U.S company reveals tiny spheres 60x more efficient than solar panels

[@johnnychromatic]

My BS meter is off the charts on this one.

[@mb-3faze]

Agreed. Regardless, there is a maximum amount of solar radiation coming from the sun per square meter. It's roughly 1kW per square meter. That's the best you can get. For an average car with, what, a max of 5 sq meters of usable surface exposed to the sun that's 5kW - 6.7 horsepower.

[@chrisborns5972]

60x 30% efficiency 😜 perpetual motion machines are outlawed for a reason

[@FilipWinter]

Their website looks like a crypto project

[@gdonepercent]

Same here. I would bet up to $1,000 at 10 to 1 odds there is something rotten in denmark on this “magic spheres”. I hope it’s legit, but I doubt it very much.

[@olafschermann1592]

Just imagine applying magic salt which even quadruples that output. Or putting those spheres under holy glass pyramids which further improves energy harvesting by 5 times 🤣🤣🤣

[@RoryCJames]

Oh Sam! I thought you had at least a basic grasp of science and common sense! This is BS.

[@potencjalnypracownik2966]

Based on what you belived in that grasp? He is marketing Chad.

[@simonmiller5118]

I didn't.

[@Guvament_bs]

This dude has always been paid PR consultant for the renewable energy rent seekers. He just reads from company media releases and marketing material.

[@itsyo42]

​@@Guvament_bsYou are thinking too highly of him, he barely use source material for his videos.

[@IanPham-e8p]

@@Guvament_bs You are bs

[@universeisundernoobligatio3283]

These tiny spheres are best at harvesting money from investors.

[@gordonwardhaugh8266]

I think I have some of these in my Tackle Box I used to go fishing with❤❤

[@ristekostadinov2820]

As long as they don't milk public money, let them do it. The problem is some government will fall for this bs, like they did for the hyperloop.

[@patrickd9551]

Their team of professionals sure looks ..... professional 😁 So much ESG expertise

[@andrasbiro3007]

@@ristekostadinov2820 Hyperloop never got beyond prototypes, and it was mostly privately funded, so if they got any government funding, it must have been trivial compared to everyday waste.

[@styx1272]

Its an Amerikano Tech tech scam. Is got investment potential in Nigeria !

[@audience2]

These balls are bollocks. The Laws of Physics say no.

[@jshaw4757]

Universe Denys the law off physics the universe has zero input it came from nothing too an entire universe full off weight n energy that Defys all physics...the sun has no cable or energy bill it just is...from nothing ...

[@Phtang-phtang]

Sounds like a load of balls until they have real life data. If solar panels are 20% efficient, how can these be 60x or 200x?

[@Alantj22]

The Viking doesn't' do maths 😊

[@sirbum1918]

Sounds like a money grab grift to me. Super secret but it works! Just give us money for a big test.

[@chriswilliams8607]

Yeah, it's a little bit sad, that the Viking is technically unfortunately not very realistic.... sounds like a bunch of clickbait crap.

[@tgdomnemo5052]

multi layer (perovskites, sealed from "the elements" ?) 7:53 , thus, wave lengths, refraction (the "dimples" in the domes ?) , reflection > two faced "cells" ... maybe even a cooling/blower unit in that "fat"base🤔box .. ? if the standard siliconslats are ~21% .. the easier .. so much potenial for improvements .. 60! X , though . . . 😳🖖🏽

[@kennethferland5579]

Yea clearly they don't have any advantage over Panels, I suspect that they are using a Bullshit measurement metric. The devices look to have PINHOLE lenss at the tops for light to enter. If multiple suns of high intensity light is applied to this pinhole they might get 60x more power out then a conventional panel could achive were that same light intensity applied to one tiny spot on a panel. But they are not showing the whole setup, a large focusing lens would be needed which would make it obvious that these little trays of balls packed like egs in a carton are a lie, it would be more like the Heliostat mounted Sterling engine systems. They are likely also cheating with the 'artificial light' harvesting, by using monocromatic light ideal for their device rather then sunlight. The only legitimate efficiency number is normal intensity and specta of light perpendicular to the device, that is the standard to which all panels are tested.

[@jazzjohn2]

Even if one of the 4 inch spheres could harness 100% of the solar energy falling upon its entire surface, it would only produce 32 watts. Hyperbolic click bait.

[@johnwenzel2003]

Company doesn't provide any test results and no hard numbers. This is striking me as one huge red flag.

[@TheThetruthmaster1]

ITS DONKEY TIME HONK. e 💪🏿😡👊🏿

[@kevinstulp3715]

A decent solar panel is 20% efficient- the greatest these could be is 5x greater- 60x makes no sense

[@jackwickman2403]

@@kevinstulp3715 My guess is that there is a tiny black hole inside each sphere that sucks is all the light in the area that might otherwise pass by the collector.

[@sparkysho-ze7nm]

Idealistically ideas are NOT th limiting factor ITS GD SCALIING PRODUCTION OF TECHNOLOGY

[@olafschermann1592]

200x more efficient than 22% efficient solar panels? 5 times is more than 100%. Mathematics and physics still applies!

[@sparkysho-ze7nm]

🏆🏆🏆

[@joen5000]

People wanna make videos, even if they are worthless!

[@Tedeeb4]

​@joen5000 - The problem with that is he's misleading other people who may also get sucked into investing.

[@jshaw4757]

Efficiency comes in other ways size cost scale pottentials lots too Efficiency not just the energy

[@SonicCommenter]

You ever hear of the words, "if it sounds too good to be true then it probably is"?

[@williamwhitney6473]

Especially when the math doesn't work.

[@lesbrunswick5137]

Congratulations, you have just violated the First and Second Laws of Thermodynamics. Your Nobel Prize in physics is in the mail.

[@sparkysho-ze7nm]

Patent surely for sale ha

[@jshaw4757]

Yh universe breaks that law also lol

[@jshaw4757]

A universe full off weight and unlimited energy which came from nothing no weight and still now has no input but thousands off millions off billions off trillions off megawatts off power with zero input yh that breaks the law nicely

[@kamra99a]

Perpetual motion machines are obsolete. This will replace them.

[@MartinBarlow-n2p]

The solar energy falling on an area is limited. If a solar panel is 20% efficient, the absolute (unattainable) maximum energy would be 5x. 60x is defying the laws of physics.

[@cmw9876]

E. V. Not paying attention during maths and physics? I suppose he'll fix this foolishness.

[@sparkysho-ze7nm]

How tf???

[@beforebefore]

Came here to say this... EXACTLY this!

[@fritter63]

Not if they combine it with ZERO POINT ENERGY harvesting!! 🤣🤣🤣🤣😎

[@jacek-jan]

​@@fritter63600x more powerful than zero? Finally a claim thar seems legit 😅

[@BillyNoMate]

is it April already?

[@roysigurdkarlsbakk3842]

111th of april IIRC, that is, really, 92th, but hell

[@tkosta08]

Please take down this video, it is lowering your credibility. I count on your channel as a resource.

[@potencjalnypracownik2966]

you are braindead to belive he a) has such thing b) cares about it. Are you first time viewer perhaps?

[@kem8651]

Either he's not bright or there was a bribe, lol.

[@not1word331]

Well, there it sits, and if you continue to count on him, you deserve your fate.

[@Guvament_bs]

This video shows his true nature. He has always been a pr promoter of no substance or scientific or engineering knowledge. I hope you have finally woken up.

[@malcolmrickarby2313]

Congratulations to Sam for the most entertaining story in years. Just the five hundred plus comments that it’s picked up in the first few hours after posting must be a record. Why anyone bothers to keep posting the same comments after each other makes them look like they are the truly gullible ones.😊

[@Withnail1969]

Scam, fraud, lies.

[@hardi.howdy.983]

I wonder why Sam likes that kind of stuff? 😁

[@manuelferreira4622]

@@hardi.howdy.983 Do you know the song: then i saw her face and i am a believer!

[@jackwickman2403]

@@manuelferreira4622 Not a trace of doubt in my mind.

[@robertmartens7839]

if it makes them rich more power to them!

[@robertmartens7839]

@@jackwickman2403 I couldn't leave her if I tried.

[@philflip1963]

They are just christmas tree decorations. Wear them as earrings whilst you're yogic flying!

[@5nowChain5]

😂 I want photos as proof 😂😂😂

[@AllDogsAreGoodDogs]

My "Carl Sagan Baloney Meter" is going crazy!

[@dopeleracad1454]

Sam, please think about what you are saying. "200 times more efficient" Current solar panels have an efficiency of about 20%, ie they produce electrical energy equivalent to 20% of the sun's energy hitting the solar panel. So 200 x more efficient means they produce 40 times more energy than the energy of sunlight hitting them.

[@stratblacknosugar.5125]

Too good to be true.

[@andders2477]

you said it: "unbelievable" come on Viking.

[@fredbloggs5902]

Sorry, this looks like a ridiculous scam to me. PVs are already approaching 30% efficiency. Clearly 6,000% efficiency isn’t possible.

[@chriseidam7319]

It could be be more than 100% efficient if it is collecting greater total band wavelength of light. As far as I know, solar collects UV light. I'm not certain about that. But that is my understanding. I should know the answer because I've worked in solar for 10 years. But I know for a fact it doesn't collect the entirety of light wave frequencies in all bandwidths.

[@fredbloggs5902]

@@chriseidam7319 nonsense

[@chriseidam7319]

@@fredbloggs5902 After I posted that, I decided to verify that I was correct about the bandwidth. Yes, it's basically ultraviolet light and purplish light. But The majority of available light is not collected. When panel manufacturers are talking about efficiency, I think they're talking about efficiency at capturing the target bandwidth of light on the light spectrum, not the entire spectrum. There is far more light energy available than is created and offered by ultraviolet light and the slightly less purplish light. Prove me wrong.

[@fredbloggs5902]

@@chriseidam7319 99.8% of the Sun’s radiant energy is emitted in a very narrow bandwidth from 20 to 2500 nanometers, this consists of 5% ultraviolet light; 42% visible light and 53% near infra-red. The TOTAL energy at sea-level is around 1 kWh per square meter. Of this total energy, PVs typically capture 20-30%.

[@jackwickman2403]

@@chriseidam7319 Isn't the latest panel design stacking 2 different cells that each absorb different parts of the spectrum? Together they have a wider bandwidth, so more power.

[@jamesgazin9447]

Next up: Unicorn Farts replace petrol for pollution-free ICE cars!

[@kem8651]

Buuuuuuut, this is doom for EV's, can't have that!

[@jackwickman2403]

And their exhaust smells like roses.

[@bwfvc7770]

And Dolphins.

[@williamreese6642]

Magic Ferry balls!

[@markmercieca5569]

Hahahahahaha....... Is the CEO's surname Holmes? I have a machine that with just a drop of blood I can tell where you were last night, LOLOLOL.....

[@richardzeitz54]

Without providing any kind of explanation of how they work plus promising 60x the performance of solar panels, this company is basically telling us it's a scam. I'm surprised you've dedicated an entire piece to this highly doubtful product.

[@ndhesketh]

"...entire piece" is generous, he doesn't actually tell us anything, just repeats with incredulity the same unbelievable claims that the company fed him with no critical thinking at all. "I mean..." Yeah, this guy is useless.

[@richardzeitz54]

@@ndhesketh makes me wonder who's paying this guy. Sometimes I suspect the CCP but for this product? Maybe he takes payment from whoever wants him to promote them. You'd think promoting scams like this would lower his cred, thus lowering what he can charge for a product plug. He should just take bribes from makers of good products.

[@jonmichaelgalindo]

That is 100% a scam. Revolutionizing energy, but they have enough spare bandwidth to "design" a forest-fire preventing drone? I have a bridge to sell you, friend.

[@MaxMisterC]

200%

[@WarmheartedKyubey]

Nay, it's 60x times, so it's 6000% a scam.

[@sparkysho-ze7nm]

80%???

[@smalltime0]

See, after revolutionising energy they decided in their spare time to also mitigate the effects of climate change. That's how legit this company is.

[@jonmichaelgalindo]

@@smalltime0 Actually, just planning to revolutionize energy, you know, once they actually get this thing working. Then they decided to take a break from all that hard energy planning, and plan a drone instead. I wrote a thesis on Theranos back when investors were all still in love with it, and I couldn't believe how obvious it was that the whole company was a scam. Investors will believe anything if you use the right buzzwords.

[@DaveDave-e4t]

Somebody needs to take an elementary physics course.

[@otterpossum9128]

Thought the same thing

[@glenw3814]

Dude, really? This looks so scammy. What fact checking did you do to determine if this is legit?

[@hardi.howdy.983]

fact checking?? he just reads such articles easy money making, no effort 😁

[@aclearlight]

I'm afraid I must agree wrt getting power from artificial lights. That just doesn't pencil out.

[@ronhill8941]

BS Spidey Sense buzzing so hard i passed out.

[@tyharris9994]

Went looking for some articles on this. " The company doesn't get deep into how the technology works..." Obviously if it's real it changes human history going forward. Cheap abundant energy for all the world. They'll have to compete with me though, as I have recently created cold fusion using Jolly Ranchers and Parmesean cheese. Can't release any details on my proprietary system just yet, but am accepting money from investors.

[@newguy6935]

I have a Twinkie that can power the world and is ready to market. It goes well with Kool-Aid. Stock symbol is FOOL.

[@beerstuff8019]

I just sprinkled half of your fusion power plant on my pepperoni pizza. srynotsry

[@tyharris9994]

@@beerstuff8019 Just keep it away from the jolly ranchers. If they come in contact it generates 1.21 Gigawatts.

[@jackwickman2403]

@@beerstuff8019 Did the pizza get hotter?

[@Nahte-uno]

Wow... i was workin on a similar concept except with fruit roll ups and string cheese

[@carlwest859]

My grandmother had these stored in a box up in the attic decades ago. She called them Xmas ornaments.

[@AWildBard]

How do you think Santa gets the energy to travel around the world and deliver all those presents? Solar Ball Technology!!!

[@evone9141]

AHAHAHAHA VERY FUNNY:)

[@paulakass1269]

Scam 🎉

[@rvanbeau2009]

I knew it was a scam just from the thumbnail. Have I been listening to an electric dummy all of these weeks?

[@rickmellor]

Dude… just look at their website, their product description and their leadership. A 10’ pole is too short for this one.

[@redjohn20001]

Seems very suspect to me. The full summer sun delivers around a kW of energy to 1 sq m of the earth's surface. A solar panel is around 20% efficient so 5 sq m delivers 1 kW. I don't see how some thing so small could capture the amount of energy suggested.

[@eg6841]

Efficency increases even more, when you drop coins💲 into them or wrap them in dollar bills... 🤣🤣🤣

[@mrnadra6843]

This sounds like something trevor milton would claim. 200x? calm down there. Gotta make it atleast semi believable.

[@michaelfink64]

Yep, like his "in motion" video of what turned out the be a truck rolling down a gradient.

[@davidlloyd1526]

I think solar panels are 18% efficient. 7 times as efficient is 126% efficient. That' quite a claim!

[@pauld3327]

60 times more efficient 😂

[@vekaterava-jd2ui]

Sooo, these spheres are 4000% effective!!! 😂😂

[@hardi.howdy.983]

Another of Sam's hyperbole 😁

[@jacetorii1452]

These balls don't absorb energy, they MAKE energy by just sitting there! "SFN" Spheres (Something From Nothing)

[@spenzasequenza]

yeah, this gives some heavy "christmas decoration glued to a cardboard box"-vibes... some mat silver spray paint in there too...

[@hebalott]

scam

[@mileshodkinson9983]

The claims are so high it's passed the unbelievable line by hundreds of miles

[@kennethferland5579]

Electric Viking has earned himself a Thunderfoot video.

[@iRwatcher]

I heard that you get even better efficiency with these if you hang these on pine trees. In the winter, the performance will blow the door out your chimney.

[@iRwatcher]

^soot out your chimney. Don't you love autocorrect.

[@Andysfishing]

With 1000w/m2 and current solar panels running at 20%, you can’t get more than 5x that efficiency.

[@mrblurleighton]

The best solar panels turn about 25% of the light coming in into electricity. That means that a perfect device would at most capture 4x the amount of energy. Maybe one day we'll have solar panela that are 99% efficient like many transistors etc currently are, but that day is not today, and physics still exists. I'm halfway through the video with no explanation yet as to where all the extra energy comes from. I'm very disappointed in the amount of BS Viking has been hyping lately.

[@douglascutler1037]

Sam, no, no, no . . .

[@hughbrackett343]

These xmas decorations appear to reflect at least half of the light hitting them. I'd be surprised if they can match the output of a conventional solar cell with the same footprint.

[@dustman96]

I'd be surprised if they have any output at all

[@hughbrackett343]

@@dustman96 I'm sure the box they're sitting on does. Probably several tool batteries worth.

[@thisismyname9569]

This is exciting. If you put enough of them in the room with you you could make more energy than you use and sell the excess to the grid.

[@5nowChain5]

😂😂😂😂

[@kenindenver1]

this is right up there with the CD disk device that stored hydrogen for powering cars...lol

[@ristekostadinov2820]

If your average solar panel is 18-20% efficient, 60x means this will work at 1080-1200% efficiency (which is as real as alchemist turning anything into gold). CPV (concentrated photovoltaics) do exist where a multijunction solar cells is placed inside a lens that concentrate solar light into the cell and it works at 35-40% efficiency. BUT and there is a big but, it costs lot of money to produce multijunction solar cell (maybe in the future when Longi and other manufacturers crack the nut on the tandem silicon perovskite cell the story will be different) + the lenses and the sun tracking system is way more expensive than just using more land.

[@minimalist_h]

When PV has an efficiency of about 25%, this means, that it can only be four times more efficient than PV! 🤷‍♂

[@_winston_smith_]

Might as well start showing videos on perpetual motion machines next. The solar flux per square meter must magically change in the vicinity of these spheres!

[@jacetorii1452]

The "solar flux" of these spheres changes 'ambient energy' into 1.21 Gigawatts

[@rare_wubbox360]

Love your channel… but please be a little sceptic to everything that sounds to good to be true Todays solar panels are 23% efficient… so there is no way they can be 60 times better….. or can they get over 100% efficiency ??

[@rhankes]

IF (and it's a big IF), they can deliver on their projections; it will be game changing. I have 60 solar panels on my roof and generate 120-130 KWH on a sunny day in June (longest days). Imagine replacing that entire solar array with a single panel that generates that level of energy! Sounds too good to be true.

[@itsyo42]

Sam, if you really don't put the minimal effort to fact check your sources, I'll have to start reporting those videos for misinformation.

[@JerHAMM]

😂😂😂 I could find many other places to start

[@richardgreen8003]

I appreciate your finding this new tech, but don't go wild until this is proven to provide the output you've indicated.

[@theirisheditor]

I get the impression that someone misread 60% as 60X ! Even then, one big red flag I see is the spheres being shiny, i.e. clearly bouncing off most of the light, which does not make sense for something that's suppose to be collecting light. Generally the whiter or shinier an object is, the more light it reflects away, which is why both solar PV and thermal panels are generally very dark or black in appearance.

[@bazzmond]

Thats the other 60x leaking out, with more funding they could probably get to 120x..

[@dustman96]

Since they somehow absorb more energy than is contained in sunlight they would be the blackest black. Maybe they are miniature black holes?

[@themogget8808]

I have seen similar claims from other concentrating photovoltaics. Sure, you can get twenty or more times better energy per square inch of silicon, but that is not what matters. If you include all the square inches of the collectors, lenses, mirror balls, or whatever around the sensor, the energy per square inch of the total system is only some ten or twenty percent better. Then when you figure in the added weight, cost, and complexity of install it costs more per watt in the end. That is assuming this isn't just a complete scam.

[@kennethferland5579]

Yep this looks like a concentrator which is being shown without its large collecting lense. The egg carton trays of Balls are clearly a lie.

[@escaperoomoz-firstonsunshi6945]

Great job Sam. You got heaps of comments. It worked.😅

[@BittermanAndy]

Sounds too good to be true. Literally.

[@garycard1826]

I looked at their Web Site. Looks like a "pipe dream". As another commented, maybe another Fisker?

[@jeffbarkley8360]

When I see a company displaying a voltmeter to show how much their design creates, it screams scam! Without seeing how much current is produced, it means nothing. The lighting inside a home doesn't produce enough energy to do pretty much anything. Sure you can run a tiny calculator or watch, but nothing major. I won't be holding my breath waiting for this to arrive :). As others have said, solar panels are currently 20 - 20% efficient, so how can this be 60x as efficient?

[@rudolphvanrooyen2655]

Micro plastics in my spheres .. Lol

[@abelincoln3261]

The spheres, which resemble tiny Death Stars (or, perhaps for a more niche Star Wars reference, normal-sized training remotes), are 30 times smaller than solar panels, with 7.5 times the output. Astoundingly, she said they are more than 200 times more efficient

[@rhettoracle9679]

Cost per watt hour is the only measurable item to consider, not the underlying technology.

[@charlesmiller6281]

Inside the spheres is a cold fusion perpetual motion reactor.

[@MrGMawson2438]

Hello mate I don't blame you

[@Guvament_bs]

Yeah, someone pointed a weapon at him and made him make this video. The dude is a few Roo's short in the top paddock and always has been. But EVangetists love him.

[@blusox78]

I couldn't find any patents under the various company names or the people mentioned on their websites. It would be interesting to see what is inside the spheres, but there are no pictures. At a guess I'd say the interior is lined with photovoltaic cells and the lens on top spreads the light to them from any angle. The increase in efficiency would not have to be in the conversion/generation rate of the PV cells, but how much power they could generate per m2 as the spheres internal area is larger than the spheres footprint, therefore you could cover an area the size of a regular solar panel with spheres and achieve a greater PV surface. Still sounds a little bogus though.

[@Stan_144]

It sounds too good to be true ..

[@cjsunburnedsavage2873]

The company needs to provide test numbers, study data, and provide items for independent tests groups to test. This sound like a dream.

[@Alarix246]

Sam, if you don't know how it works but still make it public, what does it tell about you?

[@MAGICJACKATX]

I'm keeping an open mind because I respect the work you put into your posts. You did ask what we thought so you are obviously open to critiques. I want to hear more about it.

[@environmentalcanadian2338]

Current solar panels, like the ones on my home's roof, max out at about 23% efficiency at capturing the sun's energy. Just looking at the mathematics, these spheres could at the very best be 4 times more efficient than solar panels. Just the opinion of this Canadian climate scientist. Peace, Calvin.

[@sadito_374]

It's mind blowing what people can do with a little bit of cheap plastic these days. What a time to be alive!

[@litestuffllc7249]

OK lets at least start out with Solar panels are usually 20% efficient; so the most you could do is convert all photons into electricity that is 5% higher than typical current solar panels - you can't get more than 100% efficient cant you? So one may presume 60x is impossible.

[@bahb00]

Extraordinary claims require independently verified evidence. Until that's available I call bullshit.

[@renedalmeijer8260]

Sam they put you on

[@not1word331]

No, he put their scam on. It's on him.

[@jmg7785]

Fact that they push applications ( car powered by spheres, drone powered by spheres) more that the product it’s self says it’s all cap. It’s a magic box

[@mnhsty]

Apparently Sam didn’t even watch their video, or he would know how they pronounce the name of the company.

[@Neogentronyx]

I believe it's pronounced SCAM😮 (regardless of spelling)

[@SUI-AnimoConscii]

@@Neogentronyxbahaha 😂 nice one

[@ianclarke4945]

Well obviously negated the Shockley-Queisser limit! Obviously able to convert more than just the 400 nm to 1100 nm bandwidth! Obviously what normally becomes heat must now become electricity! Obviously something does not add up here, but yeah the Theranos style figures/demo/hype (and a CEO all in black) is really inspiring!!!

[@KanLedbetter]

Hallelujah!!!! The daily jesus devotional has been a huge part of my transformation, God is good 🙌🏻🙌🏻🙌🏻🙌🏻🙌🏻was owning a loan of $47,000 to the bank for my son's brain surgery (David), Now I'm no longer in debt after I invested $8,000 and got my payout of $270,500 every months,God bless Christy Fiore 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸..

[@SimplotElbie]

Hello!! how do you make such monthly, I’m a born Christian and sometimes I feel so down of myself 😭 because of low finance but I still believe God

[@NadineSigle]

Thanks to my co-worker (Carson ) who suggested Ms Christy Fiore

[@LydiaShad]

After I raised up to 525k trading with her I bought a new House and a car here in the states🇺🇸🇺🇸 also paid for my son's surgery….Glory to God, shalom.

[@NadineSigle]

She's a licensed broker here in the states🇺🇸 and finance advisor.

[@BoshersYarzabal]

I've always wanted to be involved for a long time but the volatility in the price has been very confusing to me. Although I have watched a lot of KZbin videos about it but I still find it hard to understand

[@iainsear7830]

Hey Sam, keep up the hard work love your takes as usual... so lets consider a typical good solar panel efficiency of say 20%, if the new devices were 300% more efficient that would give us an overall efficiency of 80% i.e. 20%+20%+20%+20%. Im not sure how you get to 75 times (2:58) or 7.5 (3:09) times more efficient. The size i.e. 30 times smaller doesnt seem relevant to the efficiency calculation? At 3:11 we get 200 times more efficient, this doesnt add up. Other things to keep in mind are: -How practical is a sphere compared to a panel, especially as a building material such as roofing? -How much artificial light is there to harvest most light will be absorbed by other surfaces and say a typical room has 30ws of lighting could 3 or 4w of harvested power be worth it? -Could they be used in solar concentraters with mirrors directing light to them and avoiding the current steam turbine approach? Not sure the stats add up but interesting new technology. Stay strong mate.

[@DavidJohnson-yg8qm]

I remember a detector invented by a UK manufacturer that the government bought hook line and sinker. I can't help thinking we're being suckered again

[@kansaIainen]

If they look like silver-painted Christmas tree decorations, they are sure to be effective even in winter.

[@bencoman]

Start by considering solar irradiance is 1kW per square meter. So at 100% efficiency, they can't produce more than that. How does that scale down to the size of the device and the power out reported by the company?

[@glennleedicus]

6000% increase? Uhm, no. The best you can hope for is about a 300% increase giving you 100% efficiency, without violating the Law of Conservation.

[@markrowland1366]

Two hundred times more? Slightly impossible. My friends are complaining. Three drops of blood and all every test done in five minutes? Three hundred times smaller, is abserd. Three hundred times bigger is enormous. Lies?

[@tedgrier6249]

Note the air vent on top of ball? What happens with rain water?

[@Palisades_Prospecting]

Here is the bait and switch Sam. Measure the opening at the top of the ball in millimetres (probably a prism). Then divide a solar panel area by those square millimetres. This gets you their ridiculous numbers. As long as you don’t take into account the diameter of the balls 😂

[@arthurthomasware5004]

I can recall something from around 40 years ago which never came to fruition. A Japanese professor had invented a substance that could absorb and store light from the sun. It could take in a lot of this energy. This could then be used as a battery to power external devices. How long to charge up wasn't mentioned, or how much it could store. Also, how long it would take to discharge it. When I hear people yell "It can't be done," I'm reminded about iron ships not floating, heavier than aircraft not being able to leave the ground, and that radio telecommunications is impossible.

[@claytonholton905]

Thank you! Love it! When can we purchase them balls!

[@BrianSFischer]

If the solar panel is 20% efficient, then a perfect solar collector could only be five times as good.

[@mikeazeka1753]

Every year, a "breakthrough" is announced, but 2 years later, no commercial product. Most of the time because the cost to produce is too high, this looks like one of those "breakthroughs".

[@AlexanderA-gx1ke]

this shows how intense and incredible the energy market really is. Everyone is trying to get a piece of the pie

[@ecmcd]

I'm not buying it, and neither should you - why are you giving these shysters bandwidth? Their "invention" has a shape that would be incredibly inefficient at capturing available light, it's moderately reflective which will reduce visible light absorption and regular solar panels right now are 15-20% efficient - 60 times that is.... yeah.... 900-1200%. Unless these things are somehow achieving cold fusion it ain't happening. Edit: the video mentions several efficiency multipliers (another red flag) - but even 7 times 15% is 105%. What is the ACTUAL efficiency?? It can't be more than 100%.

[@budgetaudiophilelife-long5461]

🙋‍♂️ THANKS SAM 🤗 FOR PUTTING THIS ON MY RADAR AND WE NEED TO KEEP AN EYE 👁️ ON THIS 💚💚💚

[@xiaowei1]

x60 the energy from light than exisitng solar panels? let's see, panels are about 20% efficent, so we now have 1200% efficency. thats 12x the power from light than light actually has. add to this there is a lot less surface area collecting light and most of it is reflected from the silver surface. it may potentially (?) be picking up a wider frequency than visible light, but there is only so much energy that can be collected. at this point they might as well claim it so good it's makes energy from the CMB even when placed in a vault. Sam, I think you need to show a bit more skepticism. 🤔

[@williamwarren6639]

The only way you could achieve such numbers is if the efficiency is based on the area of the aperture/eye on the top or if the equivalent photo volt cell inside the device is the area referenced. If the entire "sphere" is effectively a one-way glass of sorts, and it focuses the light onto a standard solar panel at an optimal angel, then it could easily give you the numbers they claim. Say the outside of the device receiving light is roughly 10 square inches, and the cell is roughly 0.5 square inches, then the cell is receiving 20 times the light that a similar sized cell would receive. My guess would be that the sphere collects light, and the box has several mirrors/lenses that focus the light from any angel onto a high efficiency cell at the optimal angel for power generation. This is in no way a new concept, as efficient cells can be very costly, and trying to maintain optimal angel usually requires expensive mounting with solar tracking. The reason why it can work in low light conditions is because of the light focusing. It ultimately comes down to cost per wat, and depending on the cost of materials, it could be cheaper to build than a standard solar farm, however: imagine the cost of maintaining those spheres on an industrial scale. Standard cells are fairly sturdy at this point and can be easily cleaned with a garden hose and a mop. They don't tend to build up debrie because of their flat faces, and replacing damaged panels is easy because of their panel design. These things scream maintenance nightmare.

[@pankajpiyush3772]

Please specify the prospective manufacturer of this unique product.

[@SandyRegion]

Sounds like another Theranos/Nikola/Tesla FSD situation to me. Too good to be true until we see it PROVEN to be working.

[@blue_beephang-glider5417]

Investment advisors say "If it looks too good to be true, it probably isn't!". How can any solar device produce more power than is theoretically possible? Does SMOKE come with this MIRROR ball???

[@iquetzal6014]

The 60% more efficient claim is physically impossible.