LED Genius aims for 100% efficiency

I had never even heard of Mr. Nakamura before this:

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1604891,00.html

Brightnorm

I can only imagine what would happen if he succeeded... LEDs be so much brighter, I believe more than 3 times as much. This is because the most efficient a white light source can be (according to Wikipedia) is 35.5%, or approximately 242 lumens per watt. Current "power LEDs" get about 70-80 lumens per watt at ideal drives. Also, sonce there would be almost no heat created, there might be no need for heatsinking. So many possibilities... Let's hope he makes it.

He's the guy that works for Nichia. If he succeeds Nichia will be the one with the LED.

5mm 1000lumen 5watt leds, 5 watts of pure unadulterated white heatless light.

Even if he doesn't reach 100% the closer they get the better.

well i hope he does well, and uses a SPETRUM meter every once in a while too
mabey they can just put a hole in the side and we can inject more phosphors when needed.
charge the battery, re-ink the phosphors, and go again

I can only imagine what would happen if he succeeded... LEDs be so much brighter, I believe more than 3 times as much. This is because the most efficient a white light source can be (according to Wikipedia) is 35.5%, or approximately 242 lumens per watt.

Click to expand...

This is actually for a fairly broad spectrum white light. Using separate red, green, and blue emitters to generate white light would allow for closer to 350 lumens per watt.

The most significant aspect of a near-100% LED will be the fact that there will be almost zero waste heat, meaning much higher wattage LEDs will be feasible without having to worry about heat buildup.

tebore said:

He's the guy that works for Nichia. If he succeeds Nichia will be the one with the LED.

Click to expand...

Nope. I've been following him for a while. He left Nichia a while back and sued Nichia.

Toshi

Drew said:

Even if he doesn't reach 100% the closer they get the better.

Click to expand...

Well.. pretty much each new led that comes out is a little step closer. So we'll have to see what happens.

TMorita said:

Nope. I've been following him for a while. He left Nichia a while back and sued Nichia.

Toshi

Click to expand...

Yep you're right my fault for not staying up to date.

It is not possible to achieve anything in this world to 100% efficiency. You could get close but never to 100%.

LA OZ said:

It is not possible to achieve anything in this world to 100% efficiency. You could get close but never to 100%.

Click to expand...

What about a nuke going off?

tebore said:

What about a nuke going off?

Click to expand...

Are you inferring the efficiency of energy released or killing power of the nuke?

If so, neither is 100%.

LA OZ said:

It is not possible to achieve anything in this world to 100% efficiency. You could get close but never to 100%.

Click to expand...

I have a 100% efficient electric heater.

Alteran said:

This is because the most efficient a white light source can be (according to Wikipedia) is 35.5%, or approximately 242 lumens per watt.

Click to expand...

I guess Wikipedia is wrong.

By definition, the most efficient something could be is 100%. A wide-spectrum white light at 242 lumens per watt is 100% efficient.

balazer said:

I have a 100% efficient electric heater.

Click to expand...

That is not true. Some of the energy are lost through radiation and not heat. Also, whatever they have used to generate electricity is not 100%.

Arghhh... What kind of radiation? I keep my heater in a black room.

balazer said:

Arghhh... What kind of radiation? I keep my heater in a black room.

Click to expand...

Like electromegnatic radiation. There may be more but it has been over 20 years since I last studied physic. There are other energy loss through denaturing of the heating filaments or heating oil.

balazer said:

I guess Wikipedia is wrong.

By definition, the most efficient something could be is 100%. A wide-spectrum white light at 242 lumens per watt is 100% efficient.

Click to expand...

No, the most efficient light is the light that is the brightest for the amount of power consumed. Since the human eye, when adjusted to daylight, is most sensitive to the colour green, more specifically, the wavelength 555nm. This is lumenous efficiency, so even though it is true that maybe all of the energy is being converted to light, green still is the "brightest".

This is based on some facts from Wikipedia, which is user-sublitted, so it may be wrong. This just what I picked up from it.

Alteran said:

No, the most efficient light is the light that is the brightest for the amount of power consumed. Since the human eye, when adjusted to daylight, is most sensitive to the colour green, more specifically, the wavelength 555nm. This is lumenous efficiency, so even though it is true that maybe all of the energy is being converted to light, green still is the "brightest".

This is based on some facts from Wikipedia, which is user-sublitted, so it may be wrong. This just what I picked up from it.

Click to expand...

The way I understand it is that the term "efficiency" is used to refer to watts out/watts in, and "efficacy" is used to describe lumens out/watts in. By that criteria, an incandescent filament is very efficient (as a radiator), but has low efficacy (as a light source).