首先解釋一下大家對(duì)于“永動(dòng)機(jī)”的疑惑，一位英文網(wǎng)站的工程師作了如下解讀：No perpetual motion machine is created here. The article failed to mention the real reason why the LED can exceed 100% efficiency. Here is why：

　　It’s nice research， but it’s sort of “cheating” in an honest way. Efficiency mentioned here is how much electricity is converted into light by this LED. Let’s say， you inject 10 electrons， and they turn into 8 photons which escaped the LED， so you get a 80% efficient LED. The 2 missing electrons are “wasted”。 So， in order to get to 100% efficiency and beyond， you find another way to make up for those 2 missing electrons. MIT team used the well-known thermoelectric effect which converts heat to electricity， which in return makes up for those “wasted” electrons. As a result， this LED has over 100% efficiency. You now see why they choose to do the experiment as very low voltage， because low voltage means less electrons injects， so fewer “wasted” electrons you need to make up.

　　Therefore， the over 100% efficiency is kinda of “cheating” in an honest way. What’s supplying this ultra low voltage LED electrons are not electricity alone， but also ambient temperature in form of thermo energy. The quoted efficiency in this article is a ratio between photon generated by TWO sources of energy and input from ONE source of energy. Of course， the efficiency can be much higher than 100%.

　　It’s that simple， but I do not in anyway wish to undermine the importance of this research. It’s good work. I just don’t wish others who does not have background on this specific topic to misunderstood the importance and message of this research work.