I was looking at the design of the faux branches and leaf arrangements when a thought occurred to me ...

All solar arrays area laid out flat and angled to a point where the cells collect the most sunlight. That takes up a lot of space under which is not productive. It's a very flat, 2-dimensional approach.

Aidan's approach is mocking a living organism that uses it body to capture as much sunlight as is possible and ... in a confined area - that's a key point the 2-dimension arrays ignore. In other words, the trees uses it's branches to create a canopy surrounding the truck. Attached to the branches are the leaves which collect the light. What's even more interesting is because of the spherical shape of the canopy, more leaves are either directly or indirectly in-line with the sunlight so the light gather capabilities are dramatically increased. I suspect the leaf arrangement covers a far greater area than what we perceive which would explain why he was easily able to surpass the collecting potential of a 2-dimensional array.

It would be interesting to see a botanist and an electrical engineer work together to figure out the mechanics. Since the Fibonacci sequence is derived from nature itself, I suspect the efficiency is better than what we could possibly engineer by brute force on our own.

Actually, Ramona, the Gizmodo story you link to has virtually no comments from "science guys" debunking the kid's theory. It's all creationists saying, "Yeah, but who designed the tree in the first place?"

To find a scientific debunking, you have to go to the Atlantic blog PeraclesPlease links to. It's pretty convincing; the kid's array is not a breakthrough.

Which is not to say he isn't a smart kid with good instincts: if nature does things a certain way, you ask why and whether humans can learn from it. He deserves high marks just for the originality of his experiment, even if it didn't yield an increase in power.

There are big differences between trees and solar panels. Trees are fixed to one spot; each competes with every other tree for light, as does every leaf. That's why they try to outgrow each other, and present a maximum profile to the sun, whichever direction the light comes from. Humans position solar panels where shade is not a problem, ideally with a passive ability to track the sun. The tree and the panel are both trying to maximize energy collection, but they do so in different ways.

I totally endorse Peracles' other point: popular science reporting, like most of today's journalism, is a disgrace.

Stories about budding scientists like Aiden are always fun to read and encourages hope that not all thirteen year olds are doomed to be mouth-breathing video game testers when they grow up. Good for Aiden!  But, I do take exception to the writer Brent Rose's condescending treatment of the story. I mean, "genius"? Really? Probably not...and man, what a weight to hang around a kid's neck. And, "the little man himself reports".   Awww, isn't that precious! The little man did a smart thing! Who's a goo-boy? Who's a goo-boy!

Aiden deserves respect and recognition for his scientific experimentation, not a belly rub. I hope he follows through with his research and discovers for himself whether or not his experiment was truly a breakthrough or just a step forward in his quest to gather scientific knowledge.