this post was submitted on 02 Dec 2023
207 points (96.0% liked)
Futurology
1760 readers
81 users here now
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
the battery in question is only 1.5ah at 3 volts.
π
it's a prototype pouch format, what are you even comparing it to? lead acid 12v? you're just seeing kinda small numbers and thinking that sucks, aren't you?
you know you get whatever voltage and amps out of batteries you want by wiring the cells together in parallel and series, right? right???
the point of this is the cobalt free and fast charging, which are both good.
π€£π€£π€£
I'm dead guys. Someone get this guy a job in middle management!
Man, you're a dumbass. Your username is the something anyone would learn about electronics within the first 5 goddamn minutes. If you want to insult the people you're replying to, you have to either start immediately at the top of the comment and carry the energy through, or bury it at the end. Piling multiple insults into one comment just comes off as desperate.
Also don't reply to people you think are dumb? I sure as hell won't be reading any response you have to this comment.
"uugugghhh youre all so dumb stupid dummy heads!!!!11!" proceeds to continue to engage with supposed "dumb" people
Absolute 5th grader response, bless your soul lmfao
I'm not the one shouting about my username like its a phd
But why would i when it just makes you look like an idiot who thinks they are smart. If you truly had any experience with this, you would back it up with verified sources or evidence of your education or work in the field, but instead you choose to point to your username like its some badge of honor and not just a string of text that a database can use to identify your account.
I'm just gonna leave it here after saying one last thing
Your the one dying on this hill, since you seem to be unable to accept you were wrong and since you seem to have no good counter arguments and are restoring to ad-hominum.
Oh my, a semi-apt username! Bow down everybody, an expert has arrived! Shower us with your knowledge, great holder of thought! Surely nobody else in the world compares to your mastery!
new shit takes time to make bud, this is a step in the process, but do go on with your useless cynical doomer shit.
oh and yeah there have been many types of battery chemistries, wtf is your point there? this is even just a tweak on an established chemistry; it's not even some bizarre new attempt.
yikes.
I have been around long enough to remember when lead-acid and NiCD were the only viable rechargeable technologies.
I've lived to see the introduction of NiMH, LiPo, and LiFEPo. It's always cool when a new tech is developed to a production level.
I personally am curious about the latest in battery development because energy storage technology is one of the biggest limitations in a number of areas. It doesn't all pan out but occasionally it does. So I see no sense in bitterly assuming nothing ever will.
All large batteries are just smaller batteries wired in series for more voltage and parallel for more capacity. Both these numbers are reasonable and comparable to most battery tech.
This sounds like it's still not comparable to existing Li-ion.
The article is to short to draw conclusions from. For example their concern could be with temperature or with charging speed when linking many modules together.
Itβs a starting point at least
And this is...what...bad?
This is obviously at a prototype stage.
They clearly state that this tech would need further improvements including significantly increased capacity. But that may only be a question of size as is the case with pretty much every other battery technology.
And they produce 3V max--so what? Lead acid cells' nominal voltage is 1.2V, lipo 3.7, Nickel is like 1.3V (I can't recall for sure). Want more voltage, wire cells in series, want more current and capacity, wire in parallel.
The battery tech has interesting, useful properties that offer some promise. I don't really see why you're shitting on it. They're not claiming this is some paradigm changing tech or anything.
Before condescendingly ask if I know anything about electronics or how my phone works, while I am admittedly weak on RF design, I have written drivers for accelerometers, gyros, magnetometers, UARTs, displays, GPS receivers, etc., I've done a little bit of work writing code for cameras, I've worked with ADCs, DACs, I have written code for PIC, AVR, ARM, RISC, etc. microcontrollers in C (also a bit of assembly and c++), and I have designed and sold a variety of circuit boards for hobby use using various microcontrollers, sensors, and other components.
I probably don't know how everything in my phone works but I probably have at least a working knowledge of 80-90% of it. I don't do electronics professionally but I've always enjoyed it. That's why, along with enjoying programming, I got my computer engineering degree back when 80386 and 68020 was the latest, greatest (lol) and why I still do electronics and robotics (the kids call it mechatronics now) as a hobby.
Anyway... I am curious to see if they're able to bring this new chemistry to the market in 5 years as they claim. It may not revolutionize anything but it could offer a nice alternative in a variety of applications.