I dont know why people are sticking to batteries - even now.. with all their inherent dangers and incompatibility with the current gas based vehicle systems?

My thinking is in the following lines -
A + B --electricity--> C
C + O2 -> A + B + Heat

In this case, we should be able to store C only (similar to petrol), and whenever needed, just jack in the power.

Wishful thinking, but possible, I guess.

Just a guess -
Why moon base is an advantage ?

One of the problems with nuclear powered space travel is that people are afraid of the fallout incase of accidents.
Send huge nuclear engines - fully manufactured - to moon base.
It can be put into huge lead boxes - which can withstand high impact etc...
Now from moon base join it to the rocket and send it across..

Easier said than done.. But if they are planning for a moon base, there are indeed other advantages than just having lower gravity.
He3 is another.

Shouldnt memory play a role in this?
I was under the impression that memory (basically hippocampus and amygdala) was the reason we chose items.
For example -
Grape - Appropriate synapses of the looks of the grape colour,look etc all get burned up in hippocampus
Also, when we eat it - the synapses for amygdala set for pleasure also gets set up.
Also a combination path way neuron for both also gets hardened due to electrons going there - (in hippocampus).
Now next time I see a grape, this compination path gets a signal when we see a grape - so a signal goes to the other one (for pleasure also), thus the memory of pleasurable experience when a grape is eaten comes to me.
This is memory.

Now, for a choice, depending on the amount of pleasure, my synapses fire more and I go for that.
For example - if there is bittergourd and grape, I will go for grape only.
I thought the monkeys choice depended on these neurons rather than the one they speak about.

Or is this the intelligent choice they are talking about - where in I go for bittergourd instead due to the higeher nutrition content ??? .. I thought that also could be expressed in the earlier way mentioned.

The transmitter would be the one which would be using the max power in any cellphone.
In that case, make the antenna directional.
But then, we do *not* know the direction to which I have to sent the signal.
That can be done by maybe -
1. Changes needed for Towers
            Sent downstream a small pilot signal of the same freq as the upstream signal which the phone emits for that call.
2. Changes needed in the Cell
            Have a direction sensor in your mobile for this pilot signal. Once direction the highest amp for the pilot signal is obtained, sent the signal back in the same direction.

Instead of the wasted signal going all around, we have a signal which has very good directional properties. Thus the power of the signal to be sent can be reduced to maybe even 1/10th or 1/100th.
Thus the battery life also will have a propotional increase.

Adv of this system -
1.We dont care how many changes in direction the signal took and all.. Since the pilot came this way, my signal (almost the same freq, so almost the same refractive/reflective properties)will reach the tower proper.
2. Worries about your head getting fried by signal now over. Supposing that your head occupies 90 degrees of the phone directionality, now there is 1/4th time the power goes through you. In anycase, I dont think there is a high probability of the max amp pilot signal coming through your head.. So much less say1/10th of the time upstream signal goes through you.

Prob -
Changes needed in all towers.
Is a antenna which can change direction depending on a signal already there ? If not the idea wont work at all.

Just an idea.