Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Re:Do people actually know rough performance? (Score 1) 154

Amp hours is established to be suitably huge, but it depends on voltage.

Let's assume our 6g battery (which will be about 2 cm^3) produces 1 Volt. That means it produces 170 microAmps, and since it lasts for thousands of years, gives about 16,000 Amp hours.

But we already know these batteries last a long time. The question is whether they're light enough to do something with. Suppose I want to run a processor in a satellite. Do the number of amp hours matter?

Comment Re:Will it stand? (Score 1) 154

Contract law isn't absolute. the idea that it is is one of those oversimplifications that we're taught when we first learn about these things.

This sort of clause was already probably unenforceable. The law makes this explicit. Unfair contracts have been a problem for some time and the law makes sure that such contracts are void. This is how contract law works. This is how any law works!

Comment Re:Do people actually know rough performance? (Score 2) 154

Answering my own question - digitaltrends gives us some information.

A diamond beta-battery containing 1g of C14 will deliver 15J per day, and will continue to produce this level of output for 5,730 years

So that's 170 microWatts per gram or 6 grams per milliwatt. That's actually a usable level of power even when talking such small power cells. Still not sure what a good application might be for this technology.

Comment Do people actually know rough performance? (Score 2) 154

It sounds like we're looking at expensive components, and other posts suggests picoamps. But what sized battery would we need to get that to something usable?

Do these have a potential use in satellites or are they too heavy? How about pacemakers? Or is the radiation shielding inadequate?

Comment Why go for a simple majority? (Score 2) 497

If you're going to change the system, why change it in a way that still has drawbacks? You still have a system where voting for your preferred candidate can result in your least wanted candidate winning.

Most countries with a president use a 2 stage system where the top 2 candidates are put into a run off vote. Ireland uses IRV, where candidates are ranked and the loser eliminated each round. Both of these are better than plurality voting.

Slashdot Top Deals

What this country needs is a good five dollar plasma weapon.

Working...