Ok, it's not an actual battery, but it is designed for long-term energy storage, like a battery. My point still stands, it sounds really dangerous. Something that charges quickly typically can discharge quickly.

No it's not. It's designed to a discharge at a fast rate, hency why it's called a capacitor. It stores energy between two plates while a battery uses ionization to induce a potential difference. This isnt remotely new in application and theres a reason why capacitors arent exposed parts in electronics. Don't pretend like you know what you're talking about.

[quote]energy storage device [/quote] [quote]It has a lot of different applications and advantages over batteries in that sense[/quote] You are dumb. It was designed to function as the power source of a device, which is what a battery does. I hate to be personally insulting, but when you call me wrong, when it says in the f'ing article what I said, that's really all there is to say.

Are you seriously so stupid that you're incapable of telling the difference between a battery and capacitor when I just explained it to you? Like I just said, capacitors store energy and discharge at a fast rate, and basic comprehension would dictate you could use that as a temporary power source. A battery works completely differently since they provide a long DC and don't discharge instantly like a capacitor. Again, dont pretend like you know what you're talking about when you clearly don't. You're embarrassing yourself. Edit: Oh look, apparently I'm not the only one who thinks you're an idiot.

The whole reason why this research is interesting is because it can function like a battery while being a capacitor. Yes, capacitors by themselves are nothing new. Congratulations. Here's an excerpt from another article about a super capacitor used as a replacement of a battery - [quote]"With this work, we are blurring the lines between what is a battery and what is a supercapacitor," said Veronica Augustyn, a graduate student in materials science told UCLA's Bill Kisliuk. "The discovery takes the disadvantages of capacitors and the disadvantages of batteries and does away with them." Augustyn is lead author of a paper describing the breakthrough, published April 14 in the journal Nature Materials.[/quote] The whole point is that these super capacitors are functionally batteries. And this is why I'm calling you dumb, because you're not reading what is said and comprehending that, instead you're thinking within your own narrow frame of mind and saying "this doesn't make sense based on what I believe". Then again, I wouldn't expect a whole lot from someone who has so little worth about their life that they're willing to throw it away signing up with the marines.

So basically instead of actually learning about electricity and circuits, your knowledge is limited to what you read online and can regurgitate. You have no real knowledge of circuity and it shows. And you're still not smart enough to tell the difference between a capacitor and battery. The fact that they charge a phone in 20 seconds is a dead giveaway to the capacitance properties, yet you're still dumb enough to call it a battery. A battery that produced a potential difference will never charge something so fast because of ionization and resistance, which is exactly why a capacitance discharge is required. By your logic, a capacitor would make a good battery for any device, when in actuality, the discharge rate would probably blow out the components, and the circuit wouldnt even be usable because of the short time that the current flows. The difference between me and you is that I'm actually giving scientific and physics based reasons to disprove your moronic claims, yet all you're capable of doing is regurgitating what you read instead of coming back with actual knowledge. lonepaul even made assertion in regards to your moronic logic and I noticed you didn't retort because you know you're wrong, and since you're flustered from embarrassing yourself, your only hope is to resort to personal attacks. I'm an engineering student with above a 3.0 GPA while you're someone who only knows what he reads online. What's even more funny is you think joining the military to pay for my college is "throwing my life away" when I have more of secured and brighter future than you do. Again, don't pretend like you know what you're talking about.

Not really impressed by a B average. Also, again, you're not actually reading, you're simply limiting yourself to your own understanding of things. Also, I already have a professional job. You might get a job after slumming around in the military for a while for 18k a year, if your legs/**** aren't blown off by an IED. That sounds much more secured. /yawn. We're done here.