It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by XL5
Yes, I do know what the curve looks like, thats what a boost converter is for. I'm also sure that explosives still have more power density then capacitors. To get a real explosion from a capacitor, you can not just heat the air as that doesn't transfer power to other objects that well, you would need to vapourize copper or water to transfer more power. That said, capacitors of the size needed to do non-EMP damage cost more then explosives.
Cars kill more people then terrorists...
Originally posted by beckybecky
you seem to be ignorant of the fact that SIMPLY short circuiting the capacitor will cause millions of amps to flow causing an explosion.
Originally posted by EasyPleaseMe
Originally posted by beckybecky
you seem to be ignorant of the fact that SIMPLY short circuiting the capacitor will cause millions of amps to flow causing an explosion.
You seem to be ignorant that capacitors have an Equivalent Series Resistance, which limits the peak output current.
edit on 14/8/2013 by EasyPleaseMe because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Monkeygod333
4 years ago I saw on Sky news that they have found a way to charge conventional batteries in seconds by altering the way the power is funneled into the battery.
At that point I thought, Wow, now this is a game changer. Havent heard a word about it since, nor have I seen any type of battery opperated applience using this tech.
We will only see these products decades from now when their patents have long since expired. Duracel and the like will see to that I am sure.
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
Originally posted by lagnar
UhYup :/
As iterated in earlier replies...as soon as you start talking about it extending the life of batteries in ANY way, it's all over, and you can bet it will be quashed immediately...no matter what else it would revolutionize.
The real question we should be asking ourselves here is just how many revolutionary inventions and discoveries have had the same potential, only to be put on the back burner, or in "they"re private pockets, while we all get to continuously and absolutely needlessly suffer through 19th century (sometimes 18th) technology that threatens to kill us every time we use it?