- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
The world’s first nuclear-powered battery, which uses a radioactive isotope embedded in a diamond, could power small devices for thousands of years, scientists say.
The nuclear battery uses the reaction of a diamond placed close to a radioactive source to spontaneously produce electricity, scientists at the University of Bristol in the U.K. explained in a Dec. 4 statement. No motion — neither linear nor rotational — is required. That means no energy is needed to move a magnet through a coil or to turn an armature within a magnetic field to produce electric current, as is required in conventional power sources.
The diamond battery harvests fast-moving electrons excited by radiation, similar to how solar power uses photovoltaic cells to convert photons into electricity, the scientists said.
Meanwhile, Apple and Samsung are probably actively trying to sweep this under the digital rug. They can’t have devices out there that last more than 2, maybe 3 years…
Unfortunately, the tech won’t work for a high-power device like a smartphone. Last I read, these produce energy on the milliwatt scale.
They’ll be incredibly useful for things like weather sensors and the like.
From the article:
It seems that even a 100 gram nuclear-diamond battery would not be able to sustain a modern smartphone.
My calculations might be off, but it seems even a highly optimized low powered smartphone (say 10 watthours for 24 hours under regular use) would need x25 lower power consumption to work with a 100 g nuclear-diamond battery. And you would likely still need an additional battery of some sort (which would need to be replaced) to handle peaks (don’t think modern smartphones can function under ~420 mwatt peak max).
I’m gonna drop an addendum…
A wristwatch should be able to at bare minimum last at least 24 hours (you know, like a full day), before it needs recharge.
Apple Watch is like the absolute worst example of this, it has an expected battery life of around 18 hours. It doesn’t even function as a proper watch if it can’t even last 24 hours.
My watch (not my first merry go round with dumb watches), can at least perform their intended timekeeping function for 5 to 10 years, depending on how often you use the backlight button.
Sometimes dumb tech is nice, I don’t wanna talk to my watch anyways, it’s just there to tell time…
Who uses something for 24 hours straight? 18 hours is a full day of use. How many need this things to run through the night too and how many resources would be wasted actually making it that way?
Ever heard of the alarm function on a watch?
Yeah, some of us use the alarm, it’s kinda nice when the watch can at least have a few days charge, in case something comes up and I’m out of town longer than expected and didn’t bring my charger.
Given that the technology for clocks and watches that last upwards of a decade on a single battery has been around for quite a while, I don’t feel I should be bothered having to recharge my watch every day. Besides, smart watches just happen to be yet another tracking device.
I’m actually a fan of simple dumb watches and clocks that can last a long time, or basically indefinitely. Or just amazing clocks in general…
Atmos Clock (Powered by atmospheric pressure changes): https://youtube.com/watch?v=Jzl8HutWvw0
Automatic Self Winding Watch: https://youtube.com/watch?v=ZiubuxAAsXE
Solar Powered Watches: https://youtube.com/watch?v=oHxyp_0rW5M
Lego Mangle Rack Clock: https://youtube.com/watch?v=GUdlSYC1cCE
Digital Sundial: https://youtube.com/watch?v=wrsje5It_UU
Of course you don’t have to watch any of those videos if you don’t care to, but if you have any appreciation for awesome timekeeping devices, you’ll probably find all those videos rather interesting.
Edit: This happens to be my current watch, a Casio WS-1300H. Mine has a custom modified spiked wrist band…
https://youtube.com/watch?v=WVAO4_AfPEY
https://lemmy.world/post/22860120
Happy Holidays!
Comparing the runtime of a simple watch to a smart watch is a bit odd. Obviously you need next to no energy to run a simple clock, technology has been at that point since many decades. But for something with an actual screen, that does a ton of computing and has to connect to other devices… we are not there yet. If you reduce the requirements you get some days of runtime with some still smart-ish watches.
But if you really want the watch from Apple… Just bring the charger? That is really not a big deal. The same way phones used to last days when all they did was wait for a call, but now they do not and people understand that.
There are plenty of smartwatches that can last several days. The Apple watch is just bad in that regard.
I already said that.
Gotcha, understood.
Still, why is it that an Apple watch can’t even last 24 hours without needing a recharge, when I’m literally wearing a Casio designed to last 10 fucking years on a single button cell battery (that ain’t even rechargeable no less)?
The Apple Watch can easily last over 24 hours if you only use it as a watch and nothing else. The 18 hour estimate Apple provides is if you use all the features throughout the day such as exercise tracking, notifications, quick replying to messages, etc. If anything the 18 hour number is under selling the battery life.
Okay, fair enough. I’m still just not a fan of having to regularly recharge a watch.
To be fair, a standard (non-smart) watch uses a fraction of power compared to an Apple Watch which is still essentially a iPhone.
With that said, I have a Samsung watch, and though I charge it daily, it could probably last up to 3 days, so I don’t know what Apple is doing.
Yet!