4 ms·

Good ol disclaimer > Although the researchers acknowledge that more work is required before the material could be used in batteries that are comparable to what

Good ol disclaimer > Although the researchers acknowledge that more work is required before the material could be used in batteries that are comparable to what is in use today, the team probed the conductivity of the new material and found its potential as an effective battery electrolyte to be particularly promising.

Animats 7y ago
Right. Somebody should have a site which shows 1, 2, 5, and 10 years ago in battery technology announcements. There's at least one major battery breakthrough claim each month. These guys should shut up until they can at least light up an LED in the lab. Could be worse. Remember uBeam, the ultrasonic power people? They're now called "Sonic Energy".[1] Still doesn't really work. [1] https://liesandstartuppr.blogspot.com/ https://liesandstartuppr.blogspot.com/
- rzzzt 7y ago
  See also the many ways laboratory rodents can be nursed back to good health.
  - mikeyouse 7y ago
    One of my favorite twitter accounts; https://twitter.com/justsaysinmice https://twitter.com/justsaysinmice Got a little wild over the holidays but typically just responds with "In Mice!" to all of the overwrought headlines about miracle cures.
- TeMPOraL 7y ago
  My god, uBeam is still alive? By now, that has to be the longest running joke in the Silicon Valley.
  - dehrmann 7y ago
    Longer than Duke Nukem Forever?
    - djcapelis 7y ago
      Duke Nukem Forever shipped eight and a half years ago...
      - hinkley 7y ago
        For comparison, Duke Nukem 3D came out 23 years ago. So the interim was 2 years, 3 years, 15 years. I expect Duke Nukem 5 to be released in 2091 as the 100th anniversary version.
      - hyperbovine 7y ago
        Thus beating their target ship date of forever by infinity years.
        rzzzt 7y ago
        On the contrary, they nailed the "when it's done" release target perfectly!
  - rasz 7y ago
    But the founder 'just spend few hours, and was able to solve problems phd experts couldnt' !!1 https://youtu.be/t1R9IQF0Y9s?t=28m5s https://youtu.be/t1R9IQF0Y9s?t=28m5s
- IanCal 7y ago
  The engineers should absolutely not shut up until they've reached some arbitrary point you care about. They seem to have done good work, have published and written / worked with Lois to write an explanation more easily understandable to a lay audience which explains the background and what they've done followed by the current limitations.
  - hinkley 7y ago
    Used to be we had TV shows, magazines and the evening news that talked about The Future, and mostly stuck to tech that was at or near the pre-production phase. Those all kinda dried up and what most of us have available in its stead is these 'breaking news' things where every bench-top experiment that got a research grant approved gets written up. This is not even remotely the same thing. Articles like this aren't talking about the near future. It's not even science fiction. It's fiction fiction. Maybe even fantasy. And I have much better authors to chose from if that's what I'm after.
    - IanCal 7y ago
      This isn't fiction at all, they're describing a real world problem and the work they're doing to deal with it. > It's not even science fiction No, it's science.
      - hinkley 7y ago
        The scientific method demands replication, and we've talked an awful lot about papers being published that can't be reproduced. When it has been replicated it's theoretical science. But it's still a variant on the XKCD joke about how everything (including guns) kills cancer in vitro but that doesn't mean you can use it to cure cancer. Lab-only experiment might clue the next person into a phenomenon that can make it out of the lab. But making it news when it hits the scientific journals has been a sore subject for a lot of people, and seems like it always will be, and that it might even get worse before it gets better. We call a lot of things 'science' that haven't followed the scientific method, and it's exasperating. This is not the first time materials sciences people at UIUC have looked at self-healing materials. Twenty+ years ago they were looking at lacing concrete to repair small cracks. Really cool stuff... that has not made it out of the lab as far as I'm aware.
- dgzl 7y ago
  I think you should just change your news sources, this clearly isn't for you.
- m463 7y ago
  > There's at least one major battery breakthrough claim each month. I figure with the PV breakthroughs, we should soon have 200% efficient solar cells matched with 200% efficient batteries. :) On the other hand, I think it's wonderful that solar and batteries might be getting the right kind of attention after regan era setbacks.
- the8472 7y ago
  Batteries today are better than batteries 1, 2, 5 and 10 years ago. Lab results may not translate 1:1 into commercial applications, but they still provide the starting points for real improvements.
- throwaway2048 7y ago
  The problem isn't the researchers, its the media coverage.
userbinator 7y ago
I wonder if "found its potential" was deliberate.

Animats 7y ago

Right. Somebody should have a site which shows 1, 2, 5, and 10 years ago in battery technology announcements. There's at least one major battery breakthrough claim each month. These guys should shut up until they can at least light up an LED in the lab. Could be worse. Remember uBeam, the ultrasonic power people? They're now called "Sonic Energy".[1] Still doesn't really work. [1] https://liesandstartuppr.blogspot.com/ https://liesandstartuppr.blogspot.com/

rzzzt 7y ago
See also the many ways laboratory rodents can be nursed back to good health.
- mikeyouse 7y ago
  One of my favorite twitter accounts; https://twitter.com/justsaysinmice https://twitter.com/justsaysinmice Got a little wild over the holidays but typically just responds with "In Mice!" to all of the overwrought headlines about miracle cures.
TeMPOraL 7y ago
My god, uBeam is still alive? By now, that has to be the longest running joke in the Silicon Valley.
- dehrmann 7y ago
  Longer than Duke Nukem Forever?
  - djcapelis 7y ago
    Duke Nukem Forever shipped eight and a half years ago...
    - hinkley 7y ago
      For comparison, Duke Nukem 3D came out 23 years ago. So the interim was 2 years, 3 years, 15 years. I expect Duke Nukem 5 to be released in 2091 as the 100th anniversary version.
    - hyperbovine 7y ago
      Thus beating their target ship date of forever by infinity years.
      - rzzzt 7y ago
        On the contrary, they nailed the "when it's done" release target perfectly!
- rasz 7y ago
  But the founder 'just spend few hours, and was able to solve problems phd experts couldnt' !!1 https://youtu.be/t1R9IQF0Y9s?t=28m5s https://youtu.be/t1R9IQF0Y9s?t=28m5s
IanCal 7y ago
The engineers should absolutely not shut up until they've reached some arbitrary point you care about. They seem to have done good work, have published and written / worked with Lois to write an explanation more easily understandable to a lay audience which explains the background and what they've done followed by the current limitations.
- hinkley 7y ago
  Used to be we had TV shows, magazines and the evening news that talked about The Future, and mostly stuck to tech that was at or near the pre-production phase. Those all kinda dried up and what most of us have available in its stead is these 'breaking news' things where every bench-top experiment that got a research grant approved gets written up. This is not even remotely the same thing. Articles like this aren't talking about the near future. It's not even science fiction. It's fiction fiction. Maybe even fantasy. And I have much better authors to chose from if that's what I'm after.
  - IanCal 7y ago
    This isn't fiction at all, they're describing a real world problem and the work they're doing to deal with it. > It's not even science fiction No, it's science.
    - hinkley 7y ago
      The scientific method demands replication, and we've talked an awful lot about papers being published that can't be reproduced. When it has been replicated it's theoretical science. But it's still a variant on the XKCD joke about how everything (including guns) kills cancer in vitro but that doesn't mean you can use it to cure cancer. Lab-only experiment might clue the next person into a phenomenon that can make it out of the lab. But making it news when it hits the scientific journals has been a sore subject for a lot of people, and seems like it always will be, and that it might even get worse before it gets better. We call a lot of things 'science' that haven't followed the scientific method, and it's exasperating. This is not the first time materials sciences people at UIUC have looked at self-healing materials. Twenty+ years ago they were looking at lacing concrete to repair small cracks. Really cool stuff... that has not made it out of the lab as far as I'm aware.
dgzl 7y ago
I think you should just change your news sources, this clearly isn't for you.
m463 7y ago
> There's at least one major battery breakthrough claim each month. I figure with the PV breakthroughs, we should soon have 200% efficient solar cells matched with 200% efficient batteries. :) On the other hand, I think it's wonderful that solar and batteries might be getting the right kind of attention after regan era setbacks.
the8472 7y ago
Batteries today are better than batteries 1, 2, 5 and 10 years ago. Lab results may not translate 1:1 into commercial applications, but they still provide the starting points for real improvements.
throwaway2048 7y ago
The problem isn't the researchers, its the media coverage.

userbinator 7y ago

I wonder if "found its potential" was deliberate.