Ancient Batteries, we wuz electrics and sheeit

File: image.gif (873KB, 350x197px) Image search: [Google]

873KB, 350x197px

No. Read the Wikipedia, you dumb faggot. Question answered. Bye now

>>8452648
Apparently it has enough performance for gold electroplating and that's about it.

>>8452648

WE

>>8452738

WAS

>Is there any non-tinfoil hat tier source on the Baghdad Battery?

Yes, and all of them conclude that it wasn't a battery.

From the Junkyard to the Power Grid: Ambient Processing of Scrap Metals into Nanostructured Electrodes for Ultrafast Rechargeable Batteries

>>8452648
>Battery

I'd assume they were lamps

>>8452731
>They held scrolls

What tiny ass fucking scrolls do you think they would be using?

Bullshit shill answer from modern scientific economic complex.

>>8455200
They were scrollcases, with scroll rods, in (or next to) jars. The scrolls rotted away. The jars had previously been used for wine, vinegar, pickles, or whatever.

There was nothing around them to suggest that they were used as batteries.

>>8455215
Did you misread the question? What tiny scrolls do you think they put in there?

The pots may have been scroll-cases, yes. But the copper components are too small to be scroll holders, and are not designed for it anyway.

Bullshit explanation, to be fucking honest with you.

>>8455222
>But the copper components are too small to be scroll holders, and are not designed for it anyway.

But that's wrong, they found tonnes of copper tubes with sacred scrolls in the when they excavated Ctestiphon.

>>8455222
>What tiny scrolls do you think they put in there?
Sacred text. Archival records. Proclamations. Laws. Contracts. "Thy dam" jokes. Drawings of a cat which wanted a dish of cheese, wheat, and beef. Who knows?

The natural length of a papyrus sheet is about 16 inches, beyond which you have to glue sheets together, and a piece of writing doesn't need to be long to be very important.

>I'm interested about modern reconstructions and their performance
This is the interesting question. It seems that only one example has been found with entire assembly including clay pot, but many examples of similar copper tubes with iron rods without clay pots have been found. The theory that these tube / rod combinations were used for storage of important scrolls makes some sense, but my personal theory is that the tube / rod combination used for scroll storage was a re-purposing of artifacts (the knowledge of their purpose lost) that were found left over from an earlier age that were indeed electrical cells (batteries consist of many cells hooked together). The clay pots being fragile would not have survived nearly as long as the copper tube / iron rod thus leading to a lack of complete units.
A bit of technology that has just been published that was inspired by the Baghdad battery says;
>In this work, we draw inspiration from the rationale and working materials of the original
Baghdad battery, and demonstrate a route where otherwise discarded scrap metals of brass and
steels can be processed and combined to yield ultrafast rechargeable batteries. This builds upon
an anodization process producing nanostructured electrodes from brass and cheap low-carbon
steels that, when paired in aqueous electrolytes, exhibit nominal voltage ranging from 1V-1.8V,
energy densities upwards of 20 Wh/kg, and power densities up to 20 kW/kg. Further, we show
this idea can be transferred to scraps with various shapes, sizes, and purity, such as screws and
shavings, that motivates the use of this processing strategy at local scales to generate functional
energy storage capability from otherwise discarded metal objects.

http://libgen.io/scimag/get.php?doi=10.1021/acsenergylett.6b00295&downloadname=&key=KLYE4LI13H64GVET

>>8455407
The trouble with any theory of ancient batteries is that, once you have the trick of making them, batteries can be made by one person from reasonably inexpensive materials, and lend themselves to various amusing displays, the development of which leads to practical applications.

Galvanic cells were first discovered in the late 18th century, and their ability to produce a continuous electrical current was immediately an object of fascination. Connecting them in series (which would be necessary to do electroplating) makes a large number of interesting phenomena easily discoverable.

The galvanic cell, the series battery, electrolysis, electroplating, electromagnetism, and the thermoelectric effect were all discovered in under half a century, by a single generation of scholars and tinkerers, along with the galvanometer, electromagnet, conventional electric motor, arc welder, and telegraph. The generator and rechargeable battery weren't far behind.

It is extremely implausible that this technology, once discovered, would not be retained and developed further, especially once something as eminently useful as electroplating gold was developed.

>>8455476
>It is extremely implausible that this technology, once discovered, would not be retained and developed further,
I understand the skepticism but I ask you how many times was the art of steel making discovered and lost over the centuries of mankind's early history? In comparison the arcane art of electricity could easily be lost when you consider the products of the two technologies. The utility of steel for weapons and tools makes it a far more valuable tech than electricity in an age that had little or no use for electricity, but as we both know steel making was discovered and lost several times.