this post was submitted on 24 Dec 2024
124 points (92.5% liked)

Hardware

833 readers
337 users here now

All things related to technology hardware, with a focus on computing hardware.

Rules (Click to Expand):

  1. Follow the Lemmy.world Rules - https://mastodon.world/about

  2. Be kind. No bullying, harassment, racism, sexism etc. against other users.

  3. No Spam, illegal content, or NSFW content.

  4. Please stay on topic, adjacent topics (e.g. software) are fine if they are strongly relevant to technology hardware. Another example would be business news for hardware-focused companies.

  5. Please try and post original sources when possible (as opposed to summaries).

  6. If posting an archived version of the article, please include a URL link to the original article in the body of the post.

Some other hardware communities across Lemmy:

Icon by "icon lauk" under CC BY 3.0

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Alphane_Moon
CSFFlame
[email protected]
124
World's 1st nuclear-diamond battery of its kind could power devices for 1000s of years (www.livescience.com)
submitted 2 weeks ago by Alphane_Moon to c/hardware
42 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

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.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Eheran 3 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

There are plenty of smartwatches that can last several days. The Apple watch is just bad in that regard.

[–] Eheran 0 points 2 weeks ago

I already said that.