Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site alice.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!alice!jj
From: jj@alice.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.analog
Subject: Re: The difference between capacitors and batteries
Message-ID: <3153@alice.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 9-Dec-84 12:44:15 EST
Article-I.D.: alice.3153
Posted: Sun Dec  9 12:44:15 1984
Date-Received: Mon, 10-Dec-84 03:15:44 EST
References: <158@decwrl.UUCP>, <1538@sdcrdcf.UUCP>
Organization: New Jersey State Farm for the Terminally Bewildered
Lines: 16


While I do agree with the author at sdcrdcf about the chemical
differences between batteries and capacitors, I can't buy
the comments about the dielectric "not playing a large part",
since the point of almost all dielectrics is EXACTLY to increace
both the insulation capability and capacitance of tthe battery.
Most strong dielectrics (electrolytics, etc) do this by a physical
rearrangement of polar molecules, or electron shells, etc, within
the dielectric.  

Frankly, I would define capacitors as devices that store
energy in an E field, and which may use physical MOTION to
store energy (in a microscopic sense, one must realize), and batteries
as devices that store energy via chemical change.  One must realize
that all capacitors undergo a bit of chemical change, and all
batteries have a significant capacitance.