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.