h a l f b a k e r yRenovating the wheel
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
erythrocyte shaped battery chemicals
The erythrocyte shape has more surface area per volume than cubes or spheres. Nanopatterned battery electrodes or chemical nanoparticles that are erythrocyte shaped would then have greater power capacity as well as faster recharge | |
I read that erythrocytes have that shape as it maximizes surface area, and have a greater surface to volume ratio than spheres. There are lots of little conductors as well as powders at batteries, making these nonspherical shaped would increase surface area, which would cause higher power density as
well as faster recharging. Now the thing is that nanosized battery chemicals have been published as vastly more energy dense than ground powders, so if there is a way to make erythrocyte shaped nanopowders then batteries, and phone users, would benefit.
I also read that raindrops take on an erythrocyte shape under spreading forces, so perhaps making a nanomist of batttery powder with a headwind could produce these affordably
helical toroidal shape might (?) have even greater surface to volume ratio
http://k3dsurf.s4.b...c108-0-asc-105.html
[beanangel, Nov 01 2016]
[link]
|
| |
//I read that erythrocytes have that shape as it
maximizes surface area// |
|
| |
Yes, but that's bollocks. If you want to maximise
surface area for a given volume, you'd go for a very,
very thin flat sheet, or a very very spikey thing, or
something that was very fractal. Erythrocytes have a
slightly better surface area than a sphere of the
same volume, but it's self-evidently not maximal. |
|
| |
hmmm... erythrocyte shape get praised, so torus shape must be less efficient, but what about an air gap toroidal like [link] |
|
| |
A sphere is what you use when you want the *smallest* possible ratio of surface to volume, isn't it? Everything has a greater surface-to-volume ratio than a sphere. |
|
| |
Surely, recommending the erythrocyte shape as having a higher surface/volume than a sphere is like selling a breakfast cereal with the claim that it's more nutritious than moon dust. |
|
| |
Either that, or my brain has gone to sleep, and I will have to eat my words tomorrow. With moon dust. |
|
| |
i think [pertinax] is right about spheres. oh no! i have to vote against this idea. |
|
| |
No hard feelings, I hope. Anyway, thank you for making me look at erythrocyte shapes. They're soothing. They remind me of cough sweets. |
|
| |
The erythrocyte shape doesn't so much maximise the surface area to volume ratio as minimise the diffusion distance - *without* reducing the volume too much. |
|
| |
And given that "empty calories" are considered a problem, substituting nourishing, mineral-rich moon dust for most breakfast cerials is probably a step in the right direction. |
|
| |
Surface area is important but so is hydrodynamics. One would not want draggy cloggy erythrocytes. I envision a two slider model program: one with drag and one with surface area. I propose that erythrocytes are shaped in a place which is a compromise for both. |
|
| |
The optimum, shirley, would just be one huge,
wormlike erythrocyte that went all the way around
the circulatory loop, ouroborus-style. |
|
| |
Yes optimal would be loose hemoglobin free in the blood. Packaging it up in cells can only decrease its ability to do gas exchange. There must be something toxic about free hemoglobin such that its interaction with other components bathed in blood must be suppressed. |
|
| |
Free haemoglobin would make the blood too viscous.
Also, the membranes of the red blood cells do some
clever things. |
|
| |