"developed a tiny device that fits inside cell phone batteries, allowing them to fully charge within 20-30 seconds, according to Intel"
Can somebody tell me how it is possible to transfer the energy needed to operate a phone in 30 seconds?
Take an iPhone with a 1.4AHr battery. Q=It=CV last time I looked. That works out to 168 Amperes for 30 seconds. OK that's a pretty big wire, but let's ignore that. Now the battery is going to be charged from 3.3V to 3.7V or average 3.5V and the energy transferred is 17.64Kjoules. Lets assume I charge this mystery capacitor to 4.1V and it discharges into the battery to yield the 3.7V finished voltage. That takes a capacitor of 12600 farads. Assuming a 5 volt rated cap, that would be about 6 times the size of what is commercially available, so this would represent major breakthrough in storage. At present this part would be about 2.5 inches diameter and 18 inches long. At the beginning of the discharge of this super capacitor, it has 105.9Kjoules energy stored. At the end it has 86.25Kjoules. Some 2Kjoules is missing. With all these charges moving around, that was what was radiated. I don't know who at Intel came up with the 30 second number, but I think their math is suspect.
The problem is that banking, health care, and business all pay at least that much, or far more if you also have the math chops and work ethic to be a good engineer.
This kid would make a fortunate guaranteed on Wall Street. Going into STEM results in mediocre pay unless you land your moon shot like a Zuckerberg or Gates.
Anyone else noticed that the list of winners is HEAVILY dominated by immigrants or first-generation citizens, at least if we use names as a proxy for this? It is amazing to see liberal arts majors earn in the high $20s and engineering majors start in the high $40s and then see people claim with straight face that there is not enough incentive for STEM majors. I could make generalizations about willingness to work hard, but that would start a religious war here.
He picked a very timely subject. This is from a May 30, 2013 NHTSA press release: '"We're encouraged by the new automated vehicle technologies being developed and implemented today, but want to ensure that motor vehicle safety is considered in the development of these advances," said NHTSA Administrator David Strickland.'
The press release has some interesting information, such as a five level definition of vehicle automation. http://www.nhtsa.gov/About+NHTSA/Press+Releases/U.S.+Department+of+Transportation+Releases+Policy+on+Automated+Vehicle+Development
Drones are, in essence, flying autonomous vehicles. Pros and cons surrounding drones today might well foreshadow the debate over the development of self-driving cars. In the context of a strongly regulated aviation industry, "self-flying" drones pose a fresh challenge. How safe is it to fly drones in different environments? Should drones be required for visual line of sight – as are piloted airplanes? Join EE Times' Junko Yoshida as she moderates a panel of drone experts.