The link to Wikipedia was really just to indicate that this battery is not any sort of secret, as I assume everyone views Wikipedia as the prime example of "the official source of information." The article indicates pretty clearly that this battery design has long life as one of its strongest points. The problems with the battery should be pretty apparent from the article, especially when considering the demands needed by an application like automotive.

Also, I will look at Wikipedia whenever I desire, thank you very much. There are a lot of conspiracies that get hawked on the internet, many of them bad, and Wiki is one of the fastest ways to get the "official response" to them and test these responses for reasonableness and validity. It also turns out that Wiki is a pretty good summary of information as long as it is not too controversial. Scientific data usually falls into that category. When this assumption fails, I don't hesitate to get controversial scientific information from elsewhere.

My comment specifically said that if you dispute the numbers published on Wikipedia, I encourage you to build your own forever battery. I don't mind if someone disputes what is on Wikipedia. Even Wikipedia itself says they aren't a citable source of information lmao.

The link to Wikipedia was really just to indicate that this battery is not any sort of secret, as I assume everyone views Wikipedia as the prime example of "the official source of information." The article indicates pretty clearly that this battery design has long life as one of its strongest points. The problems with the battery should be pretty apparent from the article, especially when considering the demands needed by an application like automotive.

Also, I will look at Wikipedia whenever I desire, thank you very much. There are a lot of conspiracies that get hawked on the internet, many of them bad, and Wiki is one of the fastest ways to get the "official response" to them and test these responses for reasonableness and validity. It also turns out that Wiki is a pretty good summary of information as long as it is not too controversial. Scientific data usually falls into that category. When this assumption fails, I don't hesitate to get controversial scientific information from elsewhere.

My comment specifically said that if you dispute the numbers published on Wikipedia, I encourage you to build your own forever battery. I don't mind if someone disputes what is on Wikipedia. Even Wikipedia itself says they aren't a source of information lmao.

The link to Wikipedia was really just to indicate that this battery is not any sort of secret, as I assume everyone views Wikipedia as the prime example of "the official source of information." The article indicates pretty clearly that this battery design has long life as one of its strongest points. The problems with the battery should be pretty apparent from the article, especially when considering the demands needed by an application like automotive.

Also, I will look at Wikipedia whenever I desire, thank you very much. There are a lot of conspiracies that get hawked on the internet, many of them bad, and Wiki is one of the fastest ways to get the "official response" to them and test these responses for reasonableness and validity. It also turns out that Wiki is a pretty good summary of information as long as it is not too controversial. Scientific data usually falls into that category. When this assumption fails, I don't hesitate to get controversial scientific information from elsewhere.

My comment specifically said that if you dispute the numbers published on Wikipedia, I encourage you to build your own forever battery. I don't mind if someone disputes what is on Wikipedia, even Wiki says they aren't a source of information lmao.

The link to Wikipedia was really just to indicate that this battery is not any sort of secret, as I assume everyone views Wikipedia as the prime example of "the official source of information." The article indicates pretty clearly that this battery design has long life as one of its strongest points. The problems with the battery should be pretty apparent from the article, especially when considering the demands needed by an application like automotive.

Also, I will look at Wikipedia whenever I desire, thank you very much. There are a lot of conspiracies that get hawked on the internet, many of them bad, and Wiki is one of the fastest ways to get the "official response" to them and test these responses for reasonableness and validity. It also turns out that Wiki is a pretty good summary of information as long as it is not too controversial. Scientific data usually falls into that category. When this assumption fails, I don't hesitate to get controversial scientific information from elsewhere.

My comment specifically said that if you dispute the numbers published on Wikipedia, I encourage you to build your own forever battery.

The link to Wikipedia was really just to indicate that this battery is not any sort of secret, as I assume everyone views Wikipedia as the prime example of "the official source of information." The article indicates pretty clearly that this battery design has long life as one of its strongest points. The problems with the battery should be pretty apparent from the article, especially when considering the demands needed by an application like automotive.

Also, I will look at Wikipedia whenever I desire, thank you very much. There are a lot of conspiracies that get hawked on the internet, many of them bad, and Wiki is one of the fastest ways to get the "official response" to them and test these responses for reasonableness and validity. It also turns out the Wiki is a pretty good summary of information as long as it is not too controversial. Scientific data usually falls into that category. When this assumption fails, I don't hesitate to get controversial scientific information from elsewhere.

My comment specifically said that if you dispute the numbers published on Wikipedia, I encourage you to build your own forever battery.

The link to Wikipedia was really just to indicate that this battery is not any sort of secret, as I assume everyone views Wikipedia as the prime example of "the official source of information." The article indicates pretty clearly that this battery design has long life as one of its strongest points. The problems with the battery should be pretty apparent from the article, especially when considering the demands needed by an application like automotive.

Also, I will look at Wikipedia whenever I desire, thank you very much. There are a lot of conspiracies that get hawked on the internet, many of them bad, and Wiki is one of the fastest ways to get the "official response" to them and test these responses for validity. It also turns out the Wiki is a pretty good summary of information as long as it is not too controversial. Scientific data usually falls into that category. When this assumption fails, I don't hesitate to get controversial scientific information from elsewhere.

My comment specifically said that if you dispute the numbers published on Wikipedia, I encourage you to build your own forever battery.

The link to Wikipedia was really just to indicate that this battery is not any sort of secret, as I assume everyone views Wikipedia as the prime example of "the official source of information." The article indicates pretty clearly that this battery design has long life as one of its strongest points. The problems with the battery should be pretty apparent from the article, especially when considering the demands needed by an application like automotive.

Also, I will look at Wikipedia whenever I desire, thank you very much. There are a lot of conspiracies that get hawked on the internet, many of them bad, and Wiki is one of the fastest way to get the "official response" to them and test these responses for validity. It also turns out the Wiki is a pretty good summary of information as long as it is not too controversial. Scientific data usually falls into that category. When this assumption fails, I don't hesitate to get controversial scientific information from elsewhere.

My comment specifically said that if you dispute the numbers published on Wikipedia, I encourage you to build your own forever battery.