Free
Message: Why are they filling orders at .205

DABOSS re adding more here and the risk has never been so insignificant...LL.....

posted on Sep 21, 2007 09:37AM

You said in your post:...

"You can't stop a runaway locomotive. The ediggers want there to be a new battery technology that will open the door to many new markets, more patent filings by e.Digital, untold riches for us all as a result of the NEW product (not just better marketing of the same thing they have always had)."...

 

Gosh, if that is what ediggers, (US), think then I have to agree with you. However, your "Premiss" is inaccurate, I hope...

 

Couple of days ago I posed several questions to doni, and he answered them. From that dialogue I understood that the increase in power consupmtion was a function of MOS being tweeked to handle data flow in a manner that cuts the demand on the source of power,( a battery), thus increasing the time the available power source will be depleted...

 

Thus, if you have an eVU attached to a battery rated to last 10 hours, you can tweek the software to handle the data in a way that will increase the time the battery power will be run down by 100%. This means that if the battery is used to power an engine, (i.e. a dishwasher, a dryer,etc.), the battery power will run out in 10 hours, but if it is attached to cell phone, eVU and so on, you can extend its depletion time by 100%... 

 

It is the impact of this revelation, and its significance in term of opening more revenue doors for EDIG in an expanding FLASH based markes, that has created some excitment in the minds of "edigers", and not that EDIG has come up with some miracle to double the energy output of any given battery...

 

To sum up, the toal amount of electrons available in  a given battery stays the same, it is how the data flow is handled by a software the affects the "demand" on the electon supply, which affects the time of usage...

 

DONI...Feel free to add and correct...Lol...

 

GLTA...

 

Gil...

Share
New Message
Please login to post a reply