>>5080 I don't know what you're talking about, and why you didn't post in the old thread, which would be moved up if someone would post there... Please post your calculations, claims and conclusions there.

Same anon than >>5081. On a second note I get it, it's actually better to have thread about real batteries, power sources and technical details of these, while this here is more of a speculative and broader discussion. Your thinking is of the rails nevertheless, IMO. Two kilowatts for a onboard computer is absurd and I also don't see how to get to 500W usage at the same time for the mechanical parts. Additional to the onboard computers, there will be external brains, wifi connected home servers. But they'll rater use max 500-700 Watts. How much more might depend on how much one is willing to spend. Also if more advanced waifus need a lot of mechanical energy we'll need to use airmuscles and at least one onboard tank. Also, they don't need a huge range, from one room to another is sufficient for most people. They can plugin for some time while sitting and talking, and cuddling on the couch won't need much energy. We might simple have different levels of development in mind. The most simple Robowaifus won't need a lot of energy, if you speculate about very active, smart and mobile ones, it might be more about future technologies. But then computers, batteries and motors might also be more efficient. Direct ethanol fuel cell is my current idea of a source for a longer range.

>>5083 >Also, they don't need a huge range, from one room to another is sufficient for most people. I'm inclined to think having at least two types of operational modes would be a good idea. Namely 'At Home' which as you mentioned would mean little more than room-to-room mobility. Secondly, the 'Lunch in the Neighborhood Park' mode, where she can wear a small battery backpack to give her a couple of hours mobility time away from home (but nearby). Thirdly, a 'Oniichan, you might have to carry me home' mode, where both your robowaifu and you wear battery backpacks. Hers is just 2 or 3 kilos, where yours might be up to 20 kilos in weight.

>>5084 Yeah, the second mode is something I had in mind for a while. The third one is new to me. Interesting. For the second mode I think a a plughole in the back would be perfect, then she could wear a backpack or a belt with batteries. Another one in the foot, so if at home she stands somwhere to pose or dance, then she can be plugged in. Additionally, wireless charging might also be interesting. The one in the foot would also work for boots or motorized skater boots with additional batteries. This would need to be controlled by her computer, so maybe micro usb plugs in the feet can cover both cases, or otherwise we'd need some ethernet as well.

>>5081 OP here. I proposed 2kw because of the recent 30XX GPUs power usage(4*3090+ some power for CPU and etc.).My idea is more in the lines of 2-3 to week autonomous operation.She will be able to travel from town to town on her own

>>5087 >motorized skater boots with additional batteries Yes, having skate boots or a hoverboard or scooter to use during 'Mode 3' travel should help with things. Either or both of you could wear 'stylish' black solar-cell vests as well for trickle charging too ofc. As far as plugs go, I'd think 2 (or possibly 3) USB-C plugs w/ a pair of hi-cap chargers would be sufficient for day to day use. Or the wireless-charging 'neck-pad' like in pic related. > Once you two are finished snuggling, she can top off while you were sound asleep ofc. >>5089 >My idea is more in the lines of 2-3 to week autonomous operation.She will be able to travel from town to town on her own You're going to have to wait for at least a couple of decades (or more) before we have sufficiently good tech for that. No one outsmarts the laws of physics, lad.

>>5089 Then forget about batteries. Some Ethanol fuel cell makes more sense. >>5090 I don't like walking in the sun, also if we already have more batteries then I don't need solar power on top of that. There's a reason why cars use fuel, it's energy dense. There might not be enough Ethanol for huge fleets of cars, but for some robots it should work out.

>>5091 >There's a reason why cars use fuel, it's energy dense. Fair enough. But the idea of living day to day inside my flat with a fuel-burning, fume-emitting robowaifu isn't actually to my tastes. It would be fine for a special-purpose outdoor robot, but not really for a robowaifu companion.

>>5092 It meant it additional to batteries, when they run out she can have some Vodka or so. The remains are water with some acid. She might emmit some harmless gas as well, if so then I forgot about that. https://youtu.be/9Ubhrr5GdQo

>>5097 Watched the vid again, partially. It emits water vapor. Also the one in the vid is very weak, so I have no idea how big this would need to be, so we can have some fembot hicking through the woods, which would be cool but not my highest priority for now. Let's say, if they start using fuel cell for electric bikes, then we'll be using them as well for our waifus...

>>5100 >Let's say, if they start using fuel cell for electric bikes, then we'll be using them as well for our waifus... Makes sense, thanks for the info Anon.

This video explains hy hydrogen is suboptimal: https://youtu.be/PH9gvfaufbo - the efficiency is too low. We could even use methan, so normal natural gas for grilling, instead. I still think batteries plus maybe compressed air, plus maybe ethanol >>5097, makes more sense.

I like the idea of eventually getting to the point where our robowaifus can have a "drink" with us and use the ethanol as supplemental fuel. Imagine also being able to analyze the chemical composition and "taste", robowaifu sommliers before we know it. Joking aside, this would be a noteworthy development simply because engaging in drinking makes them seem more normal and less alien and would put others at ease and lighten any awkwardness at dinner parties "Uh.. your wife is an android?" "Gynoid actually, and yes, but she's got an excellent nose for Pinot"

>>13303 Being able to taste seems like a good idea for a robot that prepares food, and a sense of smell is also good for cleaning itself or other things. However, using ethanol as fuel just seems like a pointless idea in general, especially drinks like wine or beer that contain a relatively small amount compared to water, and then there's removal of the other chemicals. I can't really imagine a system where a robot would need to eat or drink unless it could use the materials in it to heal itself. The closest I've imagined to that is drinking distilled water to top-off its coolant, or some other ingredients for sex lube.

>>13321 Using ethanol directly was the initial idea here, not extracting it from wine. It makes totally sense that they would trink different liquids for internal use and for social reasons a well. The social part is OT in this thread however, so if this goes on then please pick another thread (meta?) for that and link back to here as the start, thanks.

>>13326 >for social reasons This is just something I never understood. I don't get how eating or drinking is supposed to be social. I also never really got how watching movies together is social, when my best movie-watching experience is completely alone in a theater, unless it's so bad people openly mock it. As far as energy sources are concerned, my plan is using a simple Atmospheric Motor (https://youtu.be/ENeDkGce5-4) to generate power continuously, figure out how to improve it so you don't need such a long antenna. I already mentioned it in another thread, >>13319 >>13281 my goal for long-term internal energy storage will be in EVO Enabled Vacuum Capacitors (https://youtu.be/TXC7-hfk7xs)

>>13331 lmao this is literally just an old school vacuum tube the most retarded thing I've ever seen, the only people that shill vacuum tubes are cringe guitarists and people who think its still the 80s, normal people dont want giant inefficient pseudo capacitors that break after a single use and capacitors arent even storable, they discharge almost imminently after you cut power, theyre only purpose is to smooth out the current of a real chemical battery which dont produce a static flow

>>13332 You can make a point without being an asshole about it friend.

>>13332 >this is literally just an old school vacuum tube No, they're a bit more complex than that, if you actually bother to read more. If it were just a vacuum there wouldn't have been a patent for it made in 2009: https://patents.google.com/patent/US9042083

>>13342 no its literally just a vacuum tube do you not know how patents work, vacuum tubes are 50+ years old the original patent has long been expired, anyone can now patent their own vacuum tube ( if you are retarded enough to actually do it because you dont understand vacuum tubes have been depreciated every since the invention of electrolytic capacitors or just a scam artists looking to reel in naive ESG investors that seem to be sprouting up like mushrooms )

>>13342 So it's supposed to be a form of supercap? I was considering to use them additionally to batteries as well. The one I know don't replace batteries, though. I might look into your vacuum capacitor. >>13353 >anyone can now patent their own vacuum tube At least in the cases I know patents need to show some novelty. So there would need to be another use case at least, and some nontrivial adjustment.

>>13355 man please learn how patents work once an expired patent on a technology enters public domain all subsequent patents are nothing but trivial adjustments if you really dont see that its just a vacuum tube you need to get vaccinated

>>13357 I know how patents work, to some extent. You wrote nothing to debunk my point. Your definition of novelty is just different, and your manners are bad. >subsequent patents are nothing but trivial adjustments At least a while ago we had some requirements for patents in Germany. Don't know if they changed that. No novelty, no patent. If you define some novelty as trivial or not, doesn't matter. Trivial ideas were not patentable.

>>13362 yeah you dont know how patents work, do you want me to cite the thousands of patents on chocolate bars or the laughable court cases from Mars the grantors use the legal definition of novelty, ie. not currently patented ( in its entirety ), the only difference is patents can not make use of already existing active patents without licensing, you cannot make trivial changes on an active patent and then patent it but in the case of a patent that has already expired and became public like vacuum tubes or chocolate bars, patents based on trivial and highly specific details are allowed since no licensing is needed for the original idea, like with that retard company Mars patenting a caramel coated, peanut chocolate bar, the patents are on the specification not the actual idea of the chocolate bar which has gone into public use and no longer patentable, which is why they lost everytime they tried to sue other companies in patent disputes and my manners arent bad, I call out bullshit when called for

>>13363 >I call out bullshit when called for Aside from the exaggeration by claiming I would know nothing, I was only wondering about the differences of patent system in US. I could claim the same way that you know nothing about patents, since you don't know the requirements in other countries. More importantly, you also wrote nothing on the topic of functionality. If it could work or not. Just calling it a vacuum tube and picking unnecessary fights.

>>13364 >functionality fucking look at it, are you blind, firstly its a vacuum tube, possibly the most inefficient way to make a capacitor because it cant be coiled like a real capacitor, you are limited to a single sheet, using only a single sheet would mean it would need to be gigantic to match the capacitance of a modern coiled capacitor, this is why they stopped being used in the first place second, the design is literally retarded, the anode plate[2] is flush with glass[4], and you want to use this as a capacitor!! do you know what happens to metal when you pass a current through it - it heats up do you know what happens to metal when it heats up - it expands do you know what happens to glass - nothing this thing will break due to thermal stress almost immediately after its first cycle, this is just another fake venture capitalist scam that is designed to siphon investor funding, its not a real product and the company has no intention on making a real product, its a scam, the fact anyone takes this seriously is laughable yet I'm not even surprised in todays age, anyone with any background in electronics however would laugh at this because its so openly retarded >whatever you wrote before functionality I dont even know what you wrote, maybe youre confused between patent rights and trademarks

>>13365 I didn't look at it at all, and I don't know much about vacuum tubes, except that they were used in early computers. >I might look into your vacuum capacitor. That's what I wrote before you started on the claim everyone can patent old technology, which made me wonder. That's all. However I looked onto the reputation of those pushing it and realized it doesn't look good.

>>13366 >However I looked onto the reputation of those pushing it and realized it doesn't look good. What did you find?

>>13369 I only looked briefly, but the guy who pushed it was someone claiming to have found a way to do cold fusion and no one could replicate it. The other technology, atmospheric energy, also strikes me as utter nonsense. If that was a thing, then more serious people would report on it. That aside it's meant to be something like a power plant and has nothing to do with the topic of this thread.

>>13371 The atmospheric electricity thing is really basic. For every meter of difference in altitude, there's a difference of about 100 volts, but the amperage is borderline nothing. The video I posted was mostly about some people making a solid state circuit to step the voltage down to something usable instead of the typical method of running a simple electrostatic motor. If you tried to use the motor to run a generator, there wouldn't be nearly enough torque, so solid state is the best solution. (isn't it always?) It's free energy. It works in every weather condition, to varying degrees, and doesn't need any maintenance or any exotic materials, but really hasn't improved at all in over 100 years, so it's still shitty. I can't really think of any way to improve it that wouldn't also significantly increase the risk of the damn thing getting hit by lightning.

>>13381 wouldn't lightning just give you more free energy?

>>19006 1.21 jiggawatts to be exact