BatMax is a wafer-thin product that promises to dramatically extend the life of rechargeable batteries, while simultaneously decreasing the amount of time it takes to recharge them. How exactly does it do this? Well, you know, nanoceramics... patented IonXR technology... blah, blah, blah. Basically, to me it sounds like a tinfoil sticker that does nothing at all but lighten your wallet a bit. Though maybe it really does work. What do I know. However, I see that the folks over at
Gizmodo and
Slashdot are skeptical as well.
Update: Some guy tested whether battery extenders really work, and found that they did extend the life of batteries by about 10-15%. So maybe there is something to this nanoceramics thing.
Comments
"The vibration wavelength released from BatMax is considered to be within almost the same range with the oscillation frequency of electrons inside the battery."
I like that: 'considered to be within almost the same range . . .'
So it isn't within the same range then; so it can't work, then.
I'd be much more impressed with the other test if, instead of a cell phone, he had set up a pair of multimeters and drained the battery through a simple resistor load, recording how long it lasted. Much easier to control your experiment that way.
The instructions for installation clearly say that it should not be placed over the terminals. How the hell could it have ANY effect? I guess it will make the BatMax company lots and lots of money. I'll bet one of their tools will be posting on here later to say "how can you be so closed minded? You probably think the earth is still flat! It really works!" It'll be in ALL CAPS, too, 'cause that's how jack asses bray.
😉
In other words, all he did was to make most people think that the product actually works as advertised and the few people who measure this sort of thing for a living beat their heads on the sidewalk until they bleed.
I also don't think the question is "Does this work?", rather I think the question is "Is this a scam or a hoax?"
Actually, the proper term is "Confirmation Bias", but it's the same general principle.
Points out that this is nothing new. A few years back there were stickers to protect your head from Evil Cell Phone Radiation, and $300 each stickers to put on the bottom of your gas tank to improve your gas mileage and reduce emissions.
He refrains from pointing out the similiarity to the stickers grade school kids put on each others' backs saying "KICK ME."
Also, there is some natural variation amongst batteries, you can't judge based on 1 test of 2 batteries. Trust me, I would know, I work at a startup battery company and there's a running joke that decisions here are often based on only one test.
This strikes me as just plain snake oil, but if any of you more technically proficient people know some way this thing could actually do something, please let me know.
"This reminds me of a product currently being touted in aquarium publications. If I understand the publicity, the miracle invention is a tube-shaped magnet. You set it up so the aquarium water runs through the magnet and somehow or other it ionizes the water or does something to its atoms or electrons or something so that it stays amazingly clean and fresh forever. The gadget has no moving parts and supposedly works equally well in fresh or salt water."
Isn't it amazing how magnets always seem to do only the GOOD things that people would want them to do in a specific application and NONE of the BAD things?
Isn't it also amazing that NO mainstream scientists find or endorse these supposed "effects" of magnets but somehow people attempting to get the public to buy them ALWAYS find and endorse them?
Why, it's almost as if the people selling these things are FRAUDS or something!
Probably made by the same folks that make the tubular magnet for your home water supply which magnetically removes impurities from your drinking water.
I note that even if it did do this, there's no way for the magnet to Get Rid Of the impurities, so they must just accumulate in your pipe near the magnet, like cholesterol in your arteries.
If the battery life enhancer somehow flattens the V/C and I/C curves of the battery, devices will function longer and charging will proceed faster.
When a LiIon battery is charged, for the first ~hour of the charge, the voltage increases linearly and the charging current remains nearly constant at it's maximum of 1A. After this, the battery is about 70% charged, but the charging current drops off rapidly meaning that an additional 2 hours of charging is required to get the last 30% of the energy into the battery.
When a LiIon battery is discharged into a portable electronic device, a similar curve is seen, for the first 50% of the life of the battery, the voltage remains fairly constant near 3.7V, after this, it begins to drop linearly with charge use, and the battery contains circuitry which shuts off at approximately 2V which is considered the zero charge point. So, if a device says the battery is dead after it drops below some threshold value (over 2V) and batmax somehow holds the battery voltage curve flatter, keeping it's voltage above that threshold level until the battery's stored charge drops lower, then the device can use more power before reporting a dead battery.
I am not saying that these products _do_ work, I'm simply suggesting a way that without increasing the actual energy in a battery they _could_ increase the usable energy and decrease the charging time. Personally, I hope they do work, and are incorporated into battery packaging, but sadly I have no idea how an external material could achieve the results I have suggested.
"sadly I have no idea how an external material could achieve the results I have suggested"
There IS no way an external material could do what you're suggesting. Think about it.
The theory of operation, if provided at all, is usually full of techno-babble and pseudo-scientific jargon that any real technologist finds meaningless or laughable.
You will also find no shortage of testimonials from "satisfied customers". We should all be aware that such testimonials prove nothing primarily because of the confirmation bias that arises because the scoffers don't buy products like that and the people who do are, well, let's just say "less than objective".
Like PT Barnum is alleged to have said: "Suckers always sell themselves".
Like a good conjuring act it diverts attention away from the fact that nobody has produced objective, double-blind test results showing that the thing does anything but negatively affect your bank balance.
http://www.dhcones.com/otheracc.html
It falls into the same category as the magic stickers discussed above. Here's Mr. Randi's take on it:
http://www.randi.org/jr/021105an.html
At AudioAsylum a glowing review by a poster named "Wellfed" can be seen here:
http://www.audioasylum.com/audio/general/messages/360880.html
Recently Wellfed turned up on the JREF forum stating that he is prepared to take the JREF $1M challenge to prove that he can detect the difference between CDs that have been treated with a GSIC and those that have not.
This should be interesting...
Here's a link to a review of a similar product (ripoff?) offered in Austrailia, I believe. Basically they say it doesn't work. Anyone surprised?
Has any of you objectively tested the Batmax? The only think scientificaly prouved is that the theory is absolutely perfect! I just had one in my Qteck S200 for 3 weeks now, IT WORKS!!!