US v. Adams (JWB Class)

From Bill Goodwine's Wiki
Revision as of 17:09, 31 January 2011 by Josh Bradley (talk | contribs) (Created page with "==The Case== *Adams was issued a patent for a wet battery powered by water **wet – electrolytes (between anode and cathode) are in a liquid **provides battery function without ...")
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigationJump to search

The Case

  • Adams was issued a patent for a wet battery powered by water
    • wet – electrolytes (between anode and cathode) are in a liquid
    • provides battery function without using acid, dangerous fumes
  • Additionally, the battery provided relatively constant current

The Prior Art

  • Magnesium had been used instead of zinc, but no prior art suggested water could be used
  • Non-obvious because the battery performance unexpectedly surpassed existing wet batteries