1. Home
  2. Electronics Repair
  3. the lie of rapid NiMH self-discharge
  4. Page 3

the lie of rapid NiMH self-discharge

and you shouldn't have jumped off the deep end and used words like "lie" and "proof"

It's not a lie and you disclosed no proof.

You have either a mistake or a serendipitous occurrence that you've extrapolated to draw unwarranted general conclusions.

Unwarranted conclusions are your right. But people here are disagreeing with you.

I'm unlikely to use old technology NiMH cells in an application where I expect full functionality after two years of storage.

Repeating your anecdote is unlikely to change that.

Reply to
mike
Loading thread data ...

The fact that I have at least one set of conventional NiMH cells that sat for two years, yet still correctly powered a device is proof that what is said about rapid self-discharge is wrong.

flashes.

I made no mistake. And if something is said to be generally true, one exception disproves it.

I'm not asking you to. The original claim was the NiMH cells repaidly self-discharged over a period of several weeks. It simply isn't true.

Reply to
William Sommerwerck

No, it is proof that it appears wrong IN ONE CASE.

One exception does NOT disprove some thing said to be generally true. It only proves it is not universally true.

Your grasp of logic is concerning.

Reply to
who where

"who where" "William Sommerwanker Fuckwit TROLL"

** But the grasp he has on his tiny penis is staggering.

.... Phil

Reply to
Phil Allison

"lie"

Which disproves the whole. Where did you learn "logic"?

After

Which is exactly the point.

Your insistence on ignorant empirical data is frightening.

Reply to
William Sommerwerck

ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.