Quote from: markdansie on July 19, 2010, 10:03:43 PM
@Jeanna
was that a typo or was it 182v ?
Kind Regards
Mark

I wish!
I will fix it. Thanks.
1.82v

jeanna

Quote from: Mk1 on July 19, 2010, 10:34:28 PM
@jeanna

Basically making a magnesium/ copper battery and a copper /carbon battery in series sharing the copper . That way you should have the carbon/magnesium voltage.

Mark

Just use the battery you already have , and add a carbon electrode to the copper.

Oh, I see... like Pete's 3 level thing. I will let you know in a moment.

jeanna

                                  C -- Mg 1.82v
Cu --Mg 1.45 +
C to Cu  0.4v
-----------------
C -- Mg  1.45v

pretty close. I think they are the same separately or summed.

jeanna

Today, I realized I had made a mistake in the way I hooked up the meter to the 3 electrodes.
So, I repeated the test with the correct placement of meter leads this time.

The result is the same.

The meter only sees the widest voltage difference and reports that.

It is a curious thing and there is a reason to think that sometimes using intermediary electrodes will help, but I do not think that is the case here.
Too bad.

After Conrad mentioned that he won't use magnesium, I began to think about the dangers of using a potential fire hazard inside my house, and so, I have decided to put all my magnesium supply into a 'safer' place, and for safety reasons I have also decided to tape up all the exposed magnesium except for a very thin line down each battery that will allow some moisture to get in. And, I may even cover that up later.

thank you,

jeanna

@jeanna

Thank you very much , for the experiment !

I know how to solve the issue , if you are still willing .

put one layer of alu foil between the copper and carbon .

so original battery
magnesium / separator / copper / separator / carbon

New one you get over 2 volts ...

magnesium / separator / copper /aluminum/ separator / carbon

No separator between the copper and aluminum .