Bank of Batteries ?

The correct label would be and is "Cell". If that label had been used all these decades, you and any other dope would have no problem referring to them in that manner, and your discussion here would have a completely different spin.

How did you ever get the moniker of "Prof." and what do you claim to be a professor of?

Oh, dear. It seems speed reading claims another victim.

I placed myself in the group called "electrical engineers": a small proportion of the population, but that says nothing about being "above others". Indeed, the fact that you are posting (I assume) from a.e.e. tends to suggest that there are some EEs who are complete dorks.

EEs are supposed to know this stuff. Other people might or might not know it, and that says nothing about them. The President of the USA probably doesn't know the difference between a battery and a cell, and he's smarter than ... OK, sorry, bad example. I'm quite certain, though, that if I bothered to search I could find, for example, an eminent and respected historian who doesn't know the difference.

By talking of the average Joe you're talking about a scale that's practically orthogonal to the technical vs non-technical axis. (If you don't know what "orthogonal" means, look it up.)

Harvey was talking about the newsgroup alt.usage.english, where we take careful use of language very seriously.

"Pedantic" is a compliment in these here parts, stranger.

Wha? The sentence is perfectly, and cleverly, constructed. Yours, though, is missing a cell: a comma. Deduct 1.5 votes.

On 24 Jul 2007, Spurious Response wrote

Try again, pookie, and see if you can figure out why a reference to somebody with the surname "Moylan" might -- just might -- not be a reference to someone who goes by the initials "HVS".

I can just picture it. Your sister asks you to change the battery in her vibrator, and you refuse her this favour because she has used the word "battery" incorrectly. As a result she has to leave one prick and search for another.

When I was teaching potential young engineers, I would come down on them like a ton of bricks if they used technical jargon incorrectly _when it was important to be precise_. At the same time, if they said they had to log in to a computer I wouldn't complain that they were typing on a keyboard and not logging the operation in a log book. If they had to leave the laboratory for a leak, I wouldn't send them off to the Fluid Mechanics laboratory. The meaning of a word can depend on context. The importance of precision also depends on context. Using a 22 pF capacitor when it was supposed to be a 22 nF capacitor is a serious error when you're constructing an electronic device; but the difference is unimportant if you're constructing a sculpture out of used parts.

To everything there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven: a time to use technical language, and a time to use plain English; a time to get a life, and a time to FOAD. When you have understood the difference, Grasshopper, you will be just a little closer to true wisdom.

She has to leave one fake, in search for another.

Dimbulb will never be on the same street as true wisdom but has market cornered on everything false.

On reflection, I retract the "interestingly" although I do still wonder why anyone would want to call themselves "Spurious Response". Does the expression have some technical meaning among electrical engineers? If not, the poster might like to consider the OED definition:

----------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. Of persons: Begot or born out of wedlock; illegitimate, bastard, adulterous.

b. fig. or in fig. context.

c. Characterized by bastardy or illegitimacy.

d. Supposititious. rare.

1. Having an illegitimate or irregular origin; not properly qualified or constituted.
2. Superficially resembling or simulating, but lacking the genuine character or qualities of, something; not true or genuine; false, sham, counterfeit: a. Of material things. Freq. in more or less specific use in Anat., Bot., etc.

b. Of qualities, conditions, etc.

c. In the specific names of animals, birds, etc.

d. In medical or pathological use.

1. Of a writing, etc.: Not really proceeding from its reputed origin, source, or author; not genuine or authentic; forged.

b. Similarly of words or passages.

1. Characterized by spuriousness or falseness.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Please don't feed the troll.

The label I mean contains information such as AAA, D, PP3, Lithium, NiCd, NiMH, Silver Oxide, rechargeable, voltage, capacity, etc.

I just looked at the Batteries pages of an electronics catalogue.

In that, sometimes batteries are called cells, and sometimes cells are called batteries, but mostly they are all called batteries. This is absolutely no problem to the consumer or even to a professional.

Nicely put.

-- John

Here's a sampling of dictionary definitions from onelook.com, all of which recognize the extension of the meaning of "battery" to single cells:

Compact Oxford English Dictionary: =B7 noun (pl. batteries) 1 a device containing one or more electrical cells, for use as a source of power.

Merriam-Webster: b : a group of two or more cells connected together to furnish electric current; also : a single cell that furnishes electric current

Cambridge online: a device that produces electricity to provide power for radios, cars, etc:

American Heritage Dictionary:

You may have your own convention, of course, but but convening with yourself is just Oneanonlyism.

-- John

Missed it by *that* much ...

Here's the pertinent excerpt from it:

also : a single cell that furnishes electric current

It does have a technical meaning in electrical engineering, pretty close to the dictionary meaning, with the added connotation of nuisance or noise. Seems appropriate.

-- John

OED:

1. a. _Galvanism_. An apparatus consisting of a series of cells, each containing the essentials for producing voltaic electricity, connected together. Also used of any such apparatus for producing voltaic electricity, whether of one cell or more.

Google Books shows "single-cell battery" back to 1849 (with hits throughout the remainder of the century). "One-cell battery" first shows up in 1857. By the time they were packaged up for consumer purchase, the usage was already established.

The name "Google" originated from a misspelling of "googol," which refers to

Nice jab, dipshit. Missed the mark, however.

One that doesn't, should be doing something else.

No s*it? That is true of practically any trivial fact.

Wow... you got one right.

Ooops... you have reverted back to total retard again.

A historian of battles, and scientific advances, and societal advances throughout history would know of major events in our timeline.

Not many at all, that did not also involve themselves with the scientific realms would, however, since our society set us up for that fall decades ago by incorrectly giving single cells the "battery" moniker, and never correcting the error.

Your IQ just fell ten more point, "professor". Why are you professing utter stupidity?

No s*it. I knew exactly what the dope was referring to.

Except that he was incorrect in his pedantry.

I just can't wait for the flood of retarded kill file edit announcements from your group's "buddies", "plonking" me and then telling the world that they did.

The first act is pretty stupid. The announcement is even more retarded, but I am quite sure that some of you holier than thou twits will give us a show.

Is everyone in that group as retarded as you are?

Sorry, but "some quite interestingly cross posters..." is NOT correct.

"Some quite interesting cross-posters" would have been right.

What is interesting is that you missed it. I hope you don't represent the many... Likely more like "the foo".