Genius invention or handiwork of ambitious parents?

by nevada Tue May 21, 2013 1:35 am

California teen invents device that could charge a cell phone in 20 seconds
Now here’s the invention that we’ve all been waiting for: A device that instantly charges our cell phones.

A gadget like this might soon be on its way thanks to a bright 18-year-old from Saratoga, Calif., who was recently honored at an international science fair.

Eesha Khare is the mind behind a super-powerful and tiny gizmo that packs more energy into a small space, delivers a charge more quickly, and holds that charge longer than the typical battery. Khare showed off her so-called super-capacitor last week at the Intel International Science and Engineering Fair in Phoenix, Ariz. In her demonstration, she showed it powering a light-emitting diode, or LED light, but the itty-bitty device could fit inside cell phone batteries, delivering a full charge in 20-30 seconds. It takes several hours for the average cell phone to fully charge.

Khare also pointed out that the super-capacitor “can last for 10,000 charge cycles compared to batteries which are good for only 1,000 cycles.”

Khare’s invention is flexible and could be used in roll-up devices and might even have applications for car batteries.

The judges at the science fare were wowed by Khare’s brilliant invention and the senior at Lindbergh High School in San Jose received the Intel Foundation Young Scientist Award and $50,000.

“With this money I will be able to pay for my college and also work on making scientific advancements,” Khare told a cheering audience after receiving the prize money.

I’m sure her parents are proud and thrilled!

Now, here is an interesting rebuttal type of comment about this:

"Her work is neither novel nor revolutionary. She made an electrochemical capacitor, which is halfway between a battery and a capacitor. The device still fits on a Ragone plot, the power density is lower than a capacitor and higher than a battery, while the energy density is lower than a battery and higher than a capacitor. I am not criticizing this promising student, but the system that allows her parents to game it. Don't believe me? look up her father Manoj Khare, who is an electrical engineer. Her mother is a biochemist, and Eesha's previous science fair entry is on molecular biology. I think it is so important for her parents that she win, that they are robbing her of the opportunity to do something original, on her own, even if it doesn't result in overhyped publicity. There are many examples of people this age (K.F. Gauss, Steven Wolfram), and younger, making original contributions to science, this is not one of them--and it shows how far our standards have fallen in science--it's basically a participation award. It's easy to say sour grapes to the negative comments, but would you give a literature reward for someone who paraphrased a Tolstoy novel??"

by Marathadi-Saamiyaar Tue May 21, 2013 1:43 am

nevada wrote:California teen invents device that could charge a cell phone in 20 seconds
Now here’s the invention that we’ve all been waiting for: A device that instantly charges our cell phones.

“With this money I will be able to pay for my college and also work on making scientific advancements,” Khare told a cheering audience after receiving the prize money.

I’m sure her parents are proud and thrilled!

Now, here is an interesting rebuttal type of comment about this:

"Her work is neither novel nor revolutionary. She made an electrochemical capacitor, which is halfway between a battery and a capacitor. The device still fits on a Ragone plot, the power density is lower than a capacitor and higher than a battery, while the energy density is lower than a battery and higher than a capacitor. I am not criticizing this promising student, but the system that allows her parents to game it. Don't believe me? look up her father Manoj Khare, who is an electrical engineer. Her mother is a biochemist, and Eesha's previous science fair entry is on molecular biology. I think it is so important for her parents that she win, that they are robbing her of the opportunity to do something original, on her own, even if it doesn't result in overhyped publicity. There are many examples of people this age (K.F. Gauss, Steven Wolfram), and younger, making original contributions to science, this is not one of them--and it shows how far our standards have fallen in science--it's basically a participation award. It's easy to say sour grapes to the negative comments, but would you give a literature reward for someone who paraphrased a Tolstoy novel??"

..Look at my comments in THIS thread...

by nevada Tue May 21, 2013 1:49 am

Damn, I should pay more attention to SUCH during office hours! Can't delete my redundant post now.

by Marathadi-Saamiyaar Tue May 21, 2013 2:08 am

nevada wrote:Damn, I should pay more attention to SUCH during office hours! Can't delete my redundant post now.

More than that both Max and I were raising the same questions. it seems totally out of place for a high schoolers to apply/use concepts and principles that are often taught at graduate level. Obviously they must have "received" help. The proof that Khare's parents were both highly educated proves my guess. I am yet to see an Intel winner coming from a family whose parents are not educated (at least highly).

by MaxEntropy_Man Tue May 21, 2013 8:17 am

nevada wrote:
Now, here is an interesting rebuttal type of comment about this:

"Her work is neither novel nor revolutionary. She made an electrochemical capacitor, which is halfway between a battery and a capacitor. The device still fits on a Ragone plot, the power density is lower than a capacitor and higher than a battery, while the energy density is lower than a battery and higher than a capacitor. I am not criticizing this promising student, but the system that allows her parents to game it. Don't believe me? look up her father Manoj Khare, who is an electrical engineer. Her mother is a biochemist, and Eesha's previous science fair entry is on molecular biology. I think it is so important for her parents that she win, that they are robbing her of the opportunity to do something original, on her own, even if it doesn't result in overhyped publicity. There are many examples of people this age (K.F. Gauss, Steven Wolfram), and younger, making original contributions to science, this is not one of them--and it shows how far our standards have fallen in science--it's basically a participation award. It's easy to say sour grapes to the negative comments, but would you give a literature reward for someone who paraphrased a Tolstoy novel??"

nevada -- whose comment is this?

here is a ragone plot (named for MIT materials scientist david ragone) which plots the energy density, a measure of how much storage capacity an energy storage device has, against the power density, how fast that energy can be discharged. basically, when you need a large amount of energy to be drawn over a long period of time you want to be as high on the plot as possible. when you need to withdraw energy really fast, you want to be as far to the right on the plot as possible. i too was thinking along the lines of plotting the performance ms.khare has obtained on a ragone plot to see how it stacks up. just haven't gotten around to it yet:

Genius invention or handiwork of ambitious parents? Figure_02

Genius invention or handiwork of ambitious parents? Figure_02

would be interesting to see where her device fits on this plot.

by southindian Tue May 21, 2013 8:38 am

So she has smart(er) parents than other Indian parents. Even if her father/mother helped her or gave directions, many children get initial inspirations from parents and carry to par or higher level in their companies. Less than a percent of inventions come from children like Thomas Alva Edison and Bill Gates/Steve Jobs are not in that group.

No, I won't take it away from her, even if she was helped by her parents. I'd rather wait for a few years before coming to that judgement. Similar example is father-son companies of Bose electronics. Go google.

by Guest Tue May 21, 2013 9:26 am

By the above logic, if one's children are not able to win at the science and engineering fairs, in spite of one's background in science and engineering means that one is not as good as the other parents whose children are winning.

PS: There's nothing wrong in the students being guided and mentored by their teachers and also parents and others, if they are able to.

by Seva Lamberdar Tue May 21, 2013 9:30 am

nevada wrote:
"Her work is neither novel nor revolutionary. She made an electrochemical capacitor, which is halfway between a battery and a capacitor. The device still fits on a Ragone plot, the power density is lower than a capacitor and higher than a battery, while the energy density is lower than a battery and higher than a capacitor. I am not criticizing this promising student, but the system that allows her parents to game it. Don't believe me? look up her father Manoj Khare, who is an electrical engineer. Her mother is a biochemist, and Eesha's previous science fair entry is on molecular biology. I think it is so important for her parents that she win, that they are robbing her of the opportunity to do something original, on her own, even if it doesn't result in overhyped publicity. There are many examples of people this age (K.F. Gauss, Steven Wolfram), and younger, making original contributions to science, this is not one of them--and it shows how far our standards have fallen in science--it's basically a participation award. It's easy to say sour grapes to the negative comments, but would you give a literature reward for someone who paraphrased a Tolstoy novel??"

So what if her parents are into science and engineering? They are helping her start early in a big way. It's like the rich parents of Bill Gates and other recent big industrial entrepreneurs sending their kids to be educated at Harvard etc. and later paying for setting the home labs for kids.

Do presidents', senators' and rich people's kids run from one employment office to the next looking for a measly job? No. What makes them so effective and acceptable while seeking admission to top schools / colleges and during job hunting? Mostly, the parents’ money and connections.

by MaxEntropy_Man Tue May 21, 2013 9:47 am

everyone uses their inherent and natural advantages in life to get ahead. hers is that she has engineer/scientist parents. they are absolutely right in helping her get ahead.

my question was nothing to do with all that, but with intel's parameters for judging contests like these. since i work in a related area to ms.khare's invention, i was naturally curious. i wish her the very best.

by MaxEntropy_Man Tue May 21, 2013 9:55 am

i'd just temper what i wrote a bit by saying that a leg up is fine, but encouraging independence and not doing helicopter parenting and letting them find their own passions is also important. i definitely don't subscribe to the tiger mom thing. the difficulty of course is in striking the right balance. it's a delicate game and for me personally it's a work in progress. i can only hope i don't screw it up too much.

by Seva Lamberdar Tue May 21, 2013 9:57 am

My comment was only in relation to the citation by Nevada, specifically "it shows how far our standards have fallen in science--it's basically a participation award. It's easy to say sour grapes to the negative comments, but would you give a literature reward for someone who paraphrased a Tolstoy novel??"
Anyway, IMO this "invention" probably has a long way to go to be of wide practical use.

by Sponsored content

Genius invention or handiwork of ambitious parents?

Genius invention or handiwork of ambitious parents?

Re: Genius invention or handiwork of ambitious parents?

Re: Genius invention or handiwork of ambitious parents?

Re: Genius invention or handiwork of ambitious parents?

Re: Genius invention or handiwork of ambitious parents?

Re: Genius invention or handiwork of ambitious parents?

Re: Genius invention or handiwork of ambitious parents?

Re: Genius invention or handiwork of ambitious parents?

Re: Genius invention or handiwork of ambitious parents?

Re: Genius invention or handiwork of ambitious parents?

Re: Genius invention or handiwork of ambitious parents?

Re: Genius invention or handiwork of ambitious parents?