Plausibility of ancient extraterrestrials

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Clay battery? What did it power? Nothing, nothing used batteries back then.

[Angrboda]

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

Clay battery? What did it power? Nothing, nothing used batteries back then.

They needed the batteries to operate their quantum computers. Duh.

Boru

[The Grand Nudger]

It actually is a weird one, because we don't just have descriptions of these artifacts, we've found quite a few of them intact. This is where it gets wonky.

The safe explanation is that they held scrolls..despite the fact that we've never found scrolls in any of them. There were a few with the rods rolled in fiber, but there wasn't any writing on it. Were not sure when any of them were made, either. Could have been as late as 600ad - but that would still predate the acknowledged and well attributed discovery of the type of battery cell proposed by 1200 years. The really interesting thing, is that it does work, and some of them could have plated small objects. Very small. As in, things that would fit in the jars, since there doesn't appear to be any exterior connections to set them up in series (except for one, with no partner artifacts found). Additionally, only some of them could have done it, because you need a decent bath - that's the main issue for plating larger objects too..they'd need to run them in series into a bath. Most of the jars with substances in them could have charged, but couldn't plate. There are no known plated objects from the time period - but it's not clear that there would be even if they were used this way. It would have been inefficient and time consuming, and mercury based plating was already a thing. That leads people to posit other possible novel uses. Charging acupuncture needles, creating electromagnets, etc. They can/could have done a number of things.

It's either an example of people failing/refusing to credit their predecessors with discovering a technology - or an example of one of the most consequential let downs in all of tinkering history - supposing they weren't intended for any such use. The world might have been a different place, in this telling, had they realized what they'd built. Part of that, I think, goes back to the peacocks neck. People who played with this sort of shit tended to treat it like their own personal state secret. The knowledge, if we want to call it that, wasn't distributed and tested and out there in the world for people who might not have a mind to tinker, but have a mind for application, to be deployed. In this, I actually don't find it very surprising that we generally attribute tech to people that came after we organized the systematic and public discovery engine we call science now. Alchemists were more like snake oil salesmen, and if they said they could turn lead into gold it's more likely they plated that shit for the rubes (using the mercury method or at least hypothetically, electroplating) if they ever demonstrated it at all.

Here's what that baffles me. Ancient aliens types would like to place these artifacts around 2kbce, on the notion that an earlier date makes them somehow more miraculous or mysterious? Thing is, most of them could have been constructed as early as 8kbce...and at no point between 8kbce and 600ace are they really a marvel of technology. Even if they were batteries, they were extremely simple and very limited, and we've known how to make all the consituent parts for about 10k years. That's why I keep asking what they're doing for the alien story. They're not really the kind of thing you need aliens to explain..and, arguably, would make the aliens seem a little more far fetched. They crossed the galaxy to show us how to make...this? I hope they didn't meander their way to our rock with tech like that...though, if they did, it might explain why we never find any of them left alive.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Batteries imply a technically knowledgeable infrastructure. They don't just float around doing nothing on something.

[The Grand Nudger]

These ones did, if the safe archeological explanation is correct.

Personally, I think the truth is somewhere between that safe explanation, and these items being toys or curio. I want to point out again that they're so simple you could accidentally build one while trying to care for plants....so I'm not sure they imply anything more elaborate than themselves. Ceramics, edge toothed saws, basic copper working.

-lol, if nothing else, you can put it in your "if I had a time machine and wanted to macguyver some shit" bag-o-tricks.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

I'm talking about batteries. Those exist in a context. Now I've put four D cell batteries in a sweat sock and beat the shit out of a guy, but normally they're used for powering radios, computers, lamps, etc.

[Fake Messiah]

It actually is a weird one, because we don't just have descriptions of these artifacts, we've found quite a few of them intact.

If we are talking about the Baghdad battery then from what I know there has only one been found and it was stolen from the museum in 2003.

The really interesting thing, is that it does work, and some of them could have plated small objects.

They do work because a basic battery requires nothing more than ordinary items. All you need are two different types of metal, and if placed in an electrolyte liquid, an electrical current will flow from one piece of metal to the other. A penny and a nickel in a bowl of vinegar will do. So they work in a way like you can turn a flower pot upside down and wear it as a helmet, or you can drink out of a shoe. The fact that something can be used as something else does not mean that it was ever intended that way.

The thing is that it would be the worst thing you could try and use for a battery: it would not last very long at all, and its electrolyte would need to be replaced quite often. However, it is sealed with asphalt, a thermoplastic, which would make it prohibitively inconvenient to refill.
Also, it lacks terminals. Batteries need a positive and a negative terminal that is accessible for connecting wires.
Also, ancient Egyptians did not know about wiring. Without wires, there was no way to get current out of the battery and to the theoretically powered device.

It's almost certainly just a scroll jar.

[The Grand Nudger]

The baghdad battery is probably the most famous, yeah. Mostly because of ancient aliens nutters I suspect - but it's not the only one. Personally, I think the later dates are more credible. I don't think we were making them 6k or 4k years ago....but they're so simple as you note and as I've also said...that it wouldn't be entirely surprising to me if we were.

I do think the "just scroll jar" explanation is the most fun....that's the "didn't know what they had" version. You know, even if the person who made it did know what they had, I bet they still would have ended up in the hands of people who stuffed receipts in them. I can point to contemporary examples, ofc. I think the weakness of the explanation is that we've never found any scrolls in them, even when there was material that could have been used as a scroll..it was blank. If the absence of any evidence to the effect is why we shouldn't believe they were (intentional) batteries...then it's also a good reason why we shouldn't believe they were for holding scrolls. The alternative safe explanation is that they were religious or cult objects.

Hence my suggestion of toys and curio. We're no more or less creative or brilliant or curious today than we were at least 50k years ago. If someone handed ancient me a "scroll holder" constructed this way, I like to think I'd have noticed it's then-weirdness, and had fun with it. Maybe they were built for licking?

[Anomalocaris]

Batteries imply a technically knowledgeable infrastructure. They don't just float around doing nothing on something.

Not really.   It only imply knowledgeable infrastructure if its principle of operation is known well enough for it to be adapted to multiple uses requiring different currents and voltage.

Otherwise it could simply be an accidental and superficial discovery resulting in a curious artifact that does not form, nor imply the existence of, any foundation that could be built upon to anything significantly more.