Wireless Charging Looks to Go Mainstream in 2015

mdelvecchio said:

not mainstream.

----------



how about desktop computing for normal americans (1970s), GUI computing ('80s), desktop publishing ('80s), USB and wifi ('90s) smartphones ('00s), tablet computing ('10s), etc... all made mainstream by apple.

largescreen androids and android notifications only exist because of iphone coming first and them cloning it.

Click to expand...

Love what you did there. You called wireless chagrin not mainstream yet because small percentage of the market uses it but then went on to claim how Apple made GUI computing mainstream even though the percentage of Apple users was and still is insignificant. Nice one. So what is it? Did Palm or Nokia made wireless charging mainstream or we are waiting for the Apple to do it? That answer will determine if GUI was mainstreamed by Apple or Windows. Just playing with you here.

Oh and to kill your thunder Sony was doing phablet computing way five years before iPhone or any other large screen phone. And it was made out of all aluminum, it featured 4" color touchscreen and a camera. There is no such thing as revolution, only evolution.

CthrewU said:

I'll be sure to scan them and upload as soon as possible

If you're not a Medical Physcist, Radiologist, or Radiologic Technologist then you have no business reading them.

Edit: Another poster gave you some light reading.

Click to expand...

Ah, the "dismiss the poster with claims that they just won't be able to understand them" routine.

Yeah, that won't work on a scientist.

Energy efficiency

rnizlek said:

I wonder what sort of efficiency loss wireless charging creates. I imagine it is not as efficient as directly connecting a cable. Obviously the actual loss will be quite small for something like a smartphone, but if they want to scale these to charge a smart car, it's a little more relevant.

Click to expand...

Note the Rezence Web site includes a technical paper mentioning a maximum value of 78% for energy transfer efficiency. There's no telling what this value would really be in practice, but the paper suggests we might be looking at increased energy costs on the order of 20% or more. WPT might be convenient, but it appears to be an "orange" energy technology that will only exacerbate climate change. Who needs that?

joe-h2o said:

Ah, the "dismiss the poster with claims that they just won't be able to understand them" routine.

Yeah, that won't work on a scientist.

Click to expand...

Yeah I don't care if you're a "Scientist" and never said anything about being about to "understand", if you don't already have access to the info then you're not meant to. Show me a medical degree or medical license in one of the three professions I mentioned and I'll direct you to the source.

CthrewU said:

Yeah I don't care if you're a "Scientist" and never said anything about being about to "understand", if you don't already have access to the info then you're not meant to. Show me a medical degree or medical license in one of the three professions I mentioned and I'll direct you to the source.

Click to expand...

You told me I had no business reading them. Why is that if not because I won't understand them? Or are you concerned that I will understand them?

I have access to the information - I am subscribed to a wide range of current journals across the bulk of scientific publishers - I just want you to give me DOIs so I can grab them quickly. How am I thus "not meant to" have access to them.

I guess you weren't expecting someone who had journal access to question you in this thread. You thought you'd get away with "here's my argument and there are studies" and didn''t expect anyone to actually call you on that and ask you to back it up.

So, come on. Citations please.

The Wireless Computer

Just a couple days ago I did a search to see if there are any computers which are completely wireless. Didn't find anything. I would say the closest we have come for the most part, would be mobile devices. However, even these devices often have at least two cables -- headphones and a power cable.

As a developer, my desk is cluttered with numerous cables, many of them leading to phones for development. I wouldn't be surprised that if we see an elimination of these data/power cables in the coming years, and cord clutter will be a cute remnant from the past.

joe-h2o said:

You told me I had no business reading them. Why is that if not because I won't understand them?

Click to expand...

Because a science degree is not the same as a medical degree. I told you to provide proof that you have the right to access the info... apparently you don't. If you did then you would have already read the journals which are several years old. Stick to you're own field of study and do your own footwork. I have no time to spoon feed you.

CthrewU said:

Because a science degree is not the same as a medical degree. I told you to provide proof that you have the right to access the info... apparently you don't. If you did then you would have already read the journals which are several years old. Stick to you're own field of study and do you're own footwork. I have no time to spoon feed you.

Click to expand...

*your

Now that's out of the way. What are your qualifications? You seem intent on telling me that I'm unqualified to determine the validity of the studies you are relying on for evidence here, yet you don't know the difference between your and you're. Hilarious kid.

What was their methodology? How many participants were in the studies? Were they double blind? What was the statistical significance? What were the selection criteria? How was the radiation measured, and how was it generated?

Oh, I'm sorry, but "I'm not qualified" to know these things. My bad.

Put up or shut up. Let's see those DOIs, or you can concede the argument. Your choice. You said there's evidence. I want to read it.

joe-h2o said:

*your

Now that's out of the way. What are your qualifications? You seem intent on telling me that I'm unqualified to determine the validity of the studies you are relying on for evidence here, yet you don't know the difference between your and you're. Hilarious kid.

What was their methodology? How many participants were in the studies? Were they double blind? What was the statistical significance? What were the selection criteria? How was the radiation measured, and how was it generated?

Oh, I'm sorry, but "I'm not qualified" to know these things. My bad.

Put up or shut up. Let's see those DOIs, or you can concede the argument. Your choice. You said there's evidence. I want to read it.

Click to expand...

Spell check is a b**** and you can shut up I'm done playing with you. You've proved you're ignorance in the matter by asking for a DOI when there can't be for an article that has not been digitized. Please go back to playing with YOUR chemistry set kid.

CthrewU said:

Stick to your own field of study and do your own footwork. I have no time to spoon feed you.

Click to expand...

joe-h2o said:

*your

Click to expand...

There fixed that for you.

CthrewU said:

Spell check is a b**** and you can shut up I'm done playing with you. You've proved you're ignorance in the matter by asking for a DOI when there can't be for an article that has not been digitized. Please go back to playing with YOUR chemistry set kid.

Click to expand...

Why has it not been digitised? If you're telling me these studies exist and have been published in journals then they *definitely* have a DOI. If they haven't been published in a journal then they are not worth reading in the first place.

I'll take an actual citation in lieu of a DOI if you have studies that somehow haven't been published in a journal that hasn't been digitised (but really, name one that isn't), or I'll take an export from your citation management software (Endnote or Mendely is fine - I can work with both) if you really don't have DOIs. You can attach that file to your forum post.

I'm not sure how I'm "showing my ignorance" in this case. You seem to be unfamiliar with the language and procedure of science. What was your specialisation again? You forgot to mention it (you know, since you have stated that I "have no business" reading these journal articles), I'm curious what your degree is in?

joe-h2o said:

I'm curious what your degree is in?

Click to expand...

Medicine, and yours?

CthrewU said:

Medicine, and yours?

Click to expand...

Chemistry, Engineering, Biochemistry.

Still waiting on those cites. Just export them out of Endnote.

While I like the idea of wireless charging, I just figured that it hasn't gone mainstream dyet ue to Apple not incorporating it natively into its iOS product lines. I can especially see a huge benefit for Apple Watch to incorporate this tech, so will be interesting to see.

joe-h2o said:

Chemistry, Engineering, Biochemistry.

Still waiting on those cites. Just export them out of Endnote.

Click to expand...

I still don't see a medical degree or license, but you can try applying for access to the journals here. I'm sure they might not mind digging them up for you if you can manage to gain membership. Although you'll need to be a Radiologist, Medical Physcist, or a Radiologic Technologist to gain access. Oh and first year med students can get in too.

http://www.acr.org/Membership/Membership-Services/Become-a-Member

stewy said:

Prediction.

Apple comes out with its own flavor of wireless charging that doesn't work with anything else.

Click to expand...

Yeah and?....I believe we retired the whole walled garden argument back in what, 2009, 2010?

CthrewU said:

I still don't see a medical degree or license, but you can try applying for access to the journals here. I'm sure they might not mind digging them up for you if you can manage to gain membership. Although you'll need to be a Radiologist, Medical Physcist, or a Radiologic Technologist to gain access. Oh and first year med students can get in too.

http://www.acr.org/Membership/Membership-Services/Become-a-Member

Click to expand...

I have ACR access already.

So, citations please.

Mac Fly (film) said:

Goes mainstream in 2025.

Click to expand...

Along with intels release of broadwell for desktops

lowercaseperson said:

"It's incredibly safe!"

Click to expand...

Madame Curie, no? Love it!