You better not pull the data about how much power is wasted by people keeping their chargers plugged into the wall 24/7, you'll have a heart attack!
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple's Interest in WiTricity Wireless Charging
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You better not pull the data about how much power is wasted by people keeping their chargers plugged into the wall 24/7, you'll have a heart attack!
You mean like the cables we all have criss-crossing around our houses, plastered into the walls?
Personally I'm looking forward to the first MRI scanner apps
Oh I know it is bad but encouraging even a much greater gross waste of power is not smart. Short range like powermat for example it is great.
Um, citation?
In 2007 the MIT researchers managed 45% efficiency at 7 feet. Surely WiTricity is doing better than that by now. On their site, they state that at optimum the efficiency is 95%.
As a matter of comparison, most electric motors operate at 60-70% efficiency. Most internal combustion engines operate at well under 50%.
That said, I do understand that we are effectively trading efficient for less efficient. But as far as using the earth's energy is concerned, there are better ways to save power than the 20% you lose charging an iPhone
95% I am going to guess means point blank range. It drops like a rock. Also I would not exactly call WiTricity a valid source.
Reason that it is so bad is simple theory. It is theoretically impossible to get it very good compared to a wire. Power usage is determined by volume. Now you can some what aim the coils but still very bad power usage.
Sounds cool, but does anyone really think they'll have this ready for the iPhone 5? And this is the first we've heard about it? No other leaks, no rumours from suppliers, no other large scale commercialisation of the technology to prove reliability and bring the component costs down?
iPhone 6 maybe, iPhone 5 I doubt it.
iPhone 6 maybe, iPhone 5 I doubt it.
While I agree with your main point, I'm not sure that a magnetic field would induce a current in neurons as it would in a metal wire. The transmission of nervous signals is mediated by ion movement across the cell membrane. There could, however, be some undiscovered danger in the alignment of polar molecules to the field, as with water molecules in an MRI machine.
Interesting.
Apple says: "by doing away with clumsy and annoying cables and eliminating the need to replace batteries, an easy to use and efficient local computing environment can be provided to the user."
I know Apple marketing is great with the hyperbole, but they're reaching here.
Eliminating the need to replace batteries:
- You can't replace the batteries in a MacBook or iDevice so no gain there.
- You can replace the batteries in a wireless KB or mouse, but that's something you only have to do a handful of times in an entire year.
Clumsy and annoying cables:
I don't know about you, but the devices that need recharging in my life (MacBook, iPod) are always plugged into the exact same locations every day. How hard is it to plug in a cable once or twice a day?
I can't remember the last time I had to move a charger. It must have been about 18 months ago when I was using an old MacBook Pro with a worn out battery and was stuck in a really long meeting.
If you travel a lot there's no guarantee that the places you're visiting will have this new resonant wireless power transmission so you'll have to haul your old fashioned cables with you anyway.
So while wireless charging sounds cool the amount of effort it replaces is negligible and the cost, no doubt, won't be.
I know Apple marketing is great with the hyperbole, but they're reaching here.
Eliminating the need to replace batteries:
- You can't replace the batteries in a MacBook or iDevice so no gain there.
- You can replace the batteries in a wireless KB or mouse, but that's something you only have to do a handful of times in an entire year.
Clumsy and annoying cables:
I don't know about you, but the devices that need recharging in my life (MacBook, iPod) are always plugged into the exact same locations every day. How hard is it to plug in a cable once or twice a day?
I can't remember the last time I had to move a charger. It must have been about 18 months ago when I was using an old MacBook Pro with a worn out battery and was stuck in a really long meeting.
If you travel a lot there's no guarantee that the places you're visiting will have this new resonant wireless power transmission so you'll have to haul your old fashioned cables with you anyway.
So while wireless charging sounds cool the amount of effort it replaces is negligible and the cost, no doubt, won't be.
I'll bet the iPhone 6 is already in prototype stage, using this remote magnetic charging system to beat gravity. Your phone will never break while in the charging area in that it will be floating approximately four feet above the ground.
I looked it up and I get how it works now. The electro-magnetic field is non-radiating so energy doesn't get absorbed by the environment. And since the distance you keep the receiving object at correlates to wavelength, they picked a very low resonant frequency to maximize distance.
Since it's non-radiating, only a resonant object in the near field will draw inductive power. If there's nothing in the field, the power gets reabsorbed by the emitter so there's minimal waste.
You're basically taking a transformer and tweaking all the variables to maximize the near field so it covers your whole living room. Your phone or whatever is the secondary. If it's within the field, it draws current. If it's not, nothing happens.
How many of those people are living a thriving healthy lifestyle without illness or disease or health problems???
Likewise, never trust a company trying to sell you something. Of course they'll say it's safe. But is it really? The cigarette industry should've taught us something about that.
If this wireless charging tech becomes feasible/viable, it will in all likelihood become a technology worth many billions in revenue. When there's that much money to be made, who can you really trust?
Efficiency compared to plugging in?
I'm always wondering how efficient such wireless technologies are compared to wired. This never seems to be a concern (especially with Apple). Given our ecological situation, I'd rather plug things in if it puts less drain on our resources, even if it's minimal. Everything adds up.
For example, Apple's external touchpad for desktops only comes with bluetooth / batteries. I won't get one because I can't plug it in and skip the batteries and the inefficiencies in power usage that brings.
So yeah, I'll be filing WiTricity under "unnecessary".
I'm always wondering how efficient such wireless technologies are compared to wired. This never seems to be a concern (especially with Apple). Given our ecological situation, I'd rather plug things in if it puts less drain on our resources, even if it's minimal. Everything adds up.
For example, Apple's external touchpad for desktops only comes with bluetooth / batteries. I won't get one because I can't plug it in and skip the batteries and the inefficiencies in power usage that brings.
So yeah, I'll be filing WiTricity under "unnecessary".
The scientific community.
Not a single scientist with a single study. One person can be paid off. 10,000 can't.
Really? I still don't know who to trust/believe on the great Global Warming debate. The whole scientific community is divided on this more than ever. Who's paying who's wages and what else is being manipulated that we don't know about?
OMG...For everyone worried about electromagnetic fields........
maybe everyone should stop driving electric vehicles or Hybrids as well.
You are sitting on top of a cancer machine. Oh and yes I am sure all the auto makers have properly shielded the passenger compartment from the EM Field. We all know how they have my and your best interest at heart.
Seriously, there are already so many magnetic fields whether nature or Man made. Depending on which study you listen to EVERYTHING in life causes cancer.
In the 80's Cell phones caused cancer.. They are still around and being used more now then ever, if they were really dangerous don't you think you'd hear about it on the 6 o'clock news?
I do not know if this tech will work, it has promise but to put your head in the sand and say it is dangerous without even knowing, is a bit of a conspiracy syndrome don't you think?
maybe everyone should stop driving electric vehicles or Hybrids as well.
You are sitting on top of a cancer machine. Oh and yes I am sure all the auto makers have properly shielded the passenger compartment from the EM Field. We all know how they have my and your best interest at heart.
Seriously, there are already so many magnetic fields whether nature or Man made. Depending on which study you listen to EVERYTHING in life causes cancer.
In the 80's Cell phones caused cancer.. They are still around and being used more now then ever, if they were really dangerous don't you think you'd hear about it on the 6 o'clock news?
I do not know if this tech will work, it has promise but to put your head in the sand and say it is dangerous without even knowing, is a bit of a conspiracy syndrome don't you think?
Or maybe you can learn how it works so your imagination doesn't have to go into conspiracy mode to fill in the gaps.
I'm wondering why you think a battery is more inefficient than the 120 VAC coming out of your outlet. For that 120 VAC to get to your house, a ton of energy is lost in the form of heat from line resistance. Tons more are lost at the generating station.
And if you want to know how the charging works, trace that 120 VAC outlet up out of your house until you find that transformer up in a pole or underground. Take that transformer, add resonance and tweak the variables that control the near field EMF, and you now have a wireless charger.
On the other hand, some of us think that it's reasonable to wait for a new technology to be proven safe before embracing it.
It's fairly obvious that the 50 Hz EMF that leaks from household wiring has proven to be safe. It does not follow that higher frequency EMF that's intentionally broadcast into the living space is also safe. (note: colonials use 60 Hz)
There's also some debate about whether the EMF fields around high voltage transmission lines are safe. I'll pass on buying a house that's under a 230 kV line for now....
I never said embrace it.... I said it has promise. Big difference. Here is my original quote for your review..
If something has promise then you investigate it and prove its worth. That means is it safe, does it work, is it repeatable. Only after it is proven to work and deemed safe and repeatable can you embrace it. But if the conspiracy folks have their way it would be deemed unsafe and shut down before it begins.
Before the Wright Brothers flew only birds could fly.
Before automobiles it was widely believed that any human traveling more than 25 MPH would disintegrate from the force.
Before Columbus people believed the world was flat.
This list could go on and on. People always believe something until science proves them wrong and then we all advance. I am not saying that science is always correct but you have to give it a chance before you shut it down.
Sure they can, you just have to know how.
Not all people.
Interestingly enough, scientists are also people. Did you know that?
Last edited by a moderator:
For me, the lack of scientific understanding and reasoning displayed in this thread has been a disappointment, and those who insist that this technology must be dangerous have made it clear that nothing, nothing will change their mind. If facts and research can't persuade you, then there's clearly no reason to argue further.
I'll end with an illuminating quote:
I'll end with an illuminating quote:
"All known cancer-inducing agents - including radiation, certain chemicals and a few viruses - act by breaking chemical bonds, producing mutant strands of DNA. Not until the ultraviolet region of the electromagnetic spectrum is reached, beyond visible light, beyond infrared and far, far beyond microwaves, do photons have sufficient energy to break chemical bonds. Microwave photons heat tissue, but they do not come close to the energy needed to break chemical bonds, no matter how intense the radiation.''
Dr. Robert L. Park of the American Physical Society -- Link
This is cool and has a lot of potential outside of consumer electronics.
For those of you concerned about health risks, I strongly recommend learning the basics behind magnetic fields, EM radiation, and DNA before becoming too concerned about something like this.
This technology is no more dangerous than your car radio or remote control.
For those of you concerned about health risks, I strongly recommend learning the basics behind magnetic fields, EM radiation, and DNA before becoming too concerned about something like this.
This technology is no more dangerous than your car radio or remote control.
By "embrace it" I meant "use it in my home". I think that we're on the same page here.
I'm not trying to shut it down - but I'm not going to be an early adopter of something of unknown safety that merely provides a convenience.