Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/9A5248d Safari/6533.18.5)

Uh, Nikola Tesle invented this nearly a century ago. Except that he discovered that he could power the entire planet wirelessly with only a few resonance towers, at 90% efficiency. The electricity industry turned him down and burried his discovery because they would not be able to meter and charge people for it the way they wanted to. Thank you American greed. Now MIT digs it up, dumbs it down, and calls it their own. Don't get me wrong, I hope it finally takes off, even if it isn't even close to the magnitide of Tesle's creation. But give credit where credit is due.

Yep, Tesla was ignored and it had everything to do with not being able to profit from the global consumption of electricity. Tesla proved that it was not harmful because you weren't "producing" electricity and sending it through the atmosphere - the way that MRI's or phones or any number of other devices produce and send electromagnetic waves. Tesla's towers (and even smaller devices that he created) simply harnessed the already existing energy that was present in the ionosphere. So people worried about cancer need not be concerned...although, whether or not MIT's method is the same as this remains to be seen.

There was no finite limit to this energy and it was totally and completely FREE! Call me pessimistic, but corporations and governments will never let this happen.
 
There was no finite limit to this energy and it was totally and completely FREE! Call me pessimistic, but corporations and governments will never let this happen.

The method described uses electricity to transmit electricity. It's not free. There is actually a cost to produce this inefficient idiot concept. I dont blame IMT guys. Scientitst doing research, and testing ideas. This is how stuff evolves.

But this being a good idea and then to claim there is no issues with health! MaleCowDroppings.

Magnetic fields are not good for your health. Microwaves are not that good either. Just ask any guy working in a cell tower how it feels.
 
Magnetic fields are not good for your health. Microwaves are not that good either. Just ask any guy working in a cell tower how it feels.

Your point is valid on microwaves. Your broad brush "magnetic fields are not good for your health" is just plain ignorant considering the only reason you or I can live on this planet is due to one.
 
Your point is valid on microwaves. Your broad brush "magnetic fields are not good for your health" is just plain ignorant considering the only reason you or I can live on this planet is due to one.

It better put strong alternating magnetic fields are bad for your health.
The earths magnetic field is rather very very weak.
 
The method described uses electricity to transmit electricity. It's not free. There is actually a cost to produce this inefficient idiot concept. I dont blame IMT guys. Scientitst doing research, and testing ideas. This is how stuff evolves.

But this being a good idea and then to claim there is no issues with health! MaleCowDroppings.

Magnetic fields are not good for your health. Microwaves are not that good either. Just ask any guy working in a cell tower how it feels.

You might want to start searching for a planet without an Iron core such as Earth. Turns out the magnetic field that engulfs this planet may be related to the fact that every human born on this planet has eventually died :rolleyes:

But seriously, there is a significant difference (to anyone who took highschool physics, and remembers it) between magnetic fields and electromagnetic waves.

FYI: Electric motors also use magnetic fields. So while you may want to say "omg science is evil!" can we please wait to do a few studies before we pronounce such a thing? Magnetic fields are everywhere. I won't deny that the strength of the field may cause problems (as most healthy things in excess does), but the article didn't say how much stronger this field is.
 
I am personally not interested in this. I spent a good amount of time reducing the EMF fields near were I sleep / sit inside my house. I don't think I want to intentionally add technology who's entire purpose is to radiate EMF, to generate technology.

Don't get me wrong, I love technology, I just don't feel comfortable near EMF. I guess I am hyper sensitive as they say on the ghost hunting shows. :eek:
 
"This design results in levels of electric and magnetic fields which fall well within regulatory guidelines. Thus WiTricity technology doesn’t give rise to radio frequency emissions that interfere with other electronic devices, and is not a source of electric and magnetic field levels that pose a risk to people or animals."

We also thought saccharin, asbestos, and mercury were safe for use in consumer products. Wi-power has promise, but I'm certainly not volunteering to be an alpha or beta tester.
 
I dont like the idea of having something like this always using power. That would make your power bill jump like crazy. That would be awesome to have on under your desk, so when i set my trusty MBP and Droid (that's right, a Droid) they would charge. I could turn the unit on and off as needed to save power.

Not to mention your post brings up another interesting point depending on how far the electricity went, people stealing electricity from you like they would steal your wi-fi connection (except I'm not sure with this technology there would be a way to say only charge those devices that have a password). I guess though there may be a way to control how far it went (could make it so it only spanned the house).
 
These people will produce anything! So I assume that long term exposure to electromagnetic fields on top of bluetooth, wi-fi, cellular and other forms of radiation and penetrating waves will not pose a health risk. Indeed.

All for the Almighty $$$$$
Humanity is lost.

Take your pick:
1. A Creator put life on a planet that has a rare (in our solor system) giant magnetic field around it.
2. Life managed to evolve on a planet that has a rare (in our solor system) giant magnetic field around it.

You can not claim that magnetic fields are inherently bad for life. To do so shows a great deal of ignorance, and that you've never understood how a compass works :cool:
 
I have a simple question, maybe stupid, but only since I don't understand the technology. At least the question is NOT, "omg what about the cancer?"

Lets say Apple releases a future iMac that's a base station, charging/powering devices within 1 meter as a start for the tech. Your wireless keyboard, mouse, your iPad and iPhone, etc.

The question is, what exactly happens if you placed 100 iphones next to the computer and each attempt to start charging? Will that many devices weaken it, charging slower for each, or will the base station know to start drawing more power from your lines to accommodate more devices? Not that it would know how many devices there are, but if it needs to work harder to maintain what it emits?

I wonder, mainly if the base station is running all day (in an iMac, ceiling of a room), it would use a low amount of electricity just to operate when nothing is around, and only increase power consumption as needed when more devices are within range.
 
Lol

Everybody its completely safe it just puts off a magnetic field at a certain frequency. The earth has a giant magnetic field that we LIVE it lol
 
I have a simple question, maybe stupid, but only since I don't understand the technology. At least the question is NOT, "omg what about the cancer?"

Lets say Apple releases a future iMac that's a base station, charging/powering devices within 1 meter as a start for the tech. Your wireless keyboard, mouse, your iPad and iPhone, etc.

The question is, what exactly happens if you placed 100 iphones next to the computer and each attempt to start charging? Will that many devices weaken it, charging slower for each, or will the base station know to start drawing more power from your lines to accommodate more devices? Not that it would know how many devices there are, but if it needs to work harder to maintain what it emits?

I wonder, mainly because I would hope the base station running all day, it would use a low amount of electricity just needed to operate when nothing is around, and only increase as needed when more devices are within range.

Actually the way it works I think would make that very possible. It emits a magnetic field at a certain frequency and the device uses that basically and converts it back into electricity. So its like the electricity could multiply itself awesome right?
 
No system is perfect, but we can't refuse to make any progress through fear of a very small chance that something may go wrong. Life has risks, we work to minimise them, and on the whole developed countries have a very good record and high standards.

Moreover, in this particular instance it's mostly ignorance that is causing people to panic over wireless electricity. This particular example of it is very promising. You don't need to have a PhD to see that, just a basic understanding of the concepts involved. Unfortunately, many people seem to lack that. I guess that's why millions still use homeopathy or refuse vaccinations!

Nobody says not to explore this technology, but IMO there is not enough info out yet to say, no problem.

I am not panicking as it will not be mandatory to use it, BUT you keep defending governments and their capability to protect us. The fear that something goes wrong is real.

If something can go wrong it will!

Funny, but real.

Nuclear reactors:
Three mile Island
Tchernobyl
Accidents in Germany now leading to gradually switch off ALL nuclear energy.

That is only the nuclear field. There is more.

Contergan sleeping pills (approved by the government after studies!), Bhopal, saccharin, asbestos, mercury, oil tanks in the ground contaminating ground water. All sanctioned and SAFE at the time!

Leaded gas. Why even switch to unleaded? Catalyzers, filtering smoke stacks, releasing stuff into the air and miles away trees die from sulfur poisoning. The list goes on and on.

All discovered AFTER the damage was done.

Humans have a habit to justify what they are doing and hope for the best outcome. They cannot control some of what they invent.

Why even take a risk if there are alternatives?

To me cable to charge or connect something is just fine.

Most of us hook up their stuff once until they move.

When I move I usually laugh about how much dust collects behind the cabinets there and how I managed to intertwine all the cables without trying.

Besides optical, I just don't see the advantages.
 
I am personally not interested in this. I spent a good amount of time reducing the EMF fields near were I sleep / sit inside my house. I don't think I want to intentionally add technology who's entire purpose is to radiate EMF, to generate technology.

Don't get me wrong, I love technology, I just don't feel comfortable near EMF. I guess I am hyper sensitive as they say on the ghost hunting shows. :eek:

You don't by chance live on the moon, do you? Or any other planet? Because it was a very poor choice to live on one of the planets with the greatest natural EMF field of them all.
 
It better put strong alternating magnetic fields are bad for your health.
The earths magnetic field is rather very very weak.

Everything I've read (I've been watching this technology develop over at MIT's Technology Review) since the original demo at TED has stated that this technology does not use strong magnetic fields. They are supposedly comparable to the fields we are already always bombarded with every day.

So yes, strong fields are bad for you as we don't fully understand how we interact with them, but seeing as thats not part of the technology the discussion is (as this thread clearly shows) a repeating excursive in futility.
 
You don't by chance live on the moon, do you? Or any other planet? Because it was a very poor choice to live on one of the planets with the greatest natural EMF field of them all.

Well first off, the Earth produces a Magnetic field, not electromagnetic field.

Secondly, I don't believe the Earth's magnetic field oscillates multiple times per second. If it did, I think we would have little receiver devices to generate free electricity globally by now. ;)
 
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)

MattInOz said:
I'd rather have batteries than enough magnetic flux coming out of the ceiling to power a TV.

I do realize that Apple is more looking at very short range low power but still I'm sitting within 1m range for 10+hours a day. Our bodies have evolved to cope with a fairly solid daily does of lots of stuff but as I understand it most naturally occurring radiation is pretty random and the jury is still out on the long term effects of made-man modulated radiation.

Plus is it really that hard to deal with the odd cable or battery change?

Reading comprehension my friends. This is not using radiation. This is not using an extremely high voltage to get current to jump through the air. This is using magnetic fields, the same thing that makes your compass work.

I'm just waiting for the scientists to prove this safe, and watch as the same people that wrap themselves in covers imbedded with magnets to say this tech will kill us all.
 
Uh, add me to the list of people who are pretty nervous of the health consequences of this. I'll let the rest of you be guinea pigs, if you really want to be. I just hope these magnetic fields aren't powerful enough to affect next-door neighbors in apartment buildings and office cubicles and whatnot. Secondhand radiation is not cool. If they're that powerful I'd support legislation banning these things.
 
Nobody says not to explore this technology, but IMO there is not enough info out yet to say, no problem.

I very much doubt you have the knowledge to make an informed decision on that. I only have an undergrad degree in chemistry, so I'm not qualified to decide whether this should be let into the public domain. But even I can appreciate having looked over some of the original papers on this (took a few mins on goolge to find them) that this technology is using very low magnetic fields and operates at a very low frequency. People just seem to be scared of any kind of wireless signal, and that's pretty sad.

I am not panicking as it will not be mandatory to use it, BUT you keep defending governments and their capability to protect us. The fear that something goes wrong is real.

Yes I do keep defending them. There will always be risks and there will always be mistakes, as I said. However, the overwhelming majority of the products we use in developed countries are safe thanks to our high standards. There should always be a high level of caution, but we can't become so paranoid as to stifle progress.

As I said above I can't be sure that this new technology is safe, but I am confident that the fear of the magnetism etc that people seem to be mentioning on here is unfounded. If it becomes commercially viable and passes EU/UK safey guidelines I would be happy to benefit from it.


Uh, add me to the list of people who are pretty nervous of the health consequences of this. I'll let the rest of you be guinea pigs, if you really want to be. I just hope these magnetic fields aren't powerful enough to affect next-door neighbors in apartment buildings and office cubicles and whatnot. Secondhand radiation is not cool. If they're that powerful I'd support legislation banning these things.

I really hope this is a joke. Once again- the MIT paper which is the basis of this type of wireless electricity states their field was 0.1uT. To put that in context that's less than you get from a typical TV.
 
Last edited:
Secondly, I don't believe the Earth's magnetic field oscillates multiple times per second. If it did, I think we would have little receiver devices to generate free electricity globally by now. ;)

Aren't we exposed to that kind of alternating field everyday anytime you're near an electric motor? Same principle right? :confused:

I'm not trying to be a smartass, I've just been learning about how certain electronics work lately and thats the driving principle behind certain electric motors, an oscillating magnetic field that changes hundreds or thousands of times a second to drive the motor. Knowing this, I'm sure that field is not contained by the motor's housing. Therefore, don't we already get this kind of exposure everyday? Anyone with a bit more schooling on the subject please feel free to poke holes in my line of thinking, I'm here to learn. :eek:
 
Nobody says not to explore this technology, but IMO there is not enough info out yet to say, no problem.

I am not panicking as it will not be mandatory to use it, BUT you keep defending governments and their capability to protect us. The fear that something goes wrong is real.

If something can go wrong it will!

Funny, but real.

Nuclear reactors:
Three mile Island
Tchernobyl
Accidents in Germany now leading to gradually switch off ALL nuclear energy.

That is only the nuclear field. There is more.

Contergan sleeping pills (approved by the government after studies!), Bhopal, saccharin, asbestos, mercury, oil tanks in the ground contaminating ground water. All sanctioned and SAFE at the time!

Leaded gas. Why even switch to unleaded? Catalyzers, filtering smoke stacks, releasing stuff into the air and miles away trees die from sulfur poisoning. The list goes on and on.

All discovered AFTER the damage was done.

Humans have a habit to justify what they are doing and hope for the best outcome. They cannot control some of what they invent.

Why even take a risk if there are alternatives?

To me cable to charge or connect something is just fine.

Most of us hook up their stuff once until they move.

When I move I usually laugh about how much dust collects behind the cabinets there and how I managed to intertwine all the cables without trying.

Besides optical, I just don't see the advantages.

Are you off of your medication or something?

The list of things I can prove false or ridicule above is endless. This is like ripe for a Conan O'Brien skit.

#1: Saccharin was found not to cause cancer in recent studies.
#2: No one died or was injured at Three Mile Island except Jimmy Carter's political reputation thanks to SNL.
#3: No one has died in Germany from nuclear radiation last I checked.
#4: Last I checked, no one has died in Japan directly from radiation except those workers on the site of the disaster and I believe most were actually from the tsunami and/or explosions instead.
#5: While there was a leaking oil tank in the ground in my own state, I'm still not aware of anyone dying. They just bought bottled water for a time until the cleanup was finished.
#6: The reason other countries are more energy independent than the U.S. is because of nuclear power not despite it.
#7: Trees dying of sulfur poisoning? You lost me there buddy. Forestation and cleaner water has been on the rise in the U.S. since the 1970s.
#8: Why even switch to unleaded gas? You lost me a second time. Should we just walk everywhere like the Geico caveman?
#9: Apparently you move a lot and your mind has collected a lot of dust as a result. :D
#10: Please say hi to Ed Begley Jr. for me and tell him I hope he finds a job soon. :D

But finally, in all seriousness, thanks for giving me probably my best laugh of the week! :D

PS: You are more likely to die from a car crash or eating fast food than ANY of the above things.
 
Last edited:
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.