Apple's Interest in WiTricity Wireless Charging

[Earendil]

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.

Government to keep us safe? Oh heavens no. I trust the scientists to tell me if it's safe or not, and then I can make up my own mind on what to do about it. But until they do, or the product is released, I see no reason to start spreading fear.

If something can go wrong it will!

It's a nice funny one liner, but hardly applies to the real world.

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.

I'm sure there are more. Perhaps there are some that happened in the last 25 years? The ones you quoted happened in 1986 and 1979. And a couple accidents out of the this many reactors is hardly proof of of how inherently bad the technology is.

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!.

Surprise! We've made mistakes!

For everything you've mentioned there have been 100 (random large number that I feel is accurate) technologies that have saved lives and advanced our understanding of ourselves and the universe we live in.

Use the mistakes to learn and to have more caution, but don't cripple technological and educational advance just because you are afraid of an eventual consumer product that you don't even have to use.

The number of disposable plastic/rubber/metal that won't go to landfills because of a safe technology like this would be incredible.

 

[840quadra]

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

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.

You are 100% correct. However, the intent of an electric motor is to contain the EMF into an area that will excite other Electro, or static magnets, not produce a field outside of it's case (though it does as a side-effect).

A typical small motor for that of a coffee grinder or similar will produce a EMF field of about 50 - 100 Gauss within 2 - 3 inches from the device while it is in operating status. This field falls off rapidly the further you move away from the source to a reasonable 1 gauss EMF field within an ultra small distance of 1 - 2 feet.

The purpose of the WiTricity device is to create a controlled EMF field that could potentially power devices at a greater distance, though to be honest I don't know the true EMF levels this produces as of yet. I would be impressed if it could do what is advertised in a field of less than 50 Gauss, but that is entirely possible.

 

[BC2009]

If Apple put this in an iMac to charge wireless peripherals and iPhones wouldn't they be simultaneously erasing any magnetic media? What about the iPhone's compass, wouldn't it have to be tuned to ignore any oscillating magnetic field that oscillates at a certain frequency? Is that even possible?

Seems cool to think about this stuff, but I also think it is going to have some very practical drawbacks. If you had such a field in your car (like Toyota is looking at), they'd have to make sure it does not effect any compasses in the car.

Further, since we have chemical-electric current running through our bodies it would make sense to believe that an oscillating high-intensity magnetic field within close proximity could have an effect on our bodies.

However, the last thing to note is that they want to use this with electronics which clearly are using electricity. If this oscillating magnetic field does not effect the electronics it powers (like messing with the picture on a monitor) then there may very well be a good basis for this.

I am no expert in the field, but I would like to see them put forth some comprehensive studies and reasoning as to why this is safe for us, for our appliances, and for things like compasses and hard-drives which rely on magnetism to function (in that order).

As an interesting aside: I saw somebody mention magnetic fields messing with honeybee's brains -- that could just be because honeybees are sensitive to magnetic fields and use them to help keep their sense of direction (like an internal compass). I don't know that it actually scrambles their brains. Some believe that our innate sense of direction is based on an imperceptible ability to sense the Earth's magnetic field (an internal compass). Incidentally, the Earth's magnetic field is like 70,000 years overdue for a flip in polarity which should create an interesting 300-year period of weakened and erratic poles, coupled with increased UV radiation (more sunblock), and finally a complete flip with the poles returned to full strength but with opposite charge. It would be interesting to somehow know how the last polarity flip affected the life on this earth. A big difference between this technology and the Earth's magnetic field is that the Earth's magnetic field changes slowly over time while this technology is talking about a magnetic field that is flipping the poles at a high frequency (if I understand it correctly).

 

[Earendil]

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.

You are correct, the field we experience is just a magnetic field. My use of "EMF" was inaccurate. However, this is what is said about WiTricity:

"The WiTricity devices are coupled almost entirely with magnetic fields (the electric fields are largely confined within capacitors inside the devices), which is argued to make them safer than resonant energy transfer using electric fields (most famously in Tesla coils, whose high electric fields allow them to be used as lightning generators)".

Emphasis is my own.

So in either case, we're talking about a magnetic field, not an EMF.

I can't wait to see if those that believe in Magnetic Therapy will shun this technology, or intentionally surround themselves with these devices so as to increase the effect

 

[henrystar]

If it wont affect our health, this is definitely the future!

Ha ha like cellphones cause cancer...

 

[Thunderhawks]

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.
#10: Please say hi to Ed Begley Jr. for me and tell him I hope he finds a job soon.

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

PS: You are more likely to die from a car crash or eating fast food than ANY of the above things.

You may want to work on your reading comprehension.

The only thing I mentioned dying was trees and that in the context of not figuring out that building higher smoke stacks wasn't enough. They figured it out and now use filters. BTW: US is not the only country in the world.
This went on in Europe too.

And, you make it sound as if the "few" nuclear accidents are not worth mentioning and should be taken as a percentage of good things happening vs. bad things happening. I beg to differ as there are alternatives and IMO the same money put into nuclear technology put into alternative energy would have yielded just as good a result without endangering people.

Japan was lucky (bad word in that context) and actually proves the point that humans figure nothing will ever happen. Last earthquake 140 years ago, must be fine now.

My examples can only be from the past, as I have not figured out yet how to predict the next disaster. I am not an analyst

They illustrate that many times something that is thought to be safe initially later turns out to be harmful.

Instead of spreading fear, I think a cautious approach is always the best way to approach inventions. I see nothing wrong with analyzing pros and cons of a technology.

 

[HyperZboy]

PS: You are more likely to die from a car crash or eating fast food than ANY of the above things.

One more thing...

I can't wait for a state to ban WiTricity charging or fast food eating while driving.

It's only a matter of time...

DUIM: Driving under the influence of Magnetism.

 

[RKpro]

I don't know. I kind of like cables..

 

[tigress666]

As an interesting aside: I saw somebody mention magnetic fields messing with honeybee's brains -- that could just be because honeybees are sensitive to magnetic fields and use them to help keep their sense of direction (like an internal compass).

Furthering this aside, the article I saw talking about this study showed the study using horrendous science. It used correlation to be causation.

They put a cellphone inside honeybee's hives and when they died after calling the phone a few times, they said, oh, it must be the rays from the cellphone.

Except:
1. That doesn't prove what distance the cellphone has to be... having it right inside the hive just means the cellphone would have to be really close, doesn't say anything about people using cellphones near the hive.

2. Who is to say the ringing or the buzzing phone wasn't what disturbed the bees enough to destroy the hive? I suppose if they turned off both (and the article I read didn't mention that) maybe there is more of a point here. But it still doesn't answer 1 (about how close the findings were... it doesn't say that people using cellphones kills hives, only that the cellphone inside the hive did, and that only proves very close range even if they address my point #2).

 

[SgtPepper12]

Umm, it acutally IS using radiation. I know "oscillating magnetic field" doesn't sound dangerous at all, but it is the same as an electromagnetic wave, therefore radiation. So, yes it can cause illnesses which are connected to high electromagnetic doses.

Whatever, I think this won't have any success. I mean most of the energy that the source uses gets lost. Very simple calculation: A device is 2 meters away from the source and the receiver has an area of 0,01m^2. The source has to generate 5000 times the power consumption of the device. This is obviously a very simplified version of reality, but it gives you an idea.

 

[Earendil]

They illustrate that many times something that is thought to be safe initially later turns out to be harmful.

And I would argue the that cases where we are completely wrong are actually quite few compared to every other scientific discovery.

[/QUOTE]Instead of spreading fear, I think a cautious approach is always the best way to approach inventions. I see nothing wrong with analyzing pros and cons of a technology.

And that is a sensible approach. However all indications right now are that it is in fact safe. More studies need to be done, but this isn't a 10 year old saying that he didn't get hurt so you won't. But instead of discussing the prons and cons you bring up Chernobyl of ALL human technological failures. I mean, seriously?

How is comparing a 3 foot magnetic field that has been deemed safe by the current set of tests comparable to disaster involving design flaws and human error?

Scientists know EXACTLY what can go wrong in a nuclear reactor. The idea is not that the technology is inherently safe, but that it is quite controllable if no one @#$%s up. The US has been running nuclear submarines and reactors on Aircraft carriers for years now, the first one being a nuclear submarine commissioned in 1954.

So while I agree with this last post by you, which is perhaps a sign that your mindset has changed, I don't think the opinion you just stated was being applied very well to the previous post that I responded to
Also, your reply to the previous fellow makes me think you might be under the impression that him and I are the same person. We aren't

 

[HyperZboy]

You may want to work on your reading comprehension.

The only thing I mentioned dying was trees and that in the context of not figuring out that building higher smoke stacks wasn't enough. They figured it out and now use filters. BTW: US is not the only country in the world.
This went on in Europe too.

And, you make it sound as if the "few" nuclear accidents are not worth mentioning and should be taken as a percentage of good things happening vs. bad things happening. I beg to differ as there are alternatives and IMO the same money put into nuclear technology put into alternative energy would have yielded just as good a result without endangering people.

Japan was lucky (bad word in that context) and actually proves the point that humans figure nothing will ever happen. Last earthquake 140 years ago, must be fine now.

My examples can only be from the past, as I have not figured out yet how to predict the next disaster. I am not an analyst

They illustrate that many times something that is thought to be safe initially later turns out to be harmful.

Instead of spreading fear, I think a cautious approach is always the best way to approach inventions. I see nothing wrong with analyzing pros and cons of a technology.

If what you say is true, Ed Begley Jr. would have a job and not be driving a $100k golf cart around town.

It amazes me that saccharin was slammed for what? 30+ years? Then a new study discovered it wasn't the cause of cancer in the first place.

I just don't understand tree hugger people that slam nuclear power. France is afloat right now because of nuclear power. The only reason NATO is in Libya is because of automobiles and gasoline.

While I'm not against new energy resources, so far, they all appear to be WINNING like Charlie Sheen.

But I'm totally in favor of magnetic charging. I don't know of any studies saying this could be detrimental to ones health, although it might be energy inefficient. But if you can pay the electric bill, isn't that a personal decision really?

 

[840quadra]

You are correct, the field we experience is just a magnetic field. My use of "EMF" was inaccurate. However, this is what is said about WiTricity:

"The WiTricity devices are coupled almost entirely with magnetic fields (the electric fields are largely confined within capacitors inside the devices), which is argued to make them safer than resonant energy transfer using electric fields (most famously in Tesla coils, whose high electric fields allow them to be used as lightning generators)".

Emphasis is my own.

So in either case, we're talking about a magnetic field, not an EMF.

I can't wait to see if those that believe in Magnetic Therapy will shun this technology, or intentionally surround themselves with these devices so as to increase the effect

I don't subscribe to the magnetic bracelet cult, but I see what you are getting at.

What they are discussing in the bolded portion you quoted is actually Electrostatic energy, which is different than Electromagnetic. In essence, they are stating that the system will not discharge or arc large amounts of electrical energy, in a way that a Tesla coil is famous for.

Regardless, Your post cast me further into this entire technology, in which I found a really detailed article on Wintricity, and the technology / theory behind it. Within the 32 page document, it is describing in detail what you referenced above, among other things.

Many of the technologies WinTricity is based around, do produce sizable EMF fields on their own. The sheer fact that it creates a large Oscillating magnetic field, is what worries me. That being said, it is reported (by the designers) that this field has a high Q Factor (Read efficient, narrow bandwidth, and pinpointed) which in theory would reduce stray, or , wasted energy. The question still remains, how much of an EMF field does a system that could power cell phone, or TV, actually create?

The field could be quite small, which I do hope as I would love to utilize it in some way or an other!

 

[Earendil]

Umm, it acutally IS using radiation. I know "oscillating magnetic field" doesn't sound dangerous at all, but it is the same as an electromagnetic wave, therefore radiation. So, yes it can cause illnesses which are connected to high electromagnetic doses.

Seriously people. I know some people accidentally bump into scientific things that they don't understand, but this subject is CLEARLY within the realm of hardcore science. So while an air of curiosity would be wonderful with a lack of knowledge, this statement of fact sort of comes off as ignorance.

So, first, let's define radiation:
"A process in which energetic particles or energy or waves travel through a medium or space."

Examples of this "dangerous" thing called radiation would include:
1. Visible Light
2. AM Radio
3. The Earth's MF
4. Thermal Radiation (Fire, stove, heater)

And there are many others that are safe in smaller quantities, X-ray, ultraviolet (think sun). And some really bad shiet like Neutron (Nuclear). There are also a lot of things that we still question in this regard. Cell phones would be among them, however those in the know think it's impossible for it to cause caner.

" Quantum physics; all cancers are caused by mutant strands of DNA. Electromagnetic radiation can't create mutant strands of DNA unless the frequency is at or higher than the blue limit of the visible spectrum the near-ultraviolet. The frequency of cell phone radiation is about 1 million times too low." - University of Maryland physics professor Bob Park

So as we can see, the scientific term "Radiation" does not automatically mean evil, bad, or dangerous. The question is what kind of radiation is this technology using? By all accounts it is using a magnetic field, not an EMF.

Your simplistic "oscillating magnetic field" = "EMF" = "radiation" = "bad", is just terrible science thinking. If you had tossed a few question marks in your comment I'd be more forgiving in my correction, but you stated it as fact. And bad science is one of my pet peeves


(If I have misspoken on any of the above points, I am open to correction).

Cheers!

 

[blackpond]

LoL at all the downranking for posts being concerned about radiation issues. Ever wonder why land near powerlines is much cheaper?

Uh... because power lines (wires) are an eyesore. It has nothing to do with radiation. If those wires were buried under the neighborhood the land would be worth more.

 

[thejadedmonkey]

It makes sense that such a magnetic field would affect the brain. The earth's magnetic field is static. It can therefore induce no current in any stationary wire, and can't be used as a "charger".

What's used here is an oscillating magnetic field. The fact that it's dynamic [changes with respect to time] is what allows it to induce current. So no matter the strength of the field, it's easy to see that humans are not already resistant to it. Such oscillations could [theoretically] affect the electrical impulses of the brain, unless the myelin sheath on the neurons was an insulator. However, I do not know at what levels - if any - it might become dangerous.

It does certainly seem like a brilliant idea though, and I liked the little anecdote about how the professor came up with the idea. Haha.

The myelin sheath is only for stopping the flow of molecules that have an electric charge, such as K, CL, Na, & Ca. I don't think it's capable of insulating neurons from a magnetic field, which could effect how electrolites respond inside of a neuron..

My gosh! You're right! I do notice I don't sleep well next to my mobile phone. Maybe I should just turn off the alarm so it doesn't wake me up in the early mornings...



And you're right again! How do you know!? My missus wakes up the same time I do... maybe because I wake her up so we can have breakfast together? Hmmm such incredible discoveries!

Should I go on?

I, for one, will pass on 'captain obvious' comments next time...

Quit being a smart ass. I'm talking about a cellphone, next to your head, without an alarm, on silent mode, versus... Nothing. And I also meant the sleep patterns, which are not when you wake up, but how you sleep. What your brain does when it's asleep. When your REM cycles are.

I really hope your day job doesn't involve any sort of scientific comprehension.

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

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.

Most people are only around an electric motor when they sit next to a computer, say for the hard drive or a cooling fan. maybe for a few seconds when walking through a revolving door... The computer motors use such little electricity, and since it drops off exponentially, by the time any gets to you, it's very weak. Certainly not strong enough to charge anything, otherwise we could use our computers already for iPhone chargers.

Ha ha like cellphones cause cancer...

Bio 101: Electromagnetic fiends are a form of low-level radiation. Luckily, DNA Polymerase (and a few other enzymes) are able to go through your DNA and find and repair any damage done. As long as the rest of your cell is working 100%, you should be OK.. at least until the radiation damages your DNA Polymerase. Then of course, the part that stops mytosis (the P53 gene I think) needs to be damaged, too, and then the cell turns cancerous. Long story short, it's not easy to do. But the more radiation you're exposed to, the more likely it happens. That's why you get to wear lead bibs everytime you get an x-ray.

 

[MacAddict1978]

I think everything does these days anyways, why not have something cool killing you.

I agree. Though I can't get funny scenarios out of my head like when kids sent their younger sibling out in a lighting storm with a golf club.

"Here tommy, hold this device and go stand in that room..."

 

[Thunderhawks]

And I would argue the that cases where we are completely wrong are actually quite few compared to every other scientific discovery.

Instead of spreading fear, I think a cautious approach is always the best way to approach inventions. I see nothing wrong with analyzing pros and cons of a technology.

And that is a sensible approach. However all indications right now are that it is in fact safe. More studies need to be done, but this isn't a 10 year old saying that he didn't get hurt so you won't. But instead of discussing the prons and cons you bring up Chernobyl of ALL human technological failures. I mean, seriously?

How is comparing a 3 foot magnetic field that has been deemed safe by the current set of tests comparable to disaster involving design flaws and human error?

Scientists know EXACTLY what can go wrong in a nuclear reactor. The idea is not that the technology is inherently safe, but that it is quite controllable if no one @#$%s up. The US has been running nuclear submarines and reactors on Aircraft carriers for years now, the first one being a nuclear submarine commissioned in 1954.

So while I agree with this last post by you, which is perhaps a sign that your mindset has changed, I don't think the opinion you just stated was being applied very well to the previous post that I responded to
Also, your reply to the previous fellow makes me think you might be under the impression that him and I are the same person. We aren't

It is always very easy to pull things out of context and comment.

Chernobyl and nuclear accidents was brought up in the context that humans have a tendency to think they can control what they create and always hope for the best (The hope for the best attitude includes me

It is just because we are humans what we create can't always be controlled.
The unless somebody $^%$ up is exactly my point. That $^%$%^ up even happens with the best of intentions.

We also have a tendency to only look at the bright side of development.

Again, nuclear a good example. What to do with all the burnt out elements that will radiate for centuries? When they started this energy, questions about disposal of these elements were brushed aside or minimized.

Now that there are so many they have a hard time to bury them safely and leave the info behind for future generations.
Many French elements are now stored in German salt mines in castors. (concrete coffins)
Who in the world can guarantee that these castors do not give out over time, via an earthquake etc.

We (humans) are always smart AFTER the fact.

So, what is wrong with evaluating a technology from beginning to end?

Electro magnetic energy and its inventions are coming at a rapid pace.
By 2021 they want to create an airplane with electro magnetic motors that can do Paris to New York in 2 hours or so. Concept drawings already in the newspapers.

I am not at all against technological advance and appreciate all we have.

As an old world folkie I do however not jump on every new technical development without being critical or without trying to look at all aspects.

BTW: The current ipod/iphone/ipad etc. 30 pin plugs ALWAYS break at the cable entry into the plug. That alone would be worth a better invention

 

[iStudentUK]

Umm, it acutally IS using radiation. I know "oscillating magnetic field" doesn't sound dangerous at all, but it is the same as an electromagnetic wave, therefore radiation. So, yes it can cause illnesses which are connected to high electromagnetic doses.

This is the biggest load of rubbish I have seen in a long time. Do you even know what an electromagnetic wave is? Do you think that radiation automatically means bad?

Gamma rays are electromagnetic waves, they will kill you. But visible light is also an electromagnetic wave- should I close my curtains? Saying high doses of electromagnetic waves causes illness is practically meaningless.

 

[tinman0]

So....

Let me get this straight.

All this "technology" is, is a low power pulsing magnetic wave that moves a component in a device, which generates a small electrical current?

So what have all the flat-earthers got against that?

 

[hayesk]

I don't care what they say, this has to have SOME sort of effect on our bodies or the energy they have themselves. We don't even understand the body and its energy enough to be able to even reliably make the claim that this is safe!



It would be cool, but I totally agree!



This mentality is a big part of what is wrong with the world today!

What is the life span of people today? When in our history has it been higher?

 

[Earendil]

The only reason NATO is in Libya is because of automobiles and gasoline.

Ugh. I know this is off topic, but... really? What sort of anecdota pos are you repeating there?

Libya produces about 2% of the worlds oil. I'm sure NATO is protecting civilians (They don't have troops on the ground) because Muammar Gaddafi is one of the worst tyrants of the last 50 years. Gaddafi has said of the current situation in his country that "Protesters deserve to die". He's a real stand up guy.

 

[840quadra]

What is the life span of people today? When in our history has it been higher?

While I understand what you are getting at, you also have to take a look at the here and now.

How many people work in coal mines, breath black smoke from Steam engines, or work with industrial equipment that can tear off limbs, or crush people alive? How about advancements in Medicine, safety equipment, and quality of food / water as well.

The world is also a lot safer than it was in the past .

 

[SgtPepper12]

Your simplistic "oscillating magnetic field" = "EMF" = "radiation" = "bad", is just terrible science thinking. If you had tossed a few question marks in your comment I'd be more forgiving in my correction, but you stated it as fact. And bad science is one of my pet peeves

I didn't suggest that this kind of radiation is bad or good. In fact, I don't even think that electromagnetic waves of this low frequency and amplitude is harmful. I just said that it IS radiation and that the term "oscillating magnetic field" is the same as "electromagnetic radiation" and therefore used as an euphemism. Read the posts here and you will notice that people tend to think "Oh, this is just magnetism, so it's fine, right?".

Gamma rays are electromagnetic waves, they will kill you. But visible light is also an electromagnetic wave- should I close my curtains? Saying high doses of electromagnetic waves causes illness is practically meaningless.

I wasn't precise: I think the waves used here are of similiar frequency as the very low end of radio. And I know there are many people out there that state to have health problems because of radio transmission. So if these people are right, then I think that this technique can cause similar problems.

 

[tinman0]

While I understand what you are getting at, you also have to take a look at the here and now.

How many people work in coal mines, breath black smoke from Steam engines, or work with industrial equipment that can tear off limbs, or crush people alive? How about advancements in Medicine, safety equipment, and quality of food / water as well.

The world is also a lot safer than it was in the past .

What gets me is that most of the morons who are against this technology will happily wear headphones!

So, that's two magnetic waves, one on each ear producing noise through a modulating magnetic wave, and that's not dangerous? But charging your iPhone in front of your computer is....

The term for many of these people is "flat earthers"