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.
Probably dumb question no one is asking...
- Thread starter joeblow7777
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It's an Apple product we're talking about here. Even if authentication required bombarding of faces with alpha, beta, and gamma particles, consumers still wouldn't think twice about buying
By that argument, tanning booths are risk free too. Not saying it's the same thing, but this particular form of exposure to IR light isn't quite the same as anything we encounter in nature either. There's already apparently issues with the light from screens disrupting sleep patterns or whatever.
Tanning booths are ultraviolet. The iPhone X uses infrared.
UV is short wavelength. Infrared is long wavelength. Short wavelengths like UV and gamma rays have more energy. Long wavelengths like infrared and radio are the opposite.
If I start getting angry and turning green, Apple is getting a call.
I know all of that, actually. My point was just that saying that it's part of sunlight doesn't necessarily mean that we suffer no harm from increased exposure to it. I guess I'm most curious about what repeated direct exposure to the eyes might do.
Incandescent, halogen, and LED sources all produce infrared. We are illuminated with infrared all the time. Infrared and near-infrared have been studied extensively.
Anything is theoretically possible. But at this point, it's like asking if drinking a teaspoon of water every time a user unlocks their iPhone can have negative physical effects. It's entirely possible, but there's already a huge body of science to suggest it's doesn't have any negative effects.
I did Google it before I made the thread. Nothing conclusive, probably because it's not something that people have had much reason to think about before.
[doublepost=1505268077][/doublepost]
Presumably not since it needs to see that your eyes are looking at it. And in the keynote, they mentioned glasses, but not sunglasses. I doubt that omission was accidental.