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.
WiTricity Demos Apple's Wireless iMac Charging Station Concept
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
none at all, typically you have something like a step up converter raise the frequency of electricity so high that it floats through the air, it never penetrates the skin, you can touch the device shooting the waves and no harm will be done to you.
The only bad thing is your electricity bill will go up, because this is not 100% efficient, depending how far you are from the source you start loosing energy. Definitely not green enough for apple.
woo hoo! to old technology from the master of lightning!
Last edited:
Charging can occur over several meters...
Cancer can occur over several meters... as well as flipper babies.
Cancer can occur over several meters... as well as flipper babies.
I'm very desperate to start living in that world when I talk to my grandsons and say: " I remember when we plug every electric device in our home... in fact when you bought a house it was full of outlets all over the place... ha ha ha... "
My only concerns are:
1) Potential health risks (already mentioned)
2) Energy loss in conversion/transmission. I mean I don't want to go through (and pay for) 3x the power (or whatever the loss ratio is) to charge a device wirelessly than it would take wired.
If those can be solved in some way then I'm all for it. in either event I think it's worth developing the technology. Even if we don't see it in our homes, I'm sure it could have many other applications, and technologies that result from it.
1) Potential health risks (already mentioned)
2) Energy loss in conversion/transmission. I mean I don't want to go through (and pay for) 3x the power (or whatever the loss ratio is) to charge a device wirelessly than it would take wired.
If those can be solved in some way then I'm all for it. in either event I think it's worth developing the technology. Even if we don't see it in our homes, I'm sure it could have many other applications, and technologies that result from it.
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_0_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/532.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.5 Mobile/8A306 Safari/6531.22.7)
(gets cable and plugs it in to phone) "Dam that was hard. Wish I had wireless electricity so that I wouldn't have to move to charge my phone"
I feel like this is not needed....sure it seems "cool" but useless as it takes up a ton more power just to transmit than what is actually being used to charge!!
Let's first figure out a clean,never ending form of electricity ala cold fusion, then we can create something pointless from a economical standpoint (it's gonna be an expensive luxury)
But yet most of us buy things just because it's cool so of course it'll sell if it does come out!!
(gets cable and plugs it in to phone) "Dam that was hard. Wish I had wireless electricity so that I wouldn't have to move to charge my phone"
I feel like this is not needed....sure it seems "cool" but useless as it takes up a ton more power just to transmit than what is actually being used to charge!!
Let's first figure out a clean,never ending form of electricity ala cold fusion, then we can create something pointless from a economical standpoint (it's gonna be an expensive luxury)
But yet most of us buy things just because it's cool so of course it'll sell if it does come out!!
Speaking of Tesla, there was a demo of a Tesla car being recharged with this or a similar technology. The sender part was in the garage floor. You just drove home and parked over it and the car was ready to go the next morning.
And they showed demos of all sorts of devices. There were little lights in the table that lit up when the device was properly placed. Cooler than just drawing lines for sure!
I think it was an episode of This New House which shows futuristic stuff, rather than how to repair old houses. Good show, not quite so breathless as most future technology programs usually are, although technology that lights up the packaging on items as you pass them in the store is a little too much...Next, they will call out to you and lay guilt trips on you if you don't buy them.
And they showed demos of all sorts of devices. There were little lights in the table that lit up when the device was properly placed. Cooler than just drawing lines for sure!
I think it was an episode of This New House which shows futuristic stuff, rather than how to repair old houses. Good show, not quite so breathless as most future technology programs usually are, although technology that lights up the packaging on items as you pass them in the store is a little too much...Next, they will call out to you and lay guilt trips on you if you don't buy them.
I see WiTricity is claiming their technology has an efficiency of 90%, but this company doesn't seem to be very honest with their numbers. I guess they once reached 90% at a distance of 1 meter and gigantic research machines. And now they use this number everywhere because it sounds so much like "nearly lossless". I think the real life average efficiency is more like 50% and less.
But I guess this is kind of the American way to see things. If energy transmission is less effective, well, then my bill goes up a bit. And if my car needs 20 litres for 100km, well, then I have to pay a little more for gas. Who cares what the rest of the world thinks about it as long as I feel fine with it.
But I guess this is kind of the American way to see things. If energy transmission is less effective, well, then my bill goes up a bit. And if my car needs 20 litres for 100km, well, then I have to pay a little more for gas. Who cares what the rest of the world thinks about it as long as I feel fine with it.
seriously people? do your research.
I am absolutely amazed at how many "knee-jerk" negative reactions this posting has inspired!
OMG WE'RE ALL GOING TO GET CANCER, which is good because we'll be lucky enough to die before the EARTH MELTS FROM ENERGY INEFFICIENCY!!!
UGH. seriously. It seems that everyone who has done alittle research in the field isn't at all worried. Honestly, for now, I think the best thing to do is to discuss the possible advantages of the idea of the systems versus the possible health risks. Thank god they didn't NOT continue work on cars because someone said they'd pollute @_@
Also, correct me if I'm wrong but I don't think that the number of devices being charged 'pulls' more energy out of the transmitting device right? The device sends out the same amount of magnetic fluctuation.... So if you were charging, say, your wireless keyboard, mouse, ipad, and iphone all at the same time wouldn't that increase the level of efficiency?
---------
ANYWHO, My own opinion is that this will be a wonderfully adventagious development. Charging multiple devices without the need for batteries and cords... Just lovely.
One additional thing which must be made, however, is a small wall device that can transmit these magnetic fields. You won't always be at home by your computer when your ipad or whatever dies. So a small charger could easily be built that will plug into any wall outlet.
At least until more public charging stations are set up
Given apple's desire to make an "unconnected" world (Um, hello icloud? no need to wire yourself to a computer anymore.... except... for... gasp... CHARGING), I think this is a no-brainer move for apple. I hope it comes very quickly indeed.
I am absolutely amazed at how many "knee-jerk" negative reactions this posting has inspired!
OMG WE'RE ALL GOING TO GET CANCER, which is good because we'll be lucky enough to die before the EARTH MELTS FROM ENERGY INEFFICIENCY!!!
UGH. seriously. It seems that everyone who has done alittle research in the field isn't at all worried. Honestly, for now, I think the best thing to do is to discuss the possible advantages of the idea of the systems versus the possible health risks. Thank god they didn't NOT continue work on cars because someone said they'd pollute @_@
Also, correct me if I'm wrong but I don't think that the number of devices being charged 'pulls' more energy out of the transmitting device right? The device sends out the same amount of magnetic fluctuation.... So if you were charging, say, your wireless keyboard, mouse, ipad, and iphone all at the same time wouldn't that increase the level of efficiency?
---------
ANYWHO, My own opinion is that this will be a wonderfully adventagious development. Charging multiple devices without the need for batteries and cords... Just lovely.
One additional thing which must be made, however, is a small wall device that can transmit these magnetic fields. You won't always be at home by your computer when your ipad or whatever dies. So a small charger could easily be built that will plug into any wall outlet.
At least until more public charging stations are set up
Given apple's desire to make an "unconnected" world (Um, hello icloud? no need to wire yourself to a computer anymore.... except... for... gasp... CHARGING), I think this is a no-brainer move for apple. I hope it comes very quickly indeed.
Thanks. A digital switch makes sense. It should be relatively simple to detect a load and when that load has diminished. I wonder how it would tell that a potential load has entered the "room". I can see how it can easily tell when a charging target leaves but if it's off I'm not sure I understand how it tells when a device has entered it's charging area in order to turn itself on. Perhaps it's always on but no energy flows unless there is a coil in range to create a load?
Nearly 2/3rds (or so I have read) of the energy that is produced by our power plants is lost to heat and transmission inefficiencies. You are also right that plugs and the small transformers on most electrical power cords waste energy due to heat loss. Wireless energy might help with that power cord heat loss but it won't help with the inefficiencies of our power grid. To get around that we need distributed generation and on site generation.
I'm all for getting rid of wires. I like the idea of near field transmission for stationary things like your computer, the TV, lamps and things like that. I'm not sure I want my house blanketed with wireless electricity just so my phone stays constantly charged. That's seems a bit overkill. It will be interesting to see where the technology goes.
I am absolutely amazed at how many "knee-jerk" negative reactions this posting has inspired!
OMG WE'RE ALL GOING TO GET CANCER, which is good because we'll be lucky enough to die before the EARTH MELTS FROM ENERGY INEFFICIENCY!!!
UGH. seriously. It seems that everyone who has done alittle research in the field isn't at all worried. Honestly, for now, I think the best thing to do is to discuss the possible advantages of the idea of the systems versus the possible health risks. Thank god they didn't NOT continue work on cars because someone said they'd pollute @_@
Also, correct me if I'm wrong but I don't think that the number of devices being charged 'pulls' more energy out of the transmitting device right? The device sends out the same amount of magnetic fluctuation.... So if you were charging, say, your wireless keyboard, mouse, ipad, and iphone all at the same time wouldn't that increase the level of efficiency?
---------
ANYWHO, My own opinion is that this will be a wonderfully adventagious development. Charging multiple devices without the need for batteries and cords... Just lovely.
One additional thing which must be made, however, is a small wall device that can transmit these magnetic fields. You won't always be at home by your computer when your ipad or whatever dies. So a small charger could easily be built that will plug into any wall outlet.
At least until more public charging stations are set up
Given apple's desire to make an "unconnected" world (Um, hello icloud? no need to wire yourself to a computer anymore.... except... for... gasp... CHARGING), I think this is a no-brainer move for apple. I hope it comes very quickly indeed.
The list of things that are carcinogenic is pretty long. I don't think this is anywhere near the top of the list. Take a graduate level environmental toxicity course and you'll never look at things in the supermarket the same again. It's all about dosage anyway and that's where the danger (if there even is one) in this technology would be.
I think you are wrong about the number of devices. I can't quote all the laws but the more devices you add to the circuit the more energy is going to have to flow in order to power or charge them all. That's true for wired or wireless energy. It's possible that it might be more efficient to charge multiple items at the same time instead of one at a time since the circuit would be open for a shorter amount of time but it's still going to use more energy for each device you place on the circuit.
That leads to another question. How many things can be charged at once and what limits it? You wouldn't want to blow a circuit breaker every time too many people with iPhones walked into your living room and started charging.
After taking a hiatus from the tech news & rumor scene, this is my first encounter with the technology. How would anyone in my situation know that it's been covered "ad nauseum" without a snarky forumer to point it out?
I am suddenly reminded of why I took the hiatus.
I wasn't referring to just tech news and rumors, it's been out in the open for quite a while. The main knee jerk comments are either this was invented by Tesla or it will stop pace makers. Check out TED 2009! Long hiatus I assume.
I am absolutely amazed at how many "knee-jerk" negative reactions this posting has inspired!
OMG WE'RE ALL GOING TO GET CANCER, which is good because we'll be lucky enough to die before the EARTH MELTS FROM ENERGY INEFFICIENCY!!!
UGH. seriously. It seems that everyone who has done alittle research in the field isn't at all worried. Honestly, for now, I think the best thing to do is to discuss the possible advantages of the idea of the systems versus the possible health risks. Thank god they didn't NOT continue work on cars because someone said they'd pollute @_@
Also, correct me if I'm wrong but I don't think that the number of devices being charged 'pulls' more energy out of the transmitting device right? The device sends out the same amount of magnetic fluctuation.... So if you were charging, say, your wireless keyboard, mouse, ipad, and iphone all at the same time wouldn't that increase the level of efficiency?
---------
ANYWHO, My own opinion is that this will be a wonderfully adventagious development. Charging multiple devices without the need for batteries and cords... Just lovely.
One additional thing which must be made, however, is a small wall device that can transmit these magnetic fields. You won't always be at home by your computer when your ipad or whatever dies. So a small charger could easily be built that will plug into any wall outlet.
At least until more public charging stations are set up
Given apple's desire to make an "unconnected" world (Um, hello icloud? no need to wire yourself to a computer anymore.... except... for... gasp... CHARGING), I think this is a no-brainer move for apple. I hope it comes very quickly indeed.
The same people had they been born a while back further would have claimed going in excess of 60 would kill you. LOL.
Ok, I was being sarcastic about the cancer. I was mocking those that think we're all going to die because of some magnetic fields...
And as for the number of devices, I am totally unaware of how these machines really work.... but I think I was thinking of it sort of as how the earth has a certain gravitational pull, nomatter how much stuff is 'being' pulled, you know? Or like, a lamp gives off the same amount of energy nomatter how many things are in the room to have light show upon them.... or a radio doesn't get louder or use more energy if there are 1, or 100 people listening....
So i was sort of imagining that anything that can fit into that sphere of magnetic energy fluxuations would be given the same level of fluctuations and therefore the same level of charging. I don't see how this would cause the machine to suddenly start putting out more magnetic energy....
People were talking about it being inefficient because the energy is dispersed instead of directed right at the thing being charged.... if there are multiple things occupying different spaces in that 'sphere' of charging, then isn't that less space that is being 'wasted' per se? IE the energy that would have been dissapated into 'thin air' would be used instead to charge one of the 6 devices that are there.
Can anyone who actually knows something about the technology comment? I'd love to learn more.
Just saying, these magnetic fields are not the same you have on permanent magnets. These fields are alternating, and that is always where the potential danger is. For example some big MRI machines are creating magnetic fields of more than 5T which is just unbelievably strong. However, this is no problem at all for any patient as long as he is just lying in there without moving. But if they are going in there too fast, the magnetic field strength inside the brain is changing too fast and therefore creating an induction current inside the nerves. I don't really think this might be a problem here, but I think there are some misunderstandings regarding the technology.
Well, imagine you have a Witrcity source and receiver with an efficiency of 50%. If you have just one device in it needing a power of 10 Watts, the source uses 20 Watts. If you have 4 devices like that it needs a power of 80 Watts and so on. So the magnetic field strength goes up the more devices are being charged. If the system would work the way you thought, the source would permanently need a power of like a few thousand watts, just like a radio transmitter.
Is that necessarily true? This isn't like lightning bolts shooting out of the transmitter into the device... the oscillating fields are being projected the same way not matter what is in that field... if you crammed two people into an MRI machine, it wouldn't suddenly go into overdrive.
Or like two people tanning under the same light... or a water energy generator. if you have a river flowing and you put one wheel in the water to generate energy, that's 1 wheel... but if you have 3-4, so long as they don't interfere, you are getting a lot more energy produced from the same river. it doesn't run faster
idk. I don't know exactly how the system works but it seems to me like given the fact that the energy is coming from a sort of physical (magnetic) reaction to a field being given off at a constant rate - then more things could be charged without the original transmitter requiring any additional energy. You are just using the energy its already sucking up more efficiently...
Or like two people tanning under the same light... or a water energy generator. if you have a river flowing and you put one wheel in the water to generate energy, that's 1 wheel... but if you have 3-4, so long as they don't interfere, you are getting a lot more energy produced from the same river. it doesn't run faster
idk. I don't know exactly how the system works but it seems to me like given the fact that the energy is coming from a sort of physical (magnetic) reaction to a field being given off at a constant rate - then more things could be charged without the original transmitter requiring any additional energy. You are just using the energy its already sucking up more efficiently...
Steve does love his magic.
I think it's a great idea. Put the technology into larger devices that are never going to be mobile anyhow, to power everything around them. This is how most people set up their equipment now. Like a TV surrounded by lots of other little electronic boxes.
Maybe one day we will have "power panels" you hang on your wall and everything within a few feet of it gets power without needing any power plugs at all.
Imagine, one day we might buy a new fancy electronic device, place it on your A/V stand and it just works, completely wirelessly.
Long time lurker, first time poster, but I have to elaborate a bit here since I have some background and have been researching Tesla's work for a long time. It is true that what WiTricity is doing is awesome but ponder this:
Tesla, over a hundred years ago, built a working prototype for a giant tower in upstate New York that was to be hooked up to the power plant (which he also designed) at niagra falls. This tower could beam wireless electricity across huge distances with no adverse health effects, since the EM waves being emitted are tuned longitudinal pulsed (DC) instead of transverse (AC) in nature (which is why high tension AC lines give people cancer).
Tesla built an electric car which he drove around the area that was powered by this wireless electricity and had no onboard charge carrier. Unfortunately, his financial backers at the time had no way to "put a meter" on wireless usage so they went with the AC distribution system instead so they could charge the plebes for their energy usage in a metered fashion.
Unfortunate side effect of our economically obsessed society... Over a hundred years later, we get excited we can power our keyboards and mice without batteries...
Nice story, a tale non the less.
Is that necessarily true? This isn't like lightning bolts shooting out of the transmitter into the device... the oscillating fields are being projected the same way not matter what is in that field... if you crammed two people into an MRI machine, it wouldn't suddenly go into overdrive.
Or like two people tanning under the same light... or a water energy generator. if you have a river flowing and you put one wheel in the water to generate energy, that's 1 wheel... but if you have 3-4, so long as they don't interfere, you are getting a lot more energy produced from the same river. it doesn't run faster
idk. I don't know exactly how the system works but it seems to me like given the fact that the energy is coming from a sort of physical (magnetic) reaction to a field being given off at a constant rate - then more things could be charged without the original transmitter requiring any additional energy. You are just using the energy its already sucking up more efficiently...
In your examples you are dividing the available energy. For a water wheel you could theoretically put hundreds in the river but you would need enough volumetric flow, distance, and drop in height for the water to regain energy through gravity after the water wheel "took" that energy out of the water. Water is the energy carrier just like electricity is.
For the Witricity charger, any time you add another load to the circuit it's going to require more energy. It's not a rare earth magnet. They are inducing the oscillating magnetic wavy things (technical term) by using the electricity coming from your house. As you put more devices on charge it will pull more electicrity until it reaches a set limit (other wise the heat gain from resistance in your home wiring would burn your house down). Once it reaches that watt limit then you can keep adding devices but I imagine you will only be dividing the available energy at that point.
What your describing, in the case of Witricity, would be free energy from magnetism and that only works if you wear a tin foil hat and rail against the governement and other conspirators.
A charger integrated a device like a computer is a fantastic idea! Of course, the technology will have to be modified and improved, but this is a great start!