Check this out

http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-12760_7-9673092-5.html
http://money.cnn.com/magazines/business2/business2_archive/2007/04/01/8403349/index.htm?postversion=2007033007

3/30/2007 2:23:05 PM

pfft, tesla was doing this shit >100 years ago

3/30/2007 3:18:41 PM

nifty

3/30/2007 3:20:45 PM

http://www.davidpitlyuk.com/2007/03/30/the-next-multi-billion-dollar-idea

3/30/2007 3:38:31 PM

neat.

3/30/2007 4:44:04 PM

Quote :

"it's meant to either continuously charge a battery or replace the need for them altogether."

oh god, I hope they dont start thinking cell phones dont need batteries. So many what if's that would make that situation never fly.

3/31/2007 10:35:57 AM

Nah, something like a cell phone would obviously still need a battery. But you could create a standard RF charger that could be built into cars as a standard feature. That way your laptop, cell phone, gameboy, etc. would be charging whenever you were taking them somewhere. It also would mean that devices meant for use specifically in cars wouldn't need batteries or cigarette lighter adapters.

3/31/2007 11:14:14 AM

this is stupid

i dont want my balls roasted

3/31/2007 3:51:14 PM

Then don't make your balls wirelessly chargeable. I for one plan to purchase the "testi-coil" as soon as it's released.

Unfortunately they won't be able to call it the "testicoil" or "testi-coil" unless they get the name rights from the band http://www.myspace.com/testicoil with the same name.

[Edited on March 31, 2007 at 5:51 PM. Reason : ]

3/31/2007 5:47:46 PM

i actually thought of having wireless power in 5th grade.



.... it was all my idea.

3/31/2007 6:03:12 PM

^^sure they could. competitors can't use same or similar names; however, completely different industries could.

this is an awesome idea btw.

3/31/2007 7:58:12 PM

would this affect pacemakers any?, i.e. make them break?

[Edited on March 31, 2007 at 8:48 PM. Reason : ]

[Edited on March 31, 2007 at 8:48 PM. Reason : ]

3/31/2007 8:47:48 PM

This is stupid. Think of all the energy that would go uncaptured. This would be a continuous drain whether the output was being captured effectively or not. Global warming, FTL.

3/31/2007 10:11:28 PM

this is not surprising news at all...

just a matter of time.

4/1/2007 12:38:48 AM

Perhaps I'm missing something, but it seems as if the only realy innovation here is commercializing the product. This looks to me like nothing more than a souped up inductive charger or RFID-type setup where the power is used to charge a battery instead of transmitting data.

^^ I suppose some of the losses could be reduced by a directional antenna and a sensor to detect when a device is within range. But yeah, I'd love to know the efficiency of this thing.

4/1/2007 10:24:17 AM

I bet if they actually deploy this, cancer rates for every house that uses them will be 2 fold.

I enjoy the benifits of wireless... but it all scares me, its like pressure treated lumber, everyone was so excited about something that bugs and weather wouldn't ever get that they kinda overlooked the WHY bugs wouldn't eat it... and then people got cancer all over the place.

I mean I've been radiated at 1MW(yuma test range @ 500m) recently so I'm doomed anyways but still... think of the rest of the world

4/1/2007 12:28:52 PM

They just need to suck it out of the atmosphere. Serves as air conditioning at the same time.

4/1/2007 12:49:08 PM

^^ i don't think there's any proof that RF has any negative health effects

that said, i'm with you...with all this excess energy pulsing through our living tissue, it would surprise me if it DIDN'T cause problems

4/1/2007 2:30:21 PM

This is a pretty dangerous idea. Why not just use research money towards extending battery life rather than zapping everything within a 50 ft radius. Hell the sun's been doing this for billions of years, and it's only natural competitors are trees.

4/1/2007 5:26:45 PM