h a l f b a k e r yBite me.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Please log in.
Before you can vote, you need to register.
Please log in or create an account.
|
If we had power outlets on rails on the walls in our homes, we could move them from behind the couch to where we need them.
Wireless Power Transmission
http://www.sfgate.c...L&feed=rss.business
Recent advances [csea, Aug 26 2008]
[link]
|
| |
If every electric appliance came with 15' cords we wouldn't need to move the outlets. |
|
| |
Sorry, [Plexus], but this is Widely Known to Exist. "Track" type power wiring systems have been in use in business and commercial environments for many years, they just haven't made the leap to homes (yet). |
|
| |
If I recall track wiring correctly, one has to remove a panel, exposing the mains rails, before moving your outlet along and replacing the cover. I can think of a number of good reasons why that wouldn't be rolled out to the general public, and unless [plexus] can describe a novel, safe way of implementing this, I'd rather it stayed that way, thanks all the same. |
|
| |
// unless [plexus] can describe a novel, safe way of implementing this // |
|
| |
How about an inductively coupled, magnetic outlet box? Your mains rails can remain safely behind the drywall, parallel to a strip of steel. A magnetically-backed outlet box could be attached anywhere along the steel strip, and receive power through induction. |
|
| |
Of course, I expect that someone smarter than me will point out why this wouldn't work - it seems obvious enough that such a system would already exist if it was feasible. |
|
| |
Why be tied to an outlet? Recent progress is being made in the area of wireless power transmission [link]. |
|
| |
That "recent" progress is not so recent. I heard of it on the radio (the marconi) the other day, and thought (the same thing I have thought for years) it is not implementable, because it won't be billable. |
|
| |
To make "wireless power" available is not a physical constrant, having been demonstrated inumerable times, but more a "how do I make sure somebody pays for it" constraint. |
|
| |
Just as the possibility of the "cell" phone or mobile phone was apparent from the earliest days of Marconi, it only became mainstream with the advent of the solid state chip and good enough cryptography. There are those that would argue that the former was introduced early on and the concept waited on an encryption platform. That means billable. And they would be correct. |
|
| |
Wireless energy awaits a suitable crypto-function, and would therefore would become reasonably billable. And would then become mainstream. |
|
| |
At the moment there are several encryption methodologies vyeing for the attention of wireless power. Electro-Magnetic resonance is sucking the hind teat at the moment, we will see who wins... |
|
| |
//it is not implementable, because it won't be billable.// |
|
| |
If the electricity company was a nationalised industry instead, it could be done through taxation. Also, we have water rates here and separate water companies, so it can be done. |
|
| |
//Huh? Is that an about face way of saying its a directional technology and you need to point it in the right direction before powering up and frying the cat ?// |
|
| |
No, it isn't. The power from elctro-magnetic resonance does not kill any cats, although it relies on a thought experiment that did and did not kill the same cat. It is also omni-directional. |
|
| |
However, the selection of a resonance frequency, or possible frequency hopping, needs to be decided (between the parties) in order to make the power available in a billable/measureable quantity. For this there are several cryptosystems being tested. The safest being line of sight, obviously (although safe meaning more for encryption than cat-frying). |
|
| |
On top of that, there are other methods of wireless power transmission being investigated. These, however, have lower mathematical limits on maximum efficiency, (but are more easily encryptable). |
|
| |