3 ms·

A New Age of Power

27 points by apsec112 11y ago

Animats 11y ago
These are the same guys who, last year, had a little ultrasonic power transmission link made from old camera ranging sensors.[1] They were very vague about efficiency and range then, and they're very vague about efficiency and range now. The first picture shows the Earth from space. Ultrasonics don't work in vacuum, guys. Covered on YCombinator last year.[2] [1] http://www.engadget.com/2014/08/07/ubeam-wireless-charger-ultrasound/ http://www.engadget.com/2014/08/07/ubeam-wireless-charger-ul... [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8542091 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8542091
Mithaldu 11y ago
They link to this, and leave out the latter part: A Study on the Effectiveness of Ultrasonic Sound Emitters [in Controlling Bat Populations] They're practically parodying themselves at this point.
schnika 11y ago
Human ears can't hear ultrasound. What about other animals[1] on this planet? [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultrasound#Animals https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultrasound#Animals
- zamalek 11y ago
  They noted dogs in the write-up so I assume they are using extremely high frequencies far beyond what animals can hear.
thewarrior 11y ago
If this thing really works a lot of people on HN will be forced to eat crow.
jaydub 11y ago
To distribute sound over long distances 'wirelessly' you need to make it loud. That typically means cranking up the power. And ultrasound can be harmful at high power [1]. [1] "Occupational exposure to ultrasound in excess of 120 dB may lead to hearing loss. Exposure in excess of 155 dB may produce heating effects that are harmful to the human body..." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultrasound https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultrasound
- cryptoglyph 11y ago
  uBeam's name is a killing word.
notacoward 11y ago
Any time someone starts off with a review of when scientists were wrong, you know snake oil will follow. In the section on bats they specifically mention how quickly ultrasound power drops off, but never discuss how that same bit of physics affects their main value proposition (hint: a lot). The irony of them going on to say "it's terrible that companies sell these devices because they're ripping people off" is pretty thick.
jacknews 11y ago
I'm guessing ubeam is also the subject of this wsj article, though I can't get past the loginwall: http://www.wsj.com/articles/soon-power-will-be-delivered-to-your-device-by-air-1444017661 http://www.wsj.com/articles/soon-power-will-be-delivered-to-... I believe the CEO Meredith Perry was on TED or some such preaching about ignoring scientists and techies when they say something is impossible, just believe, keep pushing, and it'll all come good. Maybe this is the next unicorn.
Someone 11y ago
"The most recent paper to investigate the safety of ultrasound was just published [...] Of note is that this study used energy levels to tissue that were orders of magnitude higher than levels that uBeam’s system uses." The abstract at http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0041624X15001973 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0041624X15...: "Demonstrated in vitro, 0.6 W of transcutaneous ultrasound power transfer to an implant.[...] with an average RF input to electrical charging efficiency of 20%" So, at best, 3W is "orders of magnitude higher than levels that uBeam’s system uses". That will charge your remote, but not your phone.

27 points by apsec112 11y ago

These are the same guys who, last year, had a little ultrasonic power transmission link made from old camera ranging sensors.[1] They were very vague about efficiency and range then, and they're very vague about efficiency and range now. The first picture shows the Earth from space. Ultrasonics don't work in vacuum, guys. Covered on YCombinator last year.[2] [1] http://www.engadget.com/2014/08/07/ubeam-wireless-charger-ultrasound/ http://www.engadget.com/2014/08/07/ubeam-wireless-charger-ul... [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8542091 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8542091

Mithaldu 11y ago

They link to this, and leave out the latter part: A Study on the Effectiveness of Ultrasonic Sound Emitters [in Controlling Bat Populations] They're practically parodying themselves at this point.

schnika 11y ago

Human ears can't hear ultrasound. What about other animals[1] on this planet? [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultrasound#Animals https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultrasound#Animals

zamalek 11y ago
They noted dogs in the write-up so I assume they are using extremely high frequencies far beyond what animals can hear.

thewarrior 11y ago

If this thing really works a lot of people on HN will be forced to eat crow.

jaydub 11y ago

To distribute sound over long distances 'wirelessly' you need to make it loud. That typically means cranking up the power. And ultrasound can be harmful at high power [1]. [1] "Occupational exposure to ultrasound in excess of 120 dB may lead to hearing loss. Exposure in excess of 155 dB may produce heating effects that are harmful to the human body..." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultrasound https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultrasound

cryptoglyph 11y ago
uBeam's name is a killing word.

notacoward 11y ago

Any time someone starts off with a review of when scientists were wrong, you know snake oil will follow. In the section on bats they specifically mention how quickly ultrasound power drops off, but never discuss how that same bit of physics affects their main value proposition (hint: a lot). The irony of them going on to say "it's terrible that companies sell these devices because they're ripping people off" is pretty thick.

jacknews 11y ago

I'm guessing ubeam is also the subject of this wsj article, though I can't get past the loginwall: http://www.wsj.com/articles/soon-power-will-be-delivered-to-your-device-by-air-1444017661 http://www.wsj.com/articles/soon-power-will-be-delivered-to-... I believe the CEO Meredith Perry was on TED or some such preaching about ignoring scientists and techies when they say something is impossible, just believe, keep pushing, and it'll all come good. Maybe this is the next unicorn.

Someone 11y ago

"The most recent paper to investigate the safety of ultrasound was just published [...] Of note is that this study used energy levels to tissue that were orders of magnitude higher than levels that uBeam’s system uses." The abstract at http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0041624X15001973 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0041624X15...: "Demonstrated in vitro, 0.6 W of transcutaneous ultrasound power transfer to an implant.[...] with an average RF input to electrical charging efficiency of 20%" So, at best, 3W is "orders of magnitude higher than levels that uBeam’s system uses". That will charge your remote, but not your phone.