Wireless Cellphone Charger... can be..??

[crime_genius86 0]

by theorical, we can transmit electric without wire(wireless) but it will cost more and more... we should make a tranmiter and reciever that will transmit and recieve something that with very low frequency..by formula...(speed)=(frequency)*(wavelength)when speed is constat..then frequency is very low.. wavelength must be very high..very high cost and difficult to design..

[Ronel 0]

ohhh....it was and is possible!

[toby 0]

Reccently they managed it with something like 94 or 97% efficeny, but really low power. I remember they mentioned phones, but I can't remember if they could use this. It's on BBC News.

[Mordent 0]

Out of idle curiousity, I'm trying to work out even vaguely how this could be a viable means of powering anything. Let's say you use a very small wavelength (high frequency) to minimise the amount of diffraction (namely allowing you to "target" the energy). That way, it only works if the object is in line-of-sight (or near enough), so you'd might as well just plug it in.

 

If you choose a higher wavelength, the level of diffraction increases, so the waves "spread out", meaning that although you could potentially charge things round corners (at least a little), the amount of wasted energy would be astronomical. When there's people looking at ways of using energy more efficiently to save the world's resources, I honestly can't see this working too well.

 

My next little argument against this idea is that, should we ever develop some method of making it physically viable, what would the point be? Surely it would make more sense to spend time on either ways of conserving energy, using it more efficiently, or being able to create batteries that either "recharge themselves" (there's some other topic in this forum about it somewhere...EDIT: found it here) or ones that are capable of storing far more energy at a time, so their battery life is far longer.

 

I'm not saying it won't happen, I just can't see there being a reason for it...*shrugs*

Edited November 26, 2007 by Mordent (see edit history)

[Unregistered 0111405241546 0]

This would be a pretty neat idea, but I'm not sure how this would work... although you can pass electricity without wires, where would you get the power from to power that. So instead of powering something to power the wireless thing to power your cellphone/whatever, might aswell connect the thing powering the wireless thing to power your cellphone/whatever.. Uh it's kind of confusing lol.

[Mordent 0]

This would be a pretty neat idea, but I'm not sure how this would work... although you can pass electricity without wires, where would you get the power from to power that. So instead of powering something to power the wireless thing to power your cellphone/whatever, might aswell connect the thing powering the wireless thing to power your cellphone/whatever.. Uh it's kind of confusing lol.

Agreed to some extent, although clearly the general portability of the wireless device is what's desired. It does get my point across that if you're within such a place that you could charge your device wirelessly, it's almost certainly just easier to plug the thing in.

[Habtastic 0]

It can happen but the phone will have to be at a certain distance to actually atain maximum power.The problem with this is that :A) you cannot get full powerB) Wont the charger need to be chargedC) Cost.Advantages:A) free movement:rolleyes: No hassle of wire breakingStill nice idea though

[Mordent 0]

It can happen but the phone will have to be at a certain distance to actually atain maximum power.
The problem with this is that :
A) you cannot get full power
Wont the charger need to be charged
C) Cost.

Advantages:
A) free movement
No hassle of wire breaking

Still nice idea though

Well, in response to that:

A ) Agreed, which strikes me as being one of the main disadvantages. Likewise, if the energy is being sent around in waves, there's little that you can really do to control the power that reaches your wireless device.
B ) Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the intention was for the wireless charger to be plugged in somewhere, which them "transmits energy" to the cellphone?
C ) Agreed again, as the amounts of energy wasted would be more than enough to pretty much get the idea crushed by any kind of "green" energy proposals.

As for the advantages:

A ) True, but unless the coverage was pretty impressive then there would be little point. Imagine having to worry about both mobile phone signal as well as charger signal.
B ) I'm at a slight loss here. I'm assuming you're talking about having your wireless device charged normally with a wire/transformer combination? If so, surely that comes right under the idea of free movement? Still, it's hardly as if you'd be able to use a phone all of the time, so I see no real problem with plugging it in, as per normal.

[kxrain 0]

yes it is possible and its out i think. Theres a charger that is powered solar so its wireless.

[iGuest 3]

A "world system" for "the transmission of electrical energy without wires" that depends upon the electrical conductivity was proposed in which transmission in various natural mediums with current that passes between the two point are used to power devices. In a practical wireless energy transmission system using this principle, a high-power ultraviolet beam might be used to form a vertical ionized channel in the air directly above the transmitter-receiver stations. The same concept is used in virtual lightning rods, the electrolaser electroshock weapon,[46]and has been proposed for disabling vehicles.
Nikola Tesla
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia