Search This Blog

Wednesday, April 1, 2015

Wireless power


From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Inductive charging pad for LG smartphone, using the Qi (pronounced 'Chi') system, an example of near-field wireless transfer. When the phone is set on the pad, a coil in the pad creates a magnetic field which induces a current in another coil, in the phone, charging its battery.

Wireless power transfer (WPT)[1] or wireless energy transmission is the transmission of electrical power from a power source to a consuming device without using solid wires or conductors.[2][3][4][5] It is a generic term that refers to a number of different power transmission technologies that use time-varying electromagnetic fields.[1][5][6][7] Wireless transmission is useful to power electrical devices in cases where interconnecting wires are inconvenient, hazardous, or are not possible. In wireless power transfer, a transmitter device connected to a power source, such as the mains power line, transmits power by electromagnetic fields across an intervening space to one or more receiver devices, where it is converted back to electric power and utilized.[1]

Wireless power techniques fall into two categories, non-radiative and radiative.[1][6][8][9][10] In near-field or non-radiative techniques, power is transferred over short distances by magnetic fields using inductive coupling between coils of wire or in a few devices by electric fields using capacitive coupling between electrodes.[5][8]
Applications of this type are electric toothbrush chargers, RFID tags, smartcards, and chargers for implantable medical devices like artificial cardiac pacemakers, and inductive powering or charging of electric vehicles like trains or buses.[9][11] A current focus is to develop wireless systems to charge mobile and handheld computing devices such as cellphones, digital music player and portable computers without being tethered to a wall plug. In radiative or far-field techniques, also called power beaming, power is transmitted by beams of electromagnetic radiation, like microwaves or laser beams. These techniques can transport energy longer distances but must be aimed at the receiver. Proposed applications for this type are solar power satellites, and wireless powered drone aircraft.[9] An important issue associated with all wireless power systems is limiting the exposure of people and other living things to potentially injurious electromagnetic fields (see Electromagnetic radiation and health).[9]

Overview


Generic block diagram of a wireless power system

"Wireless power transmission" is a collective term that refers to a number of different technologies for transmitting power by means of time-varying electromagnetic fields.[1][5][8] The technologies, listed in the table below, differ in the distance over which they can transmit power efficiently, whether the transmitter must be aimed (directed) at the receiver, and in the type of electromagnetic energy they use: time varying electric fields, magnetic fields, radio waves, microwaves, or infrared or visible light waves.[8]

In general a wireless power system consists of a "transmitter" device connected to a source of power such as mains power lines, which converts the power to a time-varying electromagnetic field, and one or more "receiver" devices which receive the power and convert it back to DC or AC electric power which is consumed by an electrical load.[1][8] In the transmitter the input power is converted to an oscillating electromagnetic field by some type of "antenna" device. The word "antenna" is used loosely here; it may be a coil of wire which generates a magnetic field, a metal plate which generates an electric field, an antenna which radiates radio waves, or a laser which generates light. A similar antenna or coupling device in the receiver converts the oscillating fields to an electric current. An important parameter which determines the type of waves is the frequency f in hertz of the oscillations. The frequency determines the wavelength λ = c/f of the waves which carry the energy across the gap, where c is the velocity of light.

Wireless power uses the same fields and waves as wireless communication devices like radio,[6][12] another familiar technology which involves power transmitted without wires by electromagnetic fields, used in cellphones, radio and television broadcasting, and WiFi. In radio communication the goal is the transmission of information, so the amount of power reaching the receiver is unimportant as long as it is enough that the signal to noise ratio is high enough that the information can be received intelligibly.[5][6][12] In wireless communication technologies generally only tiny amounts of power reach the receiver. By contrast, in wireless power, the amount of power received is the important thing, so the efficiency (fraction of transmitted power that is received) is the more significant parameter.[5] For this reason wireless power technologies are more limited by distance than wireless communication technologies.

These are the different wireless power technologies:[1][8][9][13][14]

Technology Range[15] Directivity[8] Frequency Antenna devices Current and or possible future applications
Inductive coupling Short Low Hz - MHz Wire coils Electric tooth brush and razor battery charging, induction stovetops and industrial heaters.
Resonant inductive coupling Mid- Low MHz - GHz Tuned wire coils, lumped element resonators Charging portable devices (Qi, WiTricity), biomedical implants, electric vehicles, powering busses, trains, MAGLEV, RFID, smartcards.
Capacitive coupling Short Low kHz - MHz Electrodes Charging portable devices, power routing in large scale integrated circuits, Smartcards.
Magnetodynamic[13] Short N.A. Hz Rotating magnets Charging electric vehicles.
Microwaves Long High GHz Parabolic dishes, phased arrays, rectennas Solar power satellite, powering drone aircraft.
Light waves Long High ≥THz Lasers, photocells, lenses Powering drone aircraft, powering space elevator climbers.

Field regions

Electric and magnetic fields are created by charged particles in matter such as electrons. A stationary charge creates an electrostatic field in the space around it. A steady current of charges (direct current, DC) creates a static magnetic field around it. The above fields contain energy, but cannot carry power because they are static. However time-varying fields can carry power.[16] Accelerating electric charges, such as are found in an alternating current (AC) of electrons in a wire, create time-varying electric and magnetic fields in the space around them. These fields can exert oscillating forces on the electrons in a receiving "antenna", causing them to move back and forth. These represent alternating current which can be used to power a load.

The oscillating electric and magnetic fields surrounding moving electric charges in an antenna device can be divided into two regions, depending on distance Drange from the antenna.[1][4][6][8][9][10][17] The boundary between the regions is somewhat vaguely defined.[8] The fields have different characteristics in these regions, and different technologies are used for transmitting power:
  • Near-field or nonradiative region - This means the area within about 1 wavelength (λ) of the antenna.[1][4][10] In this region the oscillating electric and magnetic fields are separate[6] and power can be transferred via electric fields by capacitive coupling (electrostatic induction) between metal electrodes, or via magnetic fields by inductive coupling (electromagnetic induction) between coils of wire.[5][6][8][9] These fields are not radiative,[10] meaning the energy stays within a short distance of the transmitter.[18] If there is no receiving device or absorbing material within their limited range to "couple" to, no power leaves the transmitter.[18] The range of these fields is short, and depends on the size and shape of the "antenna" devices, which are usually coils of wire. The fields, and thus the power transmitted, decrease exponentially with distance,[4][17][19] so if the distance between the two "antennas" Drange is much larger than the diameter of the "antennas" Dant very little power will be received. Therefore these techniques cannot be used for long distance power transmission.
Resonance, such as resonant inductive coupling, can increase the coupling between the antennas greatly, allowing efficient transmission at somewhat greater distances,[1][4][6][9][20][21] although the fields still decrease exponentially. Therefore the range of near-field devices is conventionally devided into two categories:
  • Short range - up to about one antenna diameter: Drange ≤ Dant.[18][20][22] This is the range over which ordinary nonresonant capacitive or inductive coupling can transfer practical amounts of power.
  • Mid-range - up to 10 times the antenna diameter: Drange ≤ 10 Dant.[20][21][22][23] This is the range over which resonant capacitive or inductive coupling can transfer practical amounts of power.
  • Far-field or radiative region - Beyond about 1 wavelength (λ) of the antenna, the electric and magnetic fields are perpendicular to each other and propagate as an electromagnetic wave; examples are radio waves, microwaves, or light waves.[1][4][9] This part of the energy is radiative,[10] meaning it leaves the antenna whether or not there is a receiver to absorb it. The portion of energy which does not strike the receiving antenna is dissipated and lost to the system. The amount of power emitted as electromagnetic waves by an antenna depends on the ratio of the antenna's size Dant to the wavelength of the waves λ,[24] which is determined by the frequency: λ = c/f. At low frequencies f where the antenna is much smaller than the size of the waves, Dant << λ, very little power is radiated. Therefore the near-field devices above, which use lower frequencies, radiate almost none of their energy as electromagnetic radiation. Antennas about the same size as the wavelength Dant ≈ λ such as monopole or dipole antennas, radiate power efficiently, but the electromagnetic waves are radiated in all directions (omnidirectionally), so if the receiving antenna is far away, only a small amount of the radiation will hit it.[10][20] Therefore these can be used for short range, inefficient power transmission but not for long range transmission.[25]
However, unlike fields, electromagnetic radiation can be focused by reflection or refraction into beams. By using a high-gain antenna or optical system which concentrates the radiation into a narrow beam aimed at the receiver, it can be used for long range power transmission.[20][25] From the Rayleigh criterion, to produce the narrow beams necessary to focus a significant amount of the energy on a distant receiver, an antenna must be much larger than the wavelength of the waves used: Dant >> λ = c/f.[26][27] Practical beam power devices require wavelengths in the centimeter region or below, corresponding to frequencies above 1 GHz, in the microwave range or above.[1]

Near-field or non-radiative techniques

The near-field components of electric and magnetic fields die out quickly beyond a distance of about one diameter of the antenna (Dant). Outside very close ranges the field strength and coupling is roughly proportional to (Drange/Dant)−3[28][17] Since power is proportional to the square of the field strength, the power transferred decreases with the sixth power of the distance (Drange/Dant)−6.[6][19][29][30] or 60 dB per decade. In other words, doubling the distance between transmitter and receiver causes the power received to decrease by a factor of 26 = 64.

Inductive coupling

Generic block diagram of an inductive wireless power system.

The electrodynamic induction wireless transmission technique relies on the use of a magnetic field generated by an electric current to induce a current in a second conductor. This effect occurs in the electromagnetic near field, with the secondary in close proximity to the primary. As the distance from the primary is increased, more and more of the primary's magnetic field misses the secondary. Even over a relatively short range the inductive coupling is grossly inefficient, wasting much of the transmitted energy.[31]

This action of an electrical transformer is the simplest form of wireless power transmission. The primary coil and secondary coil of a transformer are not directly connected; each coil is part of a separate circuit. Energy transfer takes place through a process known as mutual induction. Principal functions are stepping the primary voltage either up or down and electrical isolation. Mobile phone and electric toothbrush battery chargers, are examples of how this principle is used. Induction cookers use this method. The main drawback to this basic form of wireless transmission is short range. The receiver must be directly adjacent to the transmitter or induction unit in order to efficiently couple with it.

Common uses of resonance-enhanced electrodynamic induction[32] are charging the batteries of portable devices such as laptop computers and cell phones, medical implants and electric vehicles.[33][34][35] A localized charging technique[36] selects the appropriate transmitting coil in a multilayer winding array structure.[37] Resonance is used in both the wireless charging pad (the transmitter circuit) and the receiver module (embedded in the load) to maximize energy transfer efficiency. Battery-powered devices fitted with a special receiver module can then be charged simply by placing them on a wireless charging pad. It has been adopted as part of the Qi wireless charging standard.

This technology is also used for powering devices with very low energy requirements, such as RFID patches and contactless smartcards. Instead of relying on each of the many thousands or millions of RFID patches or smartcards to contain a working battery, electrodynamic induction can provide power only when the devices are needed.

Capacitive coupling

In capacitive coupling (electrostatic induction), the dual of inductive coupling, power is transmitted by electric fields[5] between electrodes such as metal plates. The transmitter and receiver electrodes form a capacitor, with the intervening space as the dielectric.[5][6][9][38][39] An alternating voltage generated by the transmitter is applied to the transmitting plate, and the oscillating electric field induces an alternating potential on the receiver plate by electrostatic induction,[5] which causes an alternating current to flow in the load circuit. The amount of power transferred increases with the frequency[38] and the capacitance between the plates, which is proportional to the area of the smaller plate and (for short distances) inversely proportional to the separation.[5]
Capacitive coupling has only been used practically in a few low power applications, because the very high voltages on the electrodes required to transmit significant power can be hazardous,[6][9] and can cause unpleasant side effects such as noxious ozone production. In addition, in contrast to magnetic fields,[20] electric fields interact strongly with most materials, including the human body, due to dielectric polarization.[39] Intervening materials between or near the electrodes can absorb the energy, in the case of humans possibly causing excessive electromagnetic field exposure.[6] However capacitive coupling has a few advantages over inductive. The field is largely confined between the capacitor plates, reducing interference, which in inductive coupling requires heavy ferrite "flux confinement" cores.[5][39] Also, alignment requirements between the transmitter and receiver are less critical.[5][6][38] Capacitive coupling has recently been applied to charging battery powered portable devices[40] and is being considered as a means of transferring power between substrate layers in integrated circuits.[41]

Magnetodynamic coupling

In this method, power is transmitted between two rotating armature, one in the transmitter and one in the receiver, which rotate synchronously, coupled together by a magnetic field generated by permanent magnets on the armatures.[13] The transmitter armature is turned either by or as the rotor of an electric motor, and its magnetic field exerts torque on the receiver armature, turning it. The magnetic field acts like a mechanical coupling between the armatures.[13] The receiver armature produces power to drive the load, either by turning a separate electric generator or by using the receiver armature itself as the rotor in a generator.

This device has been proposed as an alternative to inductive power transfer for noncontact charging of electric vehicles.[13] A rotating armature embedded in a garage floor or curb would turn a receiver armature in the underside of the vehicle to charge its batteries.[13] It is claimed that this technique can transfer power over distances of 10 to 15 cm (4 to 6 inches) with high efficiency, over 90%.[13] Also, the low frequency stray magnetic fields produced by the rotating magnets produce less electromagnetic interference to nearby electronic devices than the high frequency magnetic fields produced by inductive coupling systems. A prototype system charging electric vehicles has been in operation at University of British Columbia since 2012. Other researchers, however, claim that the two energy conversions (electrical to mechanical to electrical again) make the system less efficient than electrical systems like inductive coupling.[13]

Far-field or radiative techniques

Far field methods achieve longer ranges, often multiple kilometer ranges, where the distance is much greater than the diameter of the device(s). The main reason for longer ranges with radio wave and optical devices is the fact that electromagnetic radiation in the far-field can be made to match the shape of the receiving area (using high directivity antennas or well-collimated laser beams). The maximum directivity for antennas is physically limited by diffraction.

In general, visible light (from lasers) and microwaves (from purpose-designed antennas) are the forms of electromagnetic radiation best suited to energy transfer.

The dimensions of the components may be dictated by the distance from transmitter to receiver, the wavelength and the Rayleigh criterion or diffraction limit, used in standard radio frequency antenna design, which also applies to lasers. Airy's diffraction limit is also frequently used to determine an approximate spot size at an arbitrary distance from the aperture. Electromagnetic radiation experiences less diffraction at shorter wavelengths (higher frequencies); so, for example, a blue laser is diffracted less than a red one.

The Rayleigh criterion dictates that any radio wave, microwave or laser beam will spread and become weaker and diffuse over distance; the larger the transmitter antenna or laser aperture compared to the wavelength of radiation, the tighter the beam and the less it will spread as a function of distance (and vice versa). Smaller antennae also suffer from excessive losses due to side lobes. However, the concept of laser aperture considerably differs from an antenna. Typically, a laser aperture much larger than the wavelength induces multi-moded radiation and mostly collimators are used before emitted radiation couples into a fiber or into space.

Ultimately, beamwidth is physically determined by diffraction due to the dish size in relation to the wavelength of the electromagnetic radiation used to make the beam.

Microwave power beaming can be more efficient than lasers, and is less prone to atmospheric attenuation caused by dust or water vapor.

Then the power levels are calculated by combining the above parameters together, and adding in the gains and losses due to the antenna characteristics and the transparency and dispersion of the medium through which the radiation passes. That process is known as calculating a link budget.

Microwaves

An artist's depiction of a solar satellite that could send electric energy by microwaves to a space vessel or planetary surface.

Power transmission via radio waves can be made more directional, allowing longer distance power beaming, with shorter wavelengths of electromagnetic radiation, typically in the microwave range.[42] A rectenna may be used to convert the microwave energy back into electricity. Rectenna conversion efficiencies exceeding 95% have been realized. Power beaming using microwaves has been proposed for the transmission of energy from orbiting solar power satellites to Earth and the beaming of power to spacecraft leaving orbit has been considered.[43][44]

Power beaming by microwaves has the difficulty that, for most space applications, the required aperture sizes are very large due to diffraction limiting antenna directionality. For example, the 1978 NASA Study of solar power satellites required a 1-km diameter transmitting antenna and a 10 km diameter receiving rectenna for a microwave beam at 2.45 GHz.[45] These sizes can be somewhat decreased by using shorter wavelengths, although short wavelengths may have difficulties with atmospheric absorption and beam blockage by rain or water droplets. Because of the "thinned array curse," it is not possible to make a narrower beam by combining the beams of several smaller satellites.

For earthbound applications, a large-area 10 km diameter receiving array allows large total power levels to be used while operating at the low power density suggested for human electromagnetic exposure safety. A human safe power density of 1 mW/cm2 distributed across a 10 km diameter area corresponds to 750 megawatts total power level. This is the power level found in many modern electric power plants.

Following World War II, which saw the development of high-power microwave emitters known as cavity magnetrons, the idea of using microwaves to transmit power was researched. By 1964, a miniature helicopter propelled by microwave power had been demonstrated.[46]

Japanese researcher Hidetsugu Yagi also investigated wireless energy transmission using a directional array antenna that he designed. In February 1926, Yagi and his colleague Shintaro Uda published their first paper on the tuned high-gain directional array now known as the Yagi antenna. While it did not prove to be particularly useful for power transmission, this beam antenna has been widely adopted throughout the broadcasting and wireless telecommunications industries due to its excellent performance characteristics.[47]

Wireless high power transmission using microwaves is well proven. Experiments in the tens of kilowatts have been performed at Goldstone in California in 1975[48][49][50] and more recently (1997) at Grand Bassin on Reunion Island.[51] These methods achieve distances on the order of a kilometer.

Under experimental conditions, microwave conversion efficiency was measured to be around 54%.[52]

More recently, a change to 24 GHz has been suggested as microwave emitters similar to LEDs have been made with very high quantum efficiencies using negative resistance, i.e. Gunn or IMPATT diodes, and this would be viable for short range links.

Lasers


With a laser beam centered on its panel of photovoltaic cells, a lightweight model plane makes the first flight of an aircraft powered by a laser beam inside a building at NASA Marshall Space Flight Center.

In the case of electromagnetic radiation closer to the visible region of the spectrum (tens of micrometers to tens of nanometres), power can be transmitted by converting electricity into a laser beam that is then pointed at a photovoltaic cell.[53] This mechanism is generally known as "power beaming" because the power is beamed at a receiver that can convert it to electrical energy.

Compared to other wireless methods:[54]
  • Collimated monochromatic wavefront propagation allows narrow beam cross-section area for transmission over large distances.
  • Compact size: solid state lasers fit into small products.
  • No radio-frequency interference to existing radio communication such as Wi-Fi and cell phones.
  • Access control: only receivers hit by the laser receive power.
Drawbacks include:
  • Laser radiation is hazardous. Low power levels can blind humans and other animals. High power levels can kill through localized spot heating.
  • Conversion between electricity and light is inefficient. Photovoltaic cells achieve only 40%–50% efficiency.[55] (Efficiency is higher with monochromatic light than with solar panels).
  • Atmospheric absorption, and absorption and scattering by clouds, fog, rain, etc., causes up to 100% losses.
  • Requires a direct line of sight with the target.
Laser "powerbeaming" technology has been mostly explored in military weapons[56][57][58] and aerospace[59][60] applications and is now being developed for commercial and consumer electronics. Wireless energy transfer systems using lasers for consumer space have to satisfy laser safety requirements standardized under IEC 60825.[citation needed]

Other details include propagation,[61] and the coherence and the range limitation problem.[62]

Geoffrey Landis[63][64][65] is one of the pioneers of solar power satellites[66] and laser-based transfer of energy especially for space and lunar missions. The demand for safe and frequent space missions has resulted in proposals for a laser-powered space elevator.[67][68]

NASA's Dryden Flight Research Center demonstrated a lightweight unmanned model plane powered by a laser beam.[69] This proof-of-concept demonstrates the feasibility of periodic recharging using the laser beam system.

Energy harvesting

In the context of wireless power, energy harvesting, also called power harvesting or energy scavenging, is the conversion of ambient energy from the environment to electric power, mainly to power small autonomous wireless electronic devices.[70] The ambient energy may come from stray electric or magnetic fields or radio waves from nearby electrical equipment, light, thermal energy (heat), or kinetic energy such as vibration or motion of the device.[70] Although the efficiency of conversion is usually low and the power gathered often minuscule (milliwatts or microwatts),[70] it can be adequate to run or recharge small micropower wireless devices such as remote sensors, which are proliferating in many fields.[70] This new technology is being developed to eliminate the need for battery replacement or charging of such wireless devices, allowing them to operate completely autonomously.

History

In 1826 André-Marie Ampère developed Ampère's circuital law showing that electric current produces a magnetic field.[71] Michael Faraday developed Faraday's law of induction in 1831, describing the electromagnetic force induced in a conductor by a time-varying magnetic flux. In 1862 James Clerk Maxwell synthesized these and other observations, experiments and equations of electricity, magnetism and optics into a consistent theory, deriving Maxwell's equations. This set of partial differential equations forms the basis for modern electromagnetics, including the wireless transmission of electrical energy.[14][72] Maxwell predicted the existence of electromagnetic waves in his 1873 A Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism.[73] In 1884 John Henry Poynting developed equations for the flow of power in an electromagnetic field, Poynting's theorem and the Poynting vector, which are used in the analysis of wireless energy transfer systems.[14][72] In 1888 Heinrich Rudolf Hertz discovered radio waves, confirming the prediction of electromagnetic waves by Maxwell.[73]

Tesla's experiments


Tesla demonstrating wireless power transmission in a lecture at Columbia College, New York, in 1891. The two metal sheets are connected to his Tesla coil oscillator, which applies a high radio frequency oscillating voltage. The oscillating electric field between the sheets ionizes the low pressure gas in the two long Geissler tubes he is holding, causing them to glow by fluorescence, similar to neon lights.

Inventor Nikola Tesla performed the first experiments in wireless power transmission at the turn of the 20th century,[72][74] and may have done more to popularize the idea than any other individual. In the period 1891 to 1904 he experimented with transmitting power by inductive and capacitive coupling using spark-excited radio frequency resonant transformers, now called Tesla coils, which generated high AC voltages.[72][74][75] With these he was able to transmit power for short distances without wires. In demonstrations before the American Institute of Electrical Engineers[75] and at the 1893 Columbian Exposition in Chicago he lit light bulbs from across a stage.[74] He found he could increase the distance by using a receiving LC circuit tuned to resonance with the transmitter's LC circuit.[76] using resonant inductive coupling. At his Colorado Springs laboratory during 1899-1900, by using voltages of the order of 20 megavolts generated by an enormous coil, he was able to light three incandescent lamps at a distance of about one hundred feet.[77][78] The resonant inductive coupling which Tesla pioneered is now a familiar technology used throughout electronics; its use in wireless power has been recently rediscovered and it is currently being widely applied to short-range wireless power systems.[74][79]

The inductive and capacitive coupling used in Tesla's experiments is a "near-field" effect,[74] so it is not able to transmit power long distances. However, Tesla was obsessed with developing a wireless power distribution system that could transmit power directly into homes and factories, as proposed in a visionary 1900 article in Century magazine.[80][81][82][83] and believed that resonance was the key. He claimed to be able to transmit power on a worldwide scale, using a method that involved conduction through the Earth and atmosphere.[84][81][82][83] Tesla was vague about his methods. One of his ideas was to use balloons to suspend transmitting and receiving terminals in the air above 30,000 feet (9,100 m) in altitude, where the pressure is lower.[84] At this altitude, Tesla claimed, an ionized layer would allow electricity to be sent at high voltages (millions of volts) over long distances.

Resonant wireless power demonstration at the Franklin Institute, Philadelphia, 1937. Visitors could adjust the receiver's tuned circuit (right) with the two knobs. When the resonant frequency of the receiver was out of tune with the transmitter, the light would go out.

In 1901, Tesla began construction of a large high-voltage coil facility, the Wardenclyffe Tower at Shoreham, New York, intended as a prototype transmitter for a "World Wireless System" that was to transmit power worldwide, but by 1904 his investors had pulled out, and the facility was never completed.[82][85] Although Tesla claimed his ideas were proven, he had a history of failing to confirm his ideas by experiment,[86][87] and there seems to be no evidence that he ever transmitted significant power beyond the short-range demonstrations above.[14][72][76][77][87][88][89][90][91] The only report of long-distance transmission by Tesla is a claim, not found in reliable sources, that in 1899 he wirelessly lit 200 light bulbs at a distance of 26 miles (42 km).[77][88] There is no independent confirmation of this putative demonstration;[77][88][92] Tesla did not mention it,[88] and it does not appear in his meticulous laboratory notes.[92][93] It originated in 1944 from Tesla's first biographer, John J. O'Neill,[77] who said he pieced it together from "fragmentary material... in a number of publications".[94] In the 110 years since Tesla's experiments, efforts using similar equipment have failed to achieve long distance power transmission,[74][77][88][90] and the scientific consensus is his World Wireless system would not have worked.[14][72][76][82][88][95][96][97][98]
Tesla's world power transmission scheme remains today what it was in Tesla's time, a fascinating dream.[14][82]

Microwaves

Before World War 2, little progress was made in wireless power transmission.[89] Radio was developed for communication uses, but couldn't be used for power transmission due to the fact that the relatively low-frequency radio waves spread out in all directions and little energy reached the receiver.[14][72][89] In radio communication, at the receiver, an amplifier intensifies a weak signal using energy from another source. For power transmission, efficient transmission required transmitters that could generate higher-frequency microwaves, which can be focused in narrow beams towards a receiver.[14][72][89][96]

The development of microwave technology during World War 2, such as the klystron and magnetron tubes and parabolic antennas[89] made radiative (far-field) methods practical for the first time, and the first long-distance wireless power transmission was achieved in the 1960s by William C. Brown.[14][72] In 1964 Brown invented the rectenna which could efficiently convert microwaves to DC power, and in 1964 demonstrated it with the first wireless-powered aircraft, a model helicopter powered by microwaves beamed from the ground.[14][89] A major motivation for microwave research in the 1970s and 80s was to develop a solar power satellite.[72][89] Conceived in 1968 by Peter Glaser, this would harvest energy from sunlight using solar cells and beam it down to Earth as microwaves to huge rectennas, which would convert it to electrical energy on the electric power grid.[14][99] In landmark 1975 high power experiments, Brown demonstrated short range transmission of 475 W of microwaves at 54% DC to DC efficiency, and he and Robert Dickinson at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory transmitted 30 kW DC output power across 1.5 km with 2.38 GHz microwaves from a 26 m dish to a 7.3 x 3.5 m rectenna array.[14][100] The incident-RF to DC conversion efficiency of the rectenna was 80%.[14][100] In 1983 Japan launched MINIX (Microwave Ionosphere Nonlinear Interation Experiment), a rocket experiment to test transmission of high power microwaves through the ionosphere.[14]

In recent years a focus of research has been the development of wireless-powered drone aircraft, which began in 1959 with the Dept. of Defense's RAMP (Raytheon Airborne Microwave Platform) project[89] which sponsored Brown's research. In 1987 Canada's Communications Research Center developed a small prototype airplane called Stationary High Altitude Relay Platform (SHARP) to relay telecommunication data between points on earth similar to a communication satellite. Powered by a rectenna, it could fly at 13 miles (21 km) altitude and stay aloft for months. In 1992 a team at Kyoto University built a more advanced craft called MILAX (MIcrowave Lifted Airplane eXperiment). In 2003 NASA flew the first laser powered aircraft. The small model plane's motor was powered by electricity generated by photocells from a beam of infrared light from a ground based laser, while a control system kept the laser pointed at the plane.

Near-field technologies

Inductive power transfer between nearby coils of wire is an old technology, existing since the transformer was developed in the 1800s. Induction heating has been used for 100 years. With the advent of cordless appliances, inductive charging stands were developed for appliances used in wet environments like electric toothbrushes and electric razors to reduce the hazard of electric shock.

One field to which inductive transfer has been applied is to power electric vehicles. In 1892 Maurice Hutin and Maurice Leblanc patented a wireless method of powering railroad trains using resonant coils inductively coupled to a track wire at 3 kHz.[101] The first passive RFID (Radio Frequency Identification) technologies were invented by Mario Cardullo[102] (1973) and Koelle et al.[103] (1975) and by the 1990s were being used in proximity cards and contactless smartcards.

The proliferation of portable wireless communication devices such as cellphones, tablet, and laptop computers in recent decades is currently driving the development of wireless powering and charging technology to eliminate the need for these devices to be tethered to wall plugs during charging.[104] The Wireless Power Consortium was established in 2008 to develop interoperable standards across manufacturers.[104] Its Qi inductive power standard published in August 2009 enables charging and powering of portable devices of up to 5 watts over distances of 4 cm (1.6 inches).[105] The wireless device is placed on a flat charger plate (which could be embedded in table tops at cafes, for example) and power is transferred from a flat coil in the charger to a similar one in the device.

In 2007, a team led by Marin Soljačić at MIT used coupled tuned circuits made of a 25 cm resonant coil at 10 MHz to transfer 60 W of power over a distance of 2 meters (6.6 ft) (8 times the coil diameter) at around 40% efficiency.[74][106] This technology is being commercialized as WiTricity.

Tuesday, March 31, 2015

We don’t need labels on genetically modified foods

Bloomberg) March 29

Original link:  http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/we-dont-need-labels-telling-us-our-food-has-been-genetically-modified/2015/03/29/66f97f4a-d4c5-11e4-8fce-3941fc548f1c_story.html?hpid=z3
 
E IGHTY-EIGHT percent of scientists polled by the Pew Research Center in January said genetically modified food is generally safe to eat. Only 37 percent of the public shared that view. The movement to require genetically modified food products to be labeled both reflects and exploits this divergence between informed opinion and popular anxiety.

Mandated labeling would deter the purchase of genetically modified (GM) food when the evidence calls for no such caution. Congress is right to be moving toward a more sensible policy that allows companies to label products as free of GM ingredients but preempts states from requiring such labels.

Lawmakers and voters in some states have considered requiring GM labeling, but only a few have chosen to label, and none have yet started. That’s good: The GM-food debate is a classic example of activists overstating risk based on fear of what might be unknown and on a distrust of corporations. People have been inducing genetic mutations in crops all sorts of other ways for a long time — by, for example, bathing plants in chemicals or exposing them to radiation. There is also all sorts of genetic turbulence in traditional selective plant breeding and constant natural genetic variation.

Yet products that result from selective gene splicing — which get scrutinized before coming to market — are being singled out as high threats. If they were threatening, one would expect experts to have identified unique harms to human health in the past two decades of GM-crop consumption. They haven’t. Unsurprisingly, institutions such as the National Academy of Sciences and the World Health Organization have concluded that GM food is no riskier than other food.

Promoters of compulsory GM food labeling claim that consumers nevertheless deserve transparency about what they’re eating. But given the facts, mandatory labeling would be extremely misleading to consumers — who, the Pew polling shows, exaggerate the worries about “Frankenfood” — implying a strong government safety concern where one does not exist. Instead of demanding that food companies add an unnecessary label, people who distrust the assurances that GM food is safe can buy food voluntarily labeled as organic or non-GM.

This isn’t just a matter of saving consumers from a little unnecessary expense or anxiety. If GM food becomes an economic nonstarter for growers and food companies, the world’s poorest will pay the highest price. GM crops that flourish in challenging environments without the aid of expensive pesticides or equipment can play an important role in alleviating hunger and food stress in the developing world — if researchers in developed countries are allowed to continue advancing the field.

A House bill introduced last week would facilitate a voluntary labeling system and prevent states and localities from going any further to indulge the GM labeling crowd. It would also empower the Food and Drug Administration to require labels on GM products that materially differ from their non-GM cousins in ways that can affect human health. Yes, food industry interests back the bill. That doesn’t make it wrong.

Finally! We Can Move On The Disposal Of Our Nuclear Waste

We might actually make a move that brings us closer to the disposal of nuclear waste than ever before. Give each of the two main types of nuclear waste – weapons and power – their own deep geologic repository.

Last week, President Obama authorized the Energy Department to move forward with a plan for a separate repository for high-level radioactive waste that was created from making atomic and nuclear weapons.

Immediately, Energy Secretary Ernie Moniz announced what we’ve been wanting for decades – a separate deep geologic nuclear waste repository for our defense-generated high-level nuclear waste (HLW), separate from one for our spent nuclear fuel (SNF) from commercial power reactors (DOE Path Forward).

If we can back-up and redo our nuclear waste disposal program based on science, we have some relatively easy and inexpensive paths forward. Defense waste is useless and should be disposed of quickly and separately. Defense HLW could be disposed of in a separate deep geologic repository, the best rock type being salt, of which America has plenty. TRU is already being disposed of in salt at the WIPP site in New Mexico. Or HLW could be redefined as TRU and also sent to WIPP. Commercial spent nuclear fuel should be set aside in dry cask storage to be burned later in fast reactors, or just disposed of if we decide it’s easier. Fast reactors produced waste that is easier to deal with and can be disposed of in boreholes deep in the Earth’s crust. Of course, if we can’t work out a deal that everyone accepts, the waste will stay right where it is, which isn’t as bad as it sounds from its environmental impact. Sources: DOE, Sandia, NEI, TerraPower.

If we can back-up and redo our nuclear waste disposal program based on science, we have some relatively easy and inexpensive paths forward. Defense waste is useless and should be disposed of quickly and separately. Defense HLW could be disposed of in a separate deep geologic repository, the best rock type being salt, of which America has plenty. TRU is already being disposed of in salt at the WIPP site in New Mexico. Or HLW could be redefined as TRU and also sent to WIPP. Commercial spent nuclear fuel should be set aside in dry cask storage to be burned later in fast reactors, or just disposed of if we decide it’s easier. Fast reactors produced waste that is easier to deal with and can be disposed of in boreholes deep in the Earth’s crust. Of course, if we can’t work out a deal that everyone accepts, the waste will stay right where it is, which isn’t as bad as it sounds from its environmental impact. Sources: DOE, Sandia, NEI, FR – Copyright TerraPower, LLC.

HLW is bomb waste. Weapons waste. Very different from commercial SNF which is not really waste at all.

Different in form – weapons waste is in various hard-to-handle forms; gunky, sludgy, nasty liquid, some solid – as opposed to dry, solid commercial spent fuel that is easy to handle and easy to store in dry casks once it is removed from the cooling pools after about 5 years.

Different in composition and types of radioactive and chemical components – SNF is primarily uranium oxide with some fission products and actinide elements produced from the fission process, but no toxic chemicals – HLW is chemically-reprocessed fuel so has residual fission products and actinide elements but lots and lots of toxic chemicals and metals used in the reprocessing.

Different in geographic location – HLW is in a relatively few locations at DOE sites like Hanford and Savannah River, while SNF is at all commercial nuclear power sites in 32 states.

Different in usefulness – HLW is from reprocessing of weapons reactor fuel and is totally waste, and of no further use. But SNF is quite useful – only about 5% of the energy contained in SNF is used after the first burning. The fuel can be recycled, but is even better saved to be burned later in fast reactors, providing about ten times the energy obtained from the original burning.

This last point is really the important one. A separate repository for useless defense waste would go faster and cheaper than a larger repository for both waste types.

Right now the “law” is that SNF and HLW have to be disposed of together at the same time, referred to as co-mingling, even if that makes no sense, and that the repository has to have a 50-year retrievability period for the spent fuel, in case we want to use it again.

The Secretary’s announcement signals an end to this nonsense, and is an attempt to bring science and common sense back into what became a horribly political process in the 1970s and 80s.

The amount of nuclear waste in America is quite small, totaling less than a soccer field. The United States has about 80,000 metric tons each of SNF and HLW, measured as metric tons of heavy metals, or MTHM. SNF doesn’t need any reprocessing or alteration to be disposed of, or shipped or just stored.

On the other hand, HLW is in different liquid, sludge and solid forms in various containers such as the 90 million gallons stored in large tanks at Hanford, Savannah River and other DOE facilities. HLW needs to be solidified and packaged by various methods, depending on where it ends up for disposal, including simple drying, grouting (cementing), vitrifying (glassification) or steam reforming (mineralization).

In addition to SNF and HLW, a minor amount of other wastes are included in the discussion of a deep geologic repository and include nuclear navy waste, weapons proliferation-related international waste, research materials and greater than Class C radioactive waste (GTCC).

Not included in this discussion is the other kind of bomb waste – defense-generated transuranic waste (TRU waste), which has its own repository at the WIPP site in New Mexico that has been operating since 1999. TRU waste includes everything from low-activity to high-activity waste like recycled spent fuel waste from old weapons reactors, and differs from HLW in where it came from in the bomb-making process.

The amount of SNF is slowly increasing as we continue to burn fuel for power, but the amount of HLW is not increasing at all, since we’re not making weapons anymore.

Secretary Moniz stated that DOE will use a consent-based approach to siting spent fuel storage and any nuclear waste repository, as recommended by the bipartisan Blue Ribbon Commission on America’s Nuclear Future several years ago (BRC) and as outlined by DOE (Energy.gov).

This new plan, the framework of which was recommended by the BRC in 2011, has had bipartisan support in Congress over the last few years, primarily from Senators Alexander, Feinstein and Murkowski. The Senators recently unveiled the Nuclear Waste Administration Act of 2015 which would begin this process of revising our nuclear waste program.

Of course, this new (and better) strategy will have to be hammered out amongst all the relevant parties and stakeholders, but the separation of these very different waste types can only make the final job of disposal easier and cheaper.

The present plan, enshrined into law in 1982 and 1987, had so many flaws that the cost has just skyrocketed and the schedule has been pushed out almost a hundred years.

But we might just get back on track!

Follow Jim on https://twitter.com/JimConca and see his and Dr. Wright’s book at http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1419675885/sr=1-10/qid=1195953013/

Cognitive neuroscience


From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Cognitive neuroscience is an academic field concerned with the scientific study of biological substrates underlying cognition,[1] with a specific focus on the neural substrates of mental processes. It addresses the questions of how psychological/cognitive functions are produced by neural circuits in the brain. Cognitive neuroscience is a branch of both psychology and neuroscience, overlapping with disciplines such as physiological psychology, cognitive psychology and neuropsychology.[2] Cognitive neuroscience relies upon theories in cognitive science coupled with evidence from neuropsychology and computational modeling.[2]

Due to its multidisciplinary nature, cognitive neuroscientists may have various backgrounds. Other than the associated disciplines just mentioned, cognitive neuroscientists may have backgrounds in neurobiology, bioengineering, psychiatry, neurology, physics, computer science, linguistics, philosophy and mathematics.

Methods employed in cognitive neuroscience include experimental paradigms from psychophysics and cognitive psychology, functional neuroimaging, electrophysiology, cognitive genomics and behavioral genetics. Studies of patients with cognitive deficits due to brain lesions constitute an important aspect of cognitive neuroscience.
Theoretical approaches include computational neuroscience and cognitive psychology.

Cognitive neuroscience can look at the effects of damage to the brain and subsequent changes in the thought processes due to changes in neural circuitry resulting from the ensued damage. Also, cognitive abilities based on brain development is studied and examined under the subfield of developmental cognitive neuroscience.

Historical origins

Timeline of development of field of cognitive neuroscience
Timeline showing major developments in science that led to the emergence of the field cognitive neuroscience.

Cognitive neuroscience is an interdisciplinary area of study that has emerged from many other fields, perhaps most significantly neuroscience, psychology, and computer science.[3] There were several stages in these disciplines that changed the way researchers approached their investigations and that led to the field becoming fully established.

Although the task of cognitive neuroscience is to describe how the brain creates the mind, historically it has progressed by investigating how a certain area of the brain supports a given mental faculty. However, early efforts to subdivide the brain proved problematic. The phrenologist movement failed to supply a scientific basis for its theories and has since been rejected. The aggregate field view, meaning that all areas of the brain participated in all behavior,[4] was also rejected as a result of brain mapping, which began with Hitzig and Fritsch’s experiments [5] and eventually developed through methods such as positron emission tomography (PET) and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI).[6] Gestalt theory, neuropsychology, and the cognitive revolution were major turning points in the creation of cognitive neuroscience as a field, bringing together ideas and techniques that enabled researchers to make more links between behavior and its neural substrates.

Origins in philosophy

Philosophers have always been interested in the mind. For example, Aristotle thought the brain was the body’s cooling system and the capacity for intelligence was located in the heart. It has been suggested that the first person to believe otherwise was the Roman physician Galen in the second century AD, who declared that the brain was the source of mental activity [7] although this has also been accredited to Alcmaeon.[8] Psychology, a major contributing field to cognitive neuroscience, emerged from philosophical reasoning about the mind.[9]

19th century

Phrenology


A page from the American Phrenological Journal

One of the predecessors to cognitive neuroscience was phrenology, a pseudoscientific approach that claimed that behavior could be determined by the shape of the scalp. In the early 19th century, Franz Joseph Gall and J. G. Spurzheim believed that the human brain was localized into approximately 35 different sections. In his book, The Anatomy and Physiology of the Nervous System in General, and of the Brain in Particular, Gall claimed that a larger bump in one of these areas meant that that area of the brain was used more frequently by that person. This theory gained significant public attention, leading to the publication of phrenology journals and the creation of phrenometers, which measured the bumps on a human subject's head. While phrenology remained a fixture at fairs and carnivals, it did not enjoy wide acceptance within the scientific community.[10] The major criticism of phrenology is that researchers were not able to test theories empirically.[3]

Localizationist view

The localizationist view was concerned with mental abilities being localized to specific areas of the brain rather than on what the characteristics of the abilities were and how to measure them.[3] Studies performed in Europe, such as those of John Hughlings Jackson, supported this view. Jackson studied patients with brain damage, particularly those with epilepsy. He discovered that the epileptic patients often made the same clonic and tonic movements of muscle during their seizures, leading Jackson to believe that they must be occurring in the same place every time. Jackson proposed that specific functions were localized to specific areas of the brain,[11] which was critical to future understanding of the brain lobes.

Aggregate field view

According to the aggregate field view, all areas of the brain participate in every mental function.[4]
Pierre Flourens, a French experimental psychologist, challenged the localizationist view by using animal experiments.[3] He discovered that removing the cerebellum in rabbits and pigeons affected their sense of muscular coordination, and that all cognitive functions were disrupted in pigeons when the cerebral hemispheres were removed. From this he concluded that the cerebral cortex, cerebellum, and brainstem functioned together as a whole.[12] His approach has been criticised on the basis that the tests were not sensitive enough to notice selective deficits had they been present.[3]

Emergence of neuropsychology

Perhaps the first serious attempts to localize mental functions to specific locations in the brain was by Broca and Wernicke. This was mostly achieved by studying the effects of injuries to different parts of the brain on psychological functions.[13] In 1861, French neurologist Paul Broca came across a man who was able to understand language but unable to speak. The man could only produce the sound "tan". It was later discovered that the man had damage to an area of his left frontal lobe now known as Broca's area. Carl Wernicke, a German neurologist, found a patient who could speak fluently but non-sensibly. The patient had been the victim of a stroke, and could not understand spoken or written language. This patient had a lesion in the area where the left parietal and temporal lobes meet, now known as Wernicke's area. These cases, which suggested that lesions caused specific behavioral changes, strongly supported the localizationist view.

Mapping the brain

In 1870, German physicians Eduard Hitzig and Gustav Fritsch published their findings about the behavior of animals. Hitzig and Fritsch ran an electrical current through the cerebral cortex of a dog, causing different muscles to contract depending on which areas of the brain were electrically stimulated. This led to the proposition that individual functions are localized to specific areas of the brain rather than the cerebrum as a whole, as the aggregate field view suggests.[5] Brodmann was also an important figure in brain mapping; his experiments based on Franz Nissl’s tissue staining techniques divided the brain into fifty-two areas.

20th century

Cognitive revolution

At the start of the 20th century, attitudes in America were characterised by pragmatism, which led to a preference for behaviorism as the primary approach in psychology. J.B. Watson was a key figure with his stimulus-response approach. By conducting experiments on animals he was aiming to be able to predict and control behaviour.
Behaviourism eventually failed because it could not provide realistic psychology of human action and thought – it was too based in physical concepts to explain phenomena like memory and thought. This led to what is often termed as the "cognitive revolution".[14]

Neuron doctrine

In the early 20th century, Santiago Ramón y Cajal and Camillo Golgi began working on the structure of the neuron. Golgi developed a silver staining method that could entirely stain several cells in a particular area, leading him to believe that neurons were directly connected with each other in one cytoplasm. Cajal challenged this view after staining areas of the brain that had less myelin and discovering that neurons were discrete cells. Cajal also discovered that cells transmit electrical signals down the neuron in one direction only. Both Golgi and Cajal were awarded a Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 1906 for this work on the neuron doctrine.[15]

Mid-late 20th century

Several findings in the 20th century continued to advance the field, such as the discovery of ocular dominance columns, recording of single nerve cells in animals, and coordination of eye and head movements. Experimental psychology was also significant in the foundation of cognitive neuroscience. Some particularly important results were the demonstration that some tasks are accomplished via discrete processing stages, the study of attention, and the notion that behavioural data do not provide enough information by themselves to explain mental processes. As a result, some experimental psychologists began to investigate neural bases of behaviour. Wilder Penfield built up maps of primary sensory and motor areas of the brain by stimulating cortices of patients during surgery. Sperry and Gazzaniga’s work on split brain patients in the 1950s was also instrumental in the progress of the field.[7]

Brain mapping

New brain mapping technology, particularly fMRI and PET, allowed researchers to investigate experimental strategies of cognitive psychology by observing brain function. Although this is often thought of as a new method (most of the technology is relatively recent), the underlying principle goes back as far as 1878 when blood flow was first associated with brain function.[6] Angelo Mosso, an Italian psychologist of the 19th century, had monitored the pulsations of the adult brain through neurosurgically created bony defects in the skulls of patients. He noted that when the subjects engaged in tasks such as mathematical calculations the pulsations of the brain increased locally. Such observations led Mosso to conclude that blood flow of the brain followed function.[6]

Emergence of a new discipline

Birth of cognitive science

On September 11, 1956, a large-scale meeting of cognitivists took place at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. George A. Miller presented his "The Magical Number Seven, Plus or Minus Two" paper while Noam Chomsky and Newell & Simon presented their findings on computer science. Ulric Neisser commented on many of the findings at this meeting in his 1967 book Cognitive Psychology. The term "psychology" had been waning in the 1950s and 1960s, causing the field to be referred to as "cognitive science". Behaviorists such as Miller began to focus on the representation of language rather than general behavior. David Marr concluded that one should understand any cognitive process at three levels of analysis. These levels include computational, algorithmic/representational, and physical levels of analysis.[16]

Combining neuroscience and cognitive science

Before the 1980s, interaction between neuroscience and cognitive science was scarce.[17] The term 'cognitive neuroscience' was coined by George Miller and Michael Gazzaniga toward the end of the 1970s.[17] Cognitive neuroscience began to integrate the newly laid theoretical ground in cognitive science, that emerged between the 1950s and 1960s, with approaches in experimental psychology, neuropsychology and neuroscience. (Neuroscience was not established as a unified discipline until 1971[18]). In the very late 20th century new technologies evolved that are now the mainstay of the methodology of cognitive neuroscience, including TMS (1985) and fMRI (1991).
Earlier methods used in cognitive neuroscience includes EEG (human EEG 1920) and MEG (1968). Occasionally cognitive neuroscientists utilize other brain imaging methods such as PET and SPECT. An upcoming technique in neuroscience is NIRS which uses light absorption to calculate changes in oxy- and deoxyhemoglobin in cortical areas. In some animals Single-unit recording can be used. Other methods include microneurography, facial EMG, and eye-tracking. Integrative neuroscience attempts to consolidate data in databases, and form unified descriptive models from various fields and scales: biology, psychology, anatomy, and clinical practice.[19]

Recent trends

Recently the foci of research have expanded from the localization of brain area(s) for specific functions in the adult brain using a single technology, studies have been diverging in several different directions [20] such as monitoring REM sleep via polygraphy, a machine that is capable of recording the electrical activity of a sleeping brain. Advances in non-invasive functional neuroimaging and associated data analysis methods have also made it possible to use highly naturalistic stimuli and tasks such as feature films depicting social interactions in cognitive neuroscience studies.[21]

Topics

Methods

Experimental methods of specific psychology fields include:

Related WikiBooks


Equality (mathematics)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equality_...