The cordless home is now in reach with magnetic resonance

“The wireless power transmission technique known as magnetic resonance was widely known by a paper published in 2007 by Prof. Marin Soljacic of MIT,” Jack Purcher reports for Patently Apple. “Unlike the magnetic induction method that was invented 100 years ago, it has no restriction in distance. So you could charge devices without the need of a charging board of any kind.”

“It’s this attribute that it has been attracting popular attention as the next-generation wireless power transmission technique,” Purcher reports. “One of the first wireless charging patents designed for the PC using a magnetic resonance system was Apple’s November 2012 patent application which was granted earlier this month. Earlier in September we reported on a new more detailed patent filing from Apple on this very technology. We noted as far back as February that Apple and Samsung were in a race to be first with a next generation wireless charging system and last month we reported on Samsung’s latest move on this front with a 3D orientation-free wireless power transfer patent.”

“Samsung and Qualcomm will likely be first to bring magnetic resonance solutions to smartphones in in late 2014 or early 2015, though Apple could always surprise us on this front,” Purcher reports. “Now a new report suggests that magnetic resonance technology could lead to the cordless home over the next 3-5 years.”

Read more in the full article here.

44 Comments

    1. Not only jewelry, but everything metallic.

      If Apple will ever use wireless charging, it will increase thickness and weight of devices, as well as will make use of (nearly) full-metal enclosures impossible.

      I hope this does not happen; I do not like plastic at all.

    2. Haha! Yes, the limitations of MR will be interesting. I assume that the waves are tuned to affect only specific devices. But that’s not going to stop other things from being affected. And what do you do around that big fat magnet required to generate the waves? Does it mark the start of the Anti-Iron Age? Wear Iron and your life is in danger!

  1. The Greenies are going to complain about this due to the “inefficiency” of wireless charging and activation.

    The other side of this is a bitch. You have to carry a different charger when you hit the road. USB charging of small devices has to still be possible or you have to carry some dumb clunky thing with you.

    1. Amazing…you don’t believe that “inefficiency” might present a problem when the article discusses applying this technology to the “cordless home” in just a few years? Your assumption that people who might not favor this particular technology are wrong is both arrogant and ignorant. But way to get in your preemptive shot, anyway.

      The merits of this technology depend to a large degree on its power transmission efficiency and the scope of its implementation relative to overall national energy consumption. The national power grid is already badly strained in many areas, especially on hot days when A/Cs are gulping the kWh. So, inefficiency might just be a valid concern.

    2. I don’t understand this comment. What are Greenies? Are they people who want to minimize fuel waste? Or those who wants to leave a livable planet to their children and grandchildren?

      Ooooooooh what freaks those must be! I hate them like you do!

      Asshole.

      1. I think King Mel must be imbibing as I don’t understand his wording.

        I have no complaint against the “Greens” who want efficiencies as that is what I want. I think it is good to have fewer inefficiencies and lower energy use.

        Wireless powering of devices incur losses & hence is likely not as efficient as a direct wall charging wire. That is a given. What are those wireless resonance powering losses?

        Portable devices are still going to require a wired way to charge when on remote use, as we are not going to lug around another charging station in our laptop bag, when we can just do a USB connection or minicharger.

        1. Read your damn post. Your use the derogatory term “greenies” and also put “inefficiency” in quotes. You then go on to gripe about the difficulty of plugging in a charger, or carrying one with you on travel.

          The natural inference of the intent of your post is exactly opposite to what you now claim it to be. Sum Jung Gai read it the same way. I am sorry for teeing off on you, if that was not your intent. But your post mimicked the disdain for the environment and conservation that I have seen from extremists on this forum, and you posted anonymously, as well – a tactic followed by nearly every extremist on this forum attempting to formenting discord.

  2. “cordless home”

    sounds like a solution to a problem we don’t have. The wired home is the most reliable, easiest to install & maintain & use electronic systems we have. You’d be amazed at how slow your WiFi and BlueTooth are compared to a proper wired ethernet connection. As for power, again there is no comparison with the efficiency and safety of the wires that are already installed in your humble abode.

    cutting the cord is desirable when one is AWAY from home, but why not use the superior performance that hard-wiring offers when you are at home?

    1. Back in the 80’s we rented a house that had high power transmission lines on towers running through the back yard. After reading about dairy farmers saying those things messed up their cows and what they emitted I went out at night with a four foot fluorescent light tube.

      It’s a very creepy sensation to have one of them light up in your hands unconnected. I never really felt comfortable living there after that. On the upside, it was a blast to take friends out with the tubes and play Star wars while loaded. We never broke one; must of been dumb luck.

  3. “Unlike the magnetic induction method that was invented 100 years ago, it has no restriction in distance.”

    The article could have been more precise. There absolutely IS a restriction in distance. It’s just a little more than being on top of the charging pad. Otherwise all we would need is one big charger transmitter in Cupertino and I could use it here on the east coast.

      1. The law of inverse squares applies to an omni-directional point-source.

        I don’t fully understand technology in the magnetic resonance charging, but the patent specifically says, “The circularly polarized magnetic field being spatially symmetric about at least two axes provides a symmetric power reception at a peripheral device independent of the spatial relationship between the peripheral device and the NFMR power supply.”

        So, it sounds to me like the Inverse square law probably doesn’t apply in this case, at least not directly or simply.

      1. Actually, the iWatch is predominantly a media/analyst fantasy. Most of the people on this forum feel that Apple is likely investigating a range of wearable devices, including a watch form factor. But we tend to be more skeptical that most when claims of an imminent release of an iWatch or an Apple-branded TV are trumpeted.

        You won’t win any friends around here by tossing out the derogatory “fanboy” moniker. We understand the irrational enthusiasm of real fanboys, but our eyes are wide open and we understand that Apple is not perfect – the company can and occasionally does screw up.

  4. At a time when we are being encouraged to use florescent and LED lights to save energy, I don’t see how this technology can get past the fad stage. It’s just too inefficient.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.