I think the impressive part is that it's uncompressed video (and sound? couldn't tell from the video) data being transferred. not like an MPEG. The transmitter looked to be really low power, surprisingly (it was tiny!) So hopefully stuff way up in the Thz range will replace our crappy wireless G networks. :-)
regardless this doesnt prove anything, heck i could stream fullscreen video over 1024x768 32bit coloring over my old wireless internal network, the only times that didnt work was when there was a wall in between, hes standing in the same room...
i think you're all missing the point--futurama episodes can now be transmitted magically through the air, wirelessly. this is the greatest invention since Vonage brought us tele-phone service, through our high-speed data lines.
At that frequency the signal is blocked easily by a hand. This simply means it has NO practical use AT ALL in domestic applications. This could be used industrially for line of sight point to point permanent links though. This signal will never go through a wall, ever.
hmm... first thing I think about high frequencies, is high energy consumption. Imagine laptop with THz WiFi, downloading files from net, at speeds exceeding 30 MB/s, although power consumption is so high, that hour of using so fast connection will use all energy, while 10 times slower connection via normal WiFi is for at least few hours longer. Faster machines needs more energy, more energy needs better batteries, better batteries cost much more than standard ones. Am I correct?
yes for the time being, no for the future ... it's good to explore other possibilities like terahertz transmision ... if we stayed with what work's we would have never evovled pass the commodore 64 lol!
1Thz = 1000 Ghz. 300 Ghz is not even a third of 1 Thz. Also, don't confuse hz (a measurement of frequency) with bytes (a measurement of data volume). Terrahertz in this case, refers to the freq of the carrier wave.
Oddly, I recognized the linear amplifier from my CB/Ham days. I'm talking 27-28 Mhz. I never imagined it being compatible with microwave freqs.
Confusingly, the phrase "terahertz frequencies" is used to describe a range of frequencies that include some that are actually below 1 Terahertz. So rswingman is confused, but for good reason; it's a misleading term. I subbed the article myself, and had to check this. It would have been better if they'd been called "Q-rays" or something.
All I can say is, it's not our fault; some researcher named it, and we're all stuck with it. :)
again, the Thz range is defined as 300ghz to 3Thz.
Yes we all know technically 1Thz is 1000Ghz, but this is not the case here.
They can call it whatever they want, and annoyingly for us, they have called it the Thz region. Confusing for you I understand. Just rest assured that the Thz region does not have to be equal or greater than 1Thz.
'1 terabyte of data' was NOT even mentioned in the video ! The video stream was output from a DVD player and transmitted to the TV screen using a 300 Ghz signal.
fake,how would you suggest he get 1 terabyte of data streamed to the transmitter, i mean, dd3 ram is probebly the fastest ram you can get, and youd need 1 terabyte? hello, he fit all that hardware that can transmit 1 terabyte?
Reading must be a lost art or something. What you see here is a successfull laboratory setup that can utilize the terahertz range. It uses a real world application, hi res video, to demonstrate it's capability. In other words they managed to extract data from the oscilating frequency at the terahertz range wirelessly. also ..bludy tweakers.
You could of course be so polite as to endulge us with exposing this crude misinterpretation of the basic technical ongoings as portrayed here within this video . Please, feel free. Really, I'm sure you have tons of relevant things to say regarding this subject in particulair. From the demeanor in your post I'd might even be persauded to believe you could possibly even be a authority in this particlulair field of science. O, great know it all, spill thy beans for us unknowing simpletons.
I'd like to point out that this is a 'proof of concept' model, and that if/when a commercial model is produced it would be much smaller and have a omni-directional transmitter.
No - it will ALWAYS be focused uni-directional and will not be able to pass through thick objects like walls or trees. That's a limitation of this frequency of the radio spectrum and not the technology.
what kind of man gives a demonstrationin not only a place that could potentially be very busy and constantly interrupted, and also comments on how shoddy the product is overall, most wireless users, going o be honest here, are laptop and mobile phone users, would you like to explain to me how the hell that bulky thing is going to be portable and lightweight, i mean,even in the air this things going to go downhill anytime theres a passing bird! ive been thinking,why havnt you?
its a proof of concept experiment done at a science lab, its not a product demonstration for some cool new device you can get at Best Buy. i doubt the final technology will be anything remotely similar in size or appearance
So, with the lenses, making a tight beam that can be blocked by anything between the transmitter and the receiver, is this pretty much like transmission via light beam, which was demonstrated about a hundred years ago?
yeah i was just thinking "what happens if you break the line of sight?" then he commented on it, but it's still cool - gotta start somewhere, right?
epit0me 1 year ago
Comment removed
GloriousOtaku 2 years ago
Comment removed
GloriousOtaku 2 years ago
Comment removed
GloriousOtaku 2 years ago
tesla ftw. i need some freee energy right fukin now
ActiveStorage 2 years ago
I think the impressive part is that it's uncompressed video (and sound? couldn't tell from the video) data being transferred. not like an MPEG. The transmitter looked to be really low power, surprisingly (it was tiny!) So hopefully stuff way up in the Thz range will replace our crappy wireless G networks. :-)
genewitch 3 years ago 7
regardless this doesnt prove anything, heck i could stream fullscreen video over 1024x768 32bit coloring over my old wireless internal network, the only times that didnt work was when there was a wall in between, hes standing in the same room...
FusionNinjin 3 years ago 2
w00t futurama!
shuu7777 3 years ago 12
i think you're all missing the point--futurama episodes can now be transmitted magically through the air, wirelessly. this is the greatest invention since Vonage brought us tele-phone service, through our high-speed data lines.
wasnr 3 years ago 2
cant you use fiber optic cables with that?
djsuperstar717 3 years ago
using cable somehow contradicts the wish of transferring wirelessly
Boeserwolf93 2 years ago
So what? They use a higher carrier freq. Big deal. Its limitations are obvious in the vid. Why would we step back in time?
dLimboStick 3 years ago
At that frequency the signal is blocked easily by a hand. This simply means it has NO practical use AT ALL in domestic applications. This could be used industrially for line of sight point to point permanent links though. This signal will never go through a wall, ever.
PIXscotland 3 years ago 3
who really freakin cares, its cool
yoshihobbes 3 years ago 2
wow this seems so cool A TERAHERTZ. But I suppose in the future that will be the norm. Do you remember when back in the day 330 mhz was amazing.
(lol the first video to be transmitted in 1thz is futurama maybe 1 thz = future = futurama
supafly377 3 years ago
hmm... first thing I think about high frequencies, is high energy consumption. Imagine laptop with THz WiFi, downloading files from net, at speeds exceeding 30 MB/s, although power consumption is so high, that hour of using so fast connection will use all energy, while 10 times slower connection via normal WiFi is for at least few hours longer. Faster machines needs more energy, more energy needs better batteries, better batteries cost much more than standard ones. Am I correct?
JakeTiDe 3 years ago
Yes but you will be using that large amount of power for a fraction of the time!
rashm2k 3 years ago
yes for the time being, no for the future ... it's good to explore other possibilities like terahertz transmision ... if we stayed with what work's we would have never evovled pass the commodore 64 lol!
elave16 3 years ago
lol xD
KrissSro 3 years ago
lol his acent...
"up and adam"
cemre3 3 years ago
GAAAAR you people are all so dense.
benjeeqds 3 years ago
lol futurama
KyubiFox2 3 years ago 3
1Thz = 1000 Ghz. 300 Ghz is not even a third of 1 Thz. Also, don't confuse hz (a measurement of frequency) with bytes (a measurement of data volume). Terrahertz in this case, refers to the freq of the carrier wave.
Oddly, I recognized the linear amplifier from my CB/Ham days. I'm talking 27-28 Mhz. I never imagined it being compatible with microwave freqs.
rswingman 3 years ago 3
The Thz range is given from 300Ghz to 3Thz. This is the first step and it is in the lowest of the Thz region.
CheorkeeXP 3 years ago
CheorkeeXP is right about the frequency range.
Confusingly, the phrase "terahertz frequencies" is used to describe a range of frequencies that include some that are actually below 1 Terahertz. So rswingman is confused, but for good reason; it's a misleading term. I subbed the article myself, and had to check this. It would have been better if they'd been called "Q-rays" or something.
All I can say is, it's not our fault; some researcher named it, and we're all stuck with it. :)
newscientistvideo 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
what the fuck are you talking about
Elor101 3 years ago
again, the Thz range is defined as 300ghz to 3Thz.
Yes we all know technically 1Thz is 1000Ghz, but this is not the case here.
They can call it whatever they want, and annoyingly for us, they have called it the Thz region. Confusing for you I understand. Just rest assured that the Thz region does not have to be equal or greater than 1Thz.
CheorkeeXP 3 years ago
Wow! The world rediscovers RF modulation!
VyseAcher 3 years ago
Year like the world rediscovers a car which you can drive at 10000 km/h
megalomania345 3 years ago
'1 terabyte of data' was NOT even mentioned in the video ! The video stream was output from a DVD player and transmitted to the TV screen using a 300 Ghz signal.
ClanRooster 3 years ago
fake,how would you suggest he get 1 terabyte of data streamed to the transmitter, i mean, dd3 ram is probebly the fastest ram you can get, and youd need 1 terabyte? hello, he fit all that hardware that can transmit 1 terabyte?
FusionNinjin 3 years ago
Reading must be a lost art or something. What you see here is a successfull laboratory setup that can utilize the terahertz range. It uses a real world application, hi res video, to demonstrate it's capability. In other words they managed to extract data from the oscilating frequency at the terahertz range wirelessly. also ..bludy tweakers.
retepvosnul 3 years ago
If one doesnt watch the video, one doesnt recognise the "300 Ghz"-Term here ;-).
Another piece of german engineering ...
thaspecializt 3 years ago
hahha u know as much about electronic as my granny does - at least she knows when to shut up.
mokeyterny 3 years ago
You could of course be so polite as to endulge us with exposing this crude misinterpretation of the basic technical ongoings as portrayed here within this video . Please, feel free. Really, I'm sure you have tons of relevant things to say regarding this subject in particulair. From the demeanor in your post I'd might even be persauded to believe you could possibly even be a authority in this particlulair field of science. O, great know it all, spill thy beans for us unknowing simpletons.
retepvosnul 3 years ago
omg,woooooooo
deagle94 3 years ago
These guys are obviously experts in their fields -they're watching futurama!
stuigi99 3 years ago 2
terahertz, thats like a wavelength of 3um lol. You will need a solid dish to aim it in a direction.
Zwaffelen 3 years ago
yes, you may use metallic parabolic reflectors, but you can also use dielectric focusing lenses like the man demonstrated.
agungk 2 years ago
What kind of lenses are that? They focus a RF signal?
drrogla 3 years ago
dielectric lenses (kind of plastic)
agungk 2 years ago
I'd like to point out that this is a 'proof of concept' model, and that if/when a commercial model is produced it would be much smaller and have a omni-directional transmitter.
tl;dr: don't knock it, it's a work in progress.
fraseryt 3 years ago
No - it will ALWAYS be focused uni-directional and will not be able to pass through thick objects like walls or trees. That's a limitation of this frequency of the radio spectrum and not the technology.
nmg196 3 years ago 2
Yep, the shorter the wavelength the more difficulty you have penetrating common things.
This is moving towards the infrared end of the light spectrum. Not very effective for mobile, but rocks for point to point.
kd1s 3 years ago
what kind of man gives a demonstrationin not only a place that could potentially be very busy and constantly interrupted, and also comments on how shoddy the product is overall, most wireless users, going o be honest here, are laptop and mobile phone users, would you like to explain to me how the hell that bulky thing is going to be portable and lightweight, i mean,even in the air this things going to go downhill anytime theres a passing bird! ive been thinking,why havnt you?
hartnell114 3 years ago
its a proof of concept experiment done at a science lab, its not a product demonstration for some cool new device you can get at Best Buy. i doubt the final technology will be anything remotely similar in size or appearance
KrAzYkArL18769 3 years ago 4
So, with the lenses, making a tight beam that can be blocked by anything between the transmitter and the receiver, is this pretty much like transmission via light beam, which was demonstrated about a hundred years ago?
JohnMSawyer 3 years ago
Science Rules.
aquamammal 3 years ago 2
FUTURAMA!
xmailmanbiterx 3 years ago 3
Yay Futurama!
superfisto 3 years ago 2
terahertz is really better suited to fiber optic carrier.
neotoy 3 years ago 2