Antenna-Clothing Outperforms Regular Antennas 70
Zothecula writes with a snippet from Gizmag: "In the recent past, we've seen outfits that incorporate bio-sensors and batteries, and even a bikini with integrated solar cells. One of the latest innovations in smart fabrics, however, allows a person's clothing to act as multiple antennas. Developed at Ohio State University, the system could prove particularly useful to soldiers, who don't want to be encumbered by a protruding whip antenna."
Dare ya (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
shouldn't be too hard.
http://www.consumertraveler.com/today/pilot-who-posted-security-flaw-video-online-is-punished-by-the-tsa/ [consumertraveler.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Not 'til they removed the terrorism at the gates.
Clarification (Score:2, Interesting)
When the summary refers to a whip antenna, it means a ducky antenna on a handheld radio, as worn on a belt like police tend to do, not the large old style military whip/backpack thing I pictured first, nor do they compare it to a handheld radio held at face level (used without shoulder mic). So, although it makes an improvement over usual law enforcement radio, its not an astonishing discovery by any means, as similar gains can be made by holding the handheld in a usual talking position.
For those with IEEE
Re: (Score:2)
Stubby helical aerials on radios work pretty badly, and they just plain don't work at all when you've got a stubby on a handheld that's clipped to your belt.
I wonder how poor performance will be when the aerial is pressed up against a big wet conductive thing?
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Even the UHF band that most military coms occurs on has a roughly 13" ideal antenna length. SATURN and HAVE QUICK I/II are in the UHF band only
Re: (Score:2)
5 meter and 6 meter communications is still very common in military. It's a band that is highly effective for longer range ground communication without the use of satellites or repeaters.
Re: (Score:1)
Do they make them in shorts? (Score:1)
Recieving or transmitting? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
You do know there's a large difference between ionizing and non-ionizing radiation right? This stuff is on the wrong side of the spectrum to be causing you such problems.
The absolute worst you might get is some heat from absorption.
Re: (Score:3)
yea. The ultraviolet component. You know what ultraviolet is right? It's the electromagnetic band adjacent to the visible light band - specifically the higher frequency edge. Which just happens to be the lower limit for being harmful it seems!
Meaning, again, that radio waves are on the wrong side of the spectrum.
Re: (Score:2)
You do know there's a large difference between ionizing and non-ionizing radiation right? This stuff is on the wrong side of the spectrum to be causing you such problems.
The absolute worst you might get is some heat from absorption.
You know that just because the radiation doesn't cause damage to the DNA doesn't mean that it won't negatively influence cell growth and division right? Magnetic fields have been shown to influence cell division and growth rates and although the current studies used relatively high magnetic fields, smaller fields or other EM radiation may also have effects on cell growth and health.
Re: (Score:2)
My point here is that simple sunlight or heat from... say your household heater is more energetic than a typical handheld radio? You don't seem to grasp the fact that light (including radiated heat) and radio is the same damn thing, except the radio is less energetic!
Safety? (Score:1)
We have already been told keeping the antenna close to the ears for long hours can provoke cancer etc. Now getting multiple antennas essentially as close as it is possible to get without an implant. How will this change the cancer statistics etc. in the next few years?
Has safety been considered at all?
Re: (Score:2)
Well, with any luck the soldiers will die from lead poisoning before the cancer could set in. Let's hope for the best...
Sorry, I sometimes get overridden by my past life as an arms contractor.
Re: (Score:2)
no one respectable has said that for decades
31 WTO scientists in may 2011... not that long ago (Score:1)
It is hardly 4 months since a panel of 31 scientist came to the conclusion that cell phone radiation increases the risk for cancer:
http://www.cbloomnews.com/TopNews.aspx?Article_id=85332&Cat=5 [cbloomnews.com]
http://www.cnn.com/2011/HEALTH/05/31/who.cell.phones/index.html [cnn.com]
http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/229054/cell_phones_may_cause_cancer_says_the_who_what_to_do.html [pcworld.com]
What news are you reading to say "no one respectable has said that for decades"???
Re: (Score:2)
I think you've failed to take duty cycle into account. Such a radio wouldn't be active nearly as often as a typical cellphone (there's no tower to check into every couple of seconds etc)
Re: (Score:3)
It is hardly 4 months since a panel of 31 scientist came to the conclusion that cell phone radiation increases the risk for cancer:
http://www.cbloomnews.com/TopNews.aspx?Article_id=85332&Cat=5 [cbloomnews.com]
http://www.cnn.com/2011/HEALTH/05/31/who.cell.phones/index.html [cnn.com]
http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/229054/cell_phones_may_cause_cancer_says_the_who_what_to_do.html [pcworld.com]
What news are you reading to say "no one respectable has said that for decades"???
They put RF in the same risk category as coffee. They didn't do any of their own research, just reviewed existing research.
You can review the same existing research here and come to your own conclusions, just like they did:
http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/factsheet/Risk/cellphones [cancer.gov]
Re: (Score:2)
"Provoke cancer?" Your sources?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Sounds about right in the price department.
Anyways enlisted men/women only have to pay for their own gear if they loose what they were issued.
A bikini with integrated solar cells? (Score:1)
That has the potential to be shocking.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, but that G-String is a pain in the ass.
Next time they should buy them at some clothing shop and not the music store.
Solar Powered Boob-Cooler... (Score:2)
...now THERE's a novel idea!
Remember the Solar Powered Propeller hat?
Picture this:
Two boo...err...one bikini, solar powered of course, with two propellers...
Nuff said!
Joke (Score:2, Funny)
The ceremony wasn't much but the reception was excellent!
How can it possibly perform well? (Score:4, Interesting)
Putting a bag of salt water in the near field of an antenna would be expected to increase losses and detune it.
Re: (Score:3)
They quite simply do not have the energy to knock electrons loose, which is exactly what is required to cause the problems you mention. You realize infrared and visual light have more energy than radio?
The only thing they can do is be absorbed and converted to thermal energy... and to reach a hazardous level you'd needs quite a few watts of power, and the only thing you'll get for it is a skin-deep burn no different than any other burn.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
You can say whatever you want, point me to any study about radiation caused by phones, TVs etc, they're not harmless, just because they don't cause cancer in the next few months, that doesn't mean their emissions don't damage your DNA and cause other problems later, for your or your children you might have after. So, no, wrapping yourself in a antenna does not seem such a good idea.
So, you don't care about the science, you're just sure it causes damage to your dna. Gotcha.
Next topic... Magnets! How do they work?!
Re: (Score:2)
Actually salt water can provide a far better return path for rf energy than air, so depending on the frequency (I'm assuming super high) of the signal, it could be pretty good.
Not sure how I'd feel about my ugly bag of mostly water being a return path for high frequency radio though.
It has more antennas (Score:3)
It performs better because it has a whole bunch of antennas all over their body and can select the one that has the best performance at any given moment. Being able to choose one in the best spot is sometimes better than having a single efficient antenna. Of course, strapping 50 whip antennas to yourself would perform better than either a single whip or the antennasuit alone. Just don't try to move through bushes or interact with humans.
as Marconi once said... (Score:1)
"That RF is funny stuff."
"The Ohio State University" (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It only comes in turtleneck versions.
Zap them with EMPs (Score:1)
Until they're just pink in the middle..
The most interesting part of this story (Score:3)
* Googles "bikini with integrated solar cells" *
Re: (Score:2)
Looking at those things brings all kinds of weirdness to mind... "Can I jack in to your bikini to charge my iPod?"
-l
really, antenna's work better with human contact? (Score:3)
I think anyone who's had a TV that used rabbit ears and you had a channel or 2 that always seem to come in better when your touching the antenna's won't be surprised that clothes with antenna's built in would work better then normal antenna's.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Since you're all "wondering": (Score:2)
Bikini with solar cells [solarcoterie.com]
9 weirdest ways to harness solar power [ecofriend.com]: features a full-body swimsuit, a bra and a skimpy dress.
There is something weird..... (Score:3)
The Ohio State University (Score:2)
What about the durability? (Score:1)