Slashdot Mirror
UK Researchers Build Micron LED Light Based Wireless Network
Mark.JUK writes "Scientists working at the University of Strathclyde in Scotland (United Kingdom) have begun to develop a new Light Fidelity (Li-Fi) technology that will use special micron-sized LED (Light-Emitting Diodes) lights, such as those that could be used as part of home lighting or TV displays, to form part of a sophisticated wireless communications network (much like Wi-Fi is today). The principle, which revolves around manipulating the on/off flicker of LED lights to produce a digital network (a bit like Morse Code from a torch), is not new but most of the other teams are focusing on larger Li-Fi LEDs of around 1mm square in size. However micron sized LEDs not only allow you to use more lights (each of which can act as a separate data channel) but they can also flicker on and off around 1,000 times quicker than the larger LEDs."
(a bit like Morse Code from a torch)
Thanks for the clarification, News for Nerds.
What kind of frequencies are these things capable of? If it's less than a couple hundred megahertz, good luck using that for anything on the other side of a wall.
Someone will transmit some data and unwittingly hypnotize the whole population. Skynet will, at about the same time, become self-aware and instead of killing all humans, become Skynet's slaves.
If this system sends data with light, but through the air, I would call it "fiberless".
So say we all
seems that unlike Wi-Fi, itll require a direct line-of-sight
This sounds like a new spin on the optical telegraph networks that sprang up around Europe shortly after the French Revolution. Human operators stationed in signal towers handled the sending, receiving, and forwarding. It was fairly successful but suffered from the same drawbacks that are described in TFA, i.e. obstruction, poor visibility conditions, etc, plus obviously some additional ones that aren't issues with these newer devices. They became obsolete when Morse and his English counterparts rolled out electric telegraphs in the mid 19 century.
This is described in the book "The Victorian Internet".
you're not a basement dweller and actually have windows in a room with these?
I know, not as much a problem in the UK, so they probably didn't check into this potential issue.
This sounds ideal for low-bandwidth line-of-sight communications, like for example changing channels on a TV.
LED room lights will double as "Li-Fi" wireless nodes
Li-Fi Multi-tasking micro-lights could spark a communications revolution
I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
so, didn't read the article,but what about people with photosensitive epilepsy? surely hundreds or thousands of flashes per second cannot be good for people with this ailment
It requires line of sight or a limited number of bounces. Is it faster, cheaper, or lower power than conventional wireless?
Of course, anyone that can see the lights can monitor traffic undetected. Sort of or he old lihts on a modem.
I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
Imagine what you could do with this kind of technology. Personally I could see dedicated cheap devices with which you could remotely control your TV, radio, and other appliances. The sky is the limit!
Or you can just buy 60ghz gear off the shelf today. The antennas are tiny, provides several gbits per device regardless of the number of devices. It has all of the same properties as visible light except you won't be destracted by it if you don't want the damn lights on.
How would micron-LEDs allow more channels? If you are using different frequencies of light you wouldn't need them that small to cover the usable spectrum. If you are planning on resolving each pixel form the receiving device you certainly couldn't use micron sizes over any useful distance?
Requiring line of sight (or a few bounces) is the advantage - strictly limited range, easily constrained by commonly available and understood end-user technologies called "doors" and "walls".
This is what bluetooth promised, and sort of sometimes delivers - under ideal conditions and absent malicious hackers. Surely you can see applications for a technology that visibly limits broadcast range?
The same 802.11 spec you use today initially specified another physical layer for wireless communication - using infrared.
Or it's technically one physical layer - just one is down in the 2.4GHz band and the other is way up there around 3THz or so...
There's a reason people use Radio (and higher) spectrum. Maybe these guys haven't heard.
about this
The only thing I can think of is regulation. Unlike the radio spectrum, the light spectrum is unregulated so no need to worry about running afoul of the FCC and stay under certain power levels/frequency bands/etc. Also it might work in places where Wi-Fi doesn't due to RF interference (microwave oven factory maybe?) but generally there are other ways to fix that. Speaking as someone old enough to remember the colossal failure of IrDA which was based on very similar principles, I don't think this technology has much of a chance.
Support Right To Repair Legislation.
This sure seems like a BRIGHT idea.
C'on, this is Slashdot. Is it so complex to say that they employ an NRZ modulation using a light carrier, rather than "a bit like Morse Code from a torch"? Is it so difficult to refere to the switching/modulation frequency, or baud rate, rather than "they can also flicker on and off around 1,000 times quicker than the larger LEDs"?
The idea of using a LED light for communication is presented as a novelty in the summary, when all remotes work this way, and even the original 802.11 specs included a PHY layer that relied on IR. You are trying to make articles more dumb-user-friendly, but what you are getting is to kick out the users that might make valuable comments.
So is lifi.
Well I hope they're prepared for the impending patent litigation.
"Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife