14 votes

Invisible Wi-Fi signals caught on camera

Computer icons can give you an idea of your Wi-Fi signal strength. But now Timo Arnall and a team of designers from the Oslo School of Architecture & Design have created a device that can produce a large scale visualisation of the fluctuating Wi-Fi signals around a city (see video above).

Their latest prototype is a four-metre-tall rod, lined with LEDs, that incorporates a microcontroller and a Wi-Fi connector, used to detect surrounding networks. Once the team chooses a network to focus on, a computer program uses the Wi-Fi module to reveal its signal strength, which is displayed by lighting up an appropriate number of LEDs.

The signal reading is updated every three seconds so a changing bar made of lights is produced as the user walks around with the rod. By setting up a locked-off camera with a long exposure, a light painting that looks like a bar graph is produced over time.

Continue reading:
http://www.newscientist.c...




Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Saw an Article

that said that wifi signals cause a breach of the bloodbrain barrier and can cause all kinds of health problems. No one knows yet just how many problems. Isn't it nice that we are forced to live in those signals whether we want to or not?

skippy

Interesting article about a possible solution

By adding low-frequency electronic white noise over the top of the cell phone signal, most of the biological effects of the radiation could be reversed

http://www.buergerwelle.de:8080/helma/twoday/bwnews/stories/...

You would think

that such a small signal would be harmless and it probably is but what some people tend to forget or leave out is the fact that the cumulative damage from all the signals we encounter is damaging. Not only to us but to our environment. We already know that the U.L.F waves used by the navy cause damage to sea life and that is just sound waves. If you consider all the weather radar, military radar, cell towers, cell phones, home wifi and so on that spew micro waves then you can see how the supposed insignificant effect of these devices become a major effect.

Radiowaves don't cause biological damage

At least there is no plausible mechanism. It can slightly, I mean slightly increase body temperature, but it is nothing to be concerned about.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-ionizing_radiation

Non-ionizing radiation is impossible to avoid. It is everywhere, always. You are getting exposed to much more dangerous radiation simply by living on Earth (even higher energy non-ionizing radiation is more biological damaging, like visible light from the Sun).

The article on the subject

"Dr. Devra Davis, author of "Disconnect" explains the science of cell phone radiation in a very comprehensive way. For example she shows photos of two cells, one whose DNA has been damaged by "gamma" radiation (which is what was emitted in Hiroshima) and another cell damaged by low level pulsing non ionizing radiation (from a cell phone). Both cells look very damaged compared to a normal cell; but she even goes on to say the DNA from the cell exposed to the cell phone radiation looks worse."

http://www.laleva.org/eng/2012/09/neurosurgeon_shows_how_low...

Upvoted you for at least providing a source

But I am a skeptic that these findings are alarming.

Radio waves are much different than gamma waves. Gamma waves are so small that they can, in laymen terms, get into an atom and knock electrons out of the atom. The mechanism and the damage this causes is well understood.

Radio waves are huge. Their effect would likely have more to do with slightly increasing temperature and the permeability of the BBB and not direct damage to biomolecules like with gamma radiation. That is what I meant in my first comment.

It's a possibility that radiowaves and low-frequence microwaves are causing damage to health, but it is not alarming in my opinion (at least compared to many other potential hazards we encounter daily).

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20550949

It's the transmitters that are close to you

that you have to worry about. I'm not too worried about background signals like those they were measuring in the video, because of their low power level. I'm not disputing that they could have a negative affect, just saying that they are nothing compared to what transmitters close to you might be doing. People who are on the cell phone, or even cordless phone, have a transmitter right by their brain. People using computers, especially those on wireless networks, are getting a higher dose than those just out in an area with background wi-fi signals. Trouble is, we don't really know how much is too much, and while I don't talk on a cell phone that much, I do spend a lot of time on a wireless network with a computer. For that matter, the cell phone in my pocket is transmitting constantly. I wonder what that is doing to the cells in my leg.

I knew

that my tin foil hat came in handy one time.