Industry


Ads by TechWords

See your link here


Subscribe to our e-mail newsletters
For more info on a specific newsletter, click the title. Details will be displayed in a new window.
Computerworld Daily News (First Look and Wrap-Up)
Computerworld Blogs Newsletter
The Weekly Top 10
More E-Mail Newsletters 
Mike Elgan's picture
Mike Elgan

The World Is My Office

New threat to Wi-Fi: light bulbs!

SANTA BARBARA, CALIF. -- Wireless technologies like WiMAX and LTE are supposed to bring us the speed of Wi-Fi (or better) with something approaching the range of existing wireless broadband, which could replace the need for Wi-Fi hotspots. Now, Wi-Fi back at the office is under threat, too: from light bulbs!

Researchers at Boston University's College of Engineering are working on a Wi-Fi replacement technology they call "Smart Lighting" that sends data not via the radio spectrum, but the visible light spectrum. The idea is that standard dumb light-bulbs would be replaced by LED "smart lights," which flicker at imperceptibly high rates as a way to transmit data within an office. Researchers believe initial speeds would hit between 1 and 10 megabits per second.

Data transmission between servers and LEDs would take place over existing electrical wiring.

Pushing data around an office like this is more energy efficient and eliminates clutter and wiring. But its best feature is security. Because it's based on visible light, the signal won't pass through walls and out into the street where it can be picked up by some war-driving cracker.

This technology reminds me of the Timex Datalink wristwatch I owned about 13 years ago, which was built in a partnership with Microsoft. You installed special software on the PC, and you updated the calendar and other PIM data on the watch by holding it up to the screen. The monitor flashed visible light in a kind of binary Morse Code. It was very cool, but Timex and Microsoft eventually transitioned the watch to USB connectivity.

There's a consensus in the light bulb community (there's a light bulb community?) that LEDs are the future anyway, and that LED technology will gradually replace fluorescent lights. Why not take advantage?

I love the idea of LED smart lighting, because it's a rare instance of new technology that involves the removal of equipment from an office and the removal of electromagnetic radiation from the airwaves.

What I don't understand is: Why go from the electrical system to visible light for devices like PCs that are always plugged into the electrical system directly? I also don't understand how devices talk back to the LEDs. Do they flash, too?

Anyway, I'm sure the geniusus at Boston University will work all this out.

RSS feed icon Like this stuff? Subscribe to the RSS feed.

What People Are Saying

flashing light-bulbs

Um, I may be a bit thick, but how does the lightbulb know what to say? That is, are the energy suppliers making them flash? Will each lightbulb have it's own IP? It's not April already is it?

PS

I had a devolo d-lan electric power-point system once which was supposed to connect my computers through my home electric sockets, it didn't, and I got a virus as 'bundled' software, so watch out for great ideas.

Would be good for

Would be good for broadcasting, but I'm uncertain about two-way communication. You would need the PC to transmit back to the source with either light or standard EM waves, and then you'd have to take measures to prevent reflections and other distortions. How easily does light interfere with other light? I don't know.

This system also seems difficult to install and maintain. Instead of a router on the wall, you now need to put it in the ceiling, and run wiring to each of the bulbs.

Electricity answer..

Since PC's use transformers and capacitors to
provide energy, you would need a receiver between
the plug for the PC and the outlet, and then a
cable of some sort to transfer the data to/from
the PC. How to get the data from the PC to the
router is a very good question.

Not new

We did this in the UK using Psion 5 hand held devices and infra-red receivers/LEDs mounted in the ceiling of classrooms back in the 1990s...

Worked too.

Well until The kids got their dirty hands on them! It was amazing how often admin had to wipe the sensors.

As a member of the light

As a member of the light bulb community, don't count on this technology going far soon - especially if the bulbs are used for general lighting.

LED lighting has a long way to go, and will likely be just a transitionary technology to a better solution (for general lighting), just like CFL's are today.

In the near future, someone will re-invent the light bulb. There is a 10M prize out there to be awarded to the first to invent a new lighting technology that is mercury free, safe and energy efficient.

The real threat to wi-fi is the fact that some of the new lighting technologies under development are using radio frequency to create light. In other words a sort of microwave powered light bulb.

These RF lighting technologies have the potential to interfere with existing wi-fi freqencies.

On the other hand, the technology mentioned in the article may be ahead of its time. The future of lighting will eventually change. The idea is this - who says that we have to use the 100+ year old screw-in light bulb form factor? Likewise for fluorescent tubes.

As organic LED (OLED) technology advances, light fixtures as we know them will likely transform into panels or arrays and other objects. The light source will be integrated with the fixture, and the "bulb" will not be necessary, and OLED's will be cheaper than than current led technology. Today's LED's are too expensive, not because of infancy in the market, because the materials to make them are rare and expensive.

The other issue is aesthetics. Most of us try to light our homes and workspaces with light that is pleasing to the eye. If lighting a space with specific LED's to accomodate a computer network is first priority, and the human eye is second, the technology will be a tough sell.

R-

Am I missing something...?

...or is this actually almost a step back to the days of infra-red communication?
Actually, with the number of reports of people suffering migraines brought on by energy-efficient lightbulbs nowadays, wouldn't infra-red be a better option since it's not in the visible light spectrum?

I can see that it would offer benefits to battery-powered devices that receive more than the transmit (web-browsing devices, for example that receive much more information downloading pages than they transmit to request the page) but personally I'm rather sceptical about the take-up of this technology, especially as infra-red seems to be gradually getting dropped from portable devices in favour of wifi, bluetooth, and GPRS/UMTS(3G) technologies.

how secure is this?

Does this use encryption like WIFI does? TFA says "Moreover, since this white light does not penetrate opaque surfaces such as walls, there is a higher level of security, as eavesdropping is not possible." OK, that's all well and good but what about WINDOWS (the real ones that you look thru not the OS).

pretty secure

Of course it would be encrypted! Goes without saying.

LED light is quite polarised so if the RX/TX is mounted in the ceiling it points downwards and can reflect little if the power output is reduced.

TV remote controls put out a fair bit in the hope that the TV can be triggered if the Remote is vaguely pointing in the right direction so it relies on reflective light.

You could use UV LEDs I suppose glass doesn't allow the transmission of UV IIRC.
Might give the people under it some useful Vitamin D as well. ;-)