They already have one motor in the iPhone for vibration. Hasn't anyone used Cycloramic (the App that spins your phone using the vibration motor)? All they need is one more in the other axis and they're set. They already have the other sensors built in (gyro, accelerometer).
Maybe they should just design the device so all of the heaviest parts are located where they want the center of gravity to be, if that's possible. I realize that the screen is probably one of the heaviest parts, and you can't really just put it wherever you want, but there may be other things that could be moved around.
It's quite clever but simply making the device of harder materials might be simpler.
Why do so many people believe that making something harder will prevent it from breaking? The opposite is the case. Hard things break. Soft things flex and convert the kinetic energy into heat. This is why glass breaks and wood doesn't.
So, if anything, the iPhone would have to be made from a SOFTER material. Unfortunately this is not a solution, because of asthetics and wear.
Well a lighter and thinner device will drop slower as it will be influenced more by wind or gets a higher resistance from the air particles. A feather is not dropping straight to the floor but swirls. The feather drops at the same speed as a brick in a vacuum environment.
But why is there a need to change mass in the phone? Why not put the mass there at all times? It might be that it then feels a bit ackward to keep in your hand?
But as said, adding weight and thickness is so unlike Apple.
The mass of the phone will not affect the speed in which it falls, but physics does say that the force of impact is determined by "mass X speed squared". So reducing the mass would reduce the chance of damage occurring from a fall.
The mass of the phone will not affect the speed in which it falls, but physics does say that the force of impact is determined by "mass X speed squared". So reducing the mass would reduce the chance of damage occurring from a fall.
What physics program did you graduate from? Newton would be shocked to hear that force = mass x speed squared.
With an external antenna they could implement an iCat.
It's too bad that the external antenna has gone the way of dodo birds. Smartphones simply do not have the same reception as the old feature phones with the telescopic antenna.
They already have one motor in the iPhone for vibration. Hasn't anyone used Cycloramic (the App that spins your phone using the vibration motor)? All they need is one more in the other axis and they're set. They already have the other sensors built in (gyro, accelerometer).
Well, assuming this patent isn't just a joke, it really has nothing to do with iPhones. It's all quite ridiculous relative to current devices and none of it is even possible given current constraints. It seems to me that they are just trying to patent the idea first so that in 2056 when someone actually figures out how to make a device sprout wings to stop it's fall that they can point ot this and say "look! we thought of this first!"
Personally, I'm not sure it was worth the money Apple paid to submit the patent, but they submit so many they probably thought it negligible.
It reminds me of all those patents in the 1940's for rocket propelled ... everything, when rockets were clearly the future, but before anyone could actually build a reliable one. The inventor would essentially put "rocket goes here" in the drawings even though at the time they couldn't be built.
I think the iPhone/iPad/MacBook/iPodtouch should activate retro rockets to reorient it and bring it safely to earth. Or better yet, deploy a "sky crane", like Curiosity's, to stop its fall, return it to its user and then lower it safely, gently into his/her waiting hands.
Would you have preferred i said the kinetic energy would be equal to the mass multiplied by speed squared.
EDIT
I still think more people would understand the way i said it the first time though
Allow me, the acceleration of a device is independent of its weight in a vacuum. Everything on earth accelerates at an average of 32.2 ft/s^2. Or 9.81 m/s^2. Air resistance does play a role but more of a role on terminal velocity. Over a drop of 5-10 feet, like another user said, the air can be ignored due to a small to no role in the impact speed.
That said, the kinetic energy of an object is (1/2)mV^2 where m is mass and velocity is V. So the impact energy is dependent upon the mass. But note that the velocity term is squared. So the velocity plays a much bigger role in the impact energy over longer falls. Simply, the longer the fall, the less mass matters. I do not feel like running the numbers, but reducing the weight by a few grams will have little impact in a device already so light.
It is more important to use ductile and tough materials. Not strong and brittle. (Glass is brittle).
Oh, I can't wait for this phone... will these features be implemented in the 5s? Surely it will have a long, furry tail... and let out a screech if you drop it! Don't tell me, let me guess: the gyro action only works 9 times, eh?
Seems it would be easier to install a small Mylar fan folded up inside. The phone senses that it is falling and deploys the fan like a wing, slowing the fall. Or you could just get a case that puts a rubber edge all around the phone. But I don't want a phone that saves itself. I want a phone that saves me! The iPhone Emergency Rocket Pod and Ejection Seat! Press a button and I'm outta there!
Interesting patent, dating from the era of thick glass front and back. Probably aluminum on one side, Liquid Metal, thinner and more resilient glass will solve the problem better.
But this patent could find application in flying robot cameras, toys or video players that follow us around. Stuff like that. The interesting part to me is the processing that goes into the decision-making before landing. Statistical analysis to act like a cat, fancy that.
Adding weight and complexity, while increasing the volume a device would otherwise have if it didn't have such features doesn't sound like Apple.
I guess it was good for them to file it, maybe the technology to make this practical will be available before the patent expires.
That was my thinking, too. Add to that weight and complexity increasing the force that is applied when it does land the complexity and additional moving components adds to more things can go wrong makes it all seem like a 1 step forward and 10 steps backward solution.
… unless Apple is actually making robotic pets for the future. Then it makes perfect sense.
Comments
Originally Posted by FotoDirk
Well a lighter and thinner device will drop slower as it will be influenced more by wind or gets a higher resistance from the air particles.
For a device of this size, that's so negligible as to be pointless to measure.
With an external antenna they could implement an iCat.
They already have one motor in the iPhone for vibration. Hasn't anyone used Cycloramic (the App that spins your phone using the vibration motor)? All they need is one more in the other axis and they're set. They already have the other sensors built in (gyro, accelerometer).
Maybe they should just design the device so all of the heaviest parts are located where they want the center of gravity to be, if that's possible. I realize that the screen is probably one of the heaviest parts, and you can't really just put it wherever you want, but there may be other things that could be moved around.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ascii
It's quite clever but simply making the device of harder materials might be simpler.
Why do so many people believe that making something harder will prevent it from breaking? The opposite is the case. Hard things break. Soft things flex and convert the kinetic energy into heat. This is why glass breaks and wood doesn't.
So, if anything, the iPhone would have to be made from a SOFTER material. Unfortunately this is not a solution, because of asthetics and wear.
Quote:
Originally Posted by FotoDirk
Well a lighter and thinner device will drop slower as it will be influenced more by wind or gets a higher resistance from the air particles. A feather is not dropping straight to the floor but swirls. The feather drops at the same speed as a brick in a vacuum environment.
But why is there a need to change mass in the phone? Why not put the mass there at all times? It might be that it then feels a bit ackward to keep in your hand?
But as said, adding weight and thickness is so unlike Apple.
The mass of the phone will not affect the speed in which it falls, but physics does say that the force of impact is determined by "mass X speed squared". So reducing the mass would reduce the chance of damage occurring from a fall.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chrispoe
The mass of the phone will not affect the speed in which it falls, but physics does say that the force of impact is determined by "mass X speed squared". So reducing the mass would reduce the chance of damage occurring from a fall.
What physics program did you graduate from? Newton would be shocked to hear that force = mass x speed squared.
Quote:
Originally Posted by galore2112
With an external antenna they could implement an iCat.
It's too bad that the external antenna has gone the way of dodo birds. Smartphones simply do not have the same reception as the old feature phones with the telescopic antenna.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee
They already have one motor in the iPhone for vibration. Hasn't anyone used Cycloramic (the App that spins your phone using the vibration motor)? All they need is one more in the other axis and they're set. They already have the other sensors built in (gyro, accelerometer).
Well, assuming this patent isn't just a joke, it really has nothing to do with iPhones. It's all quite ridiculous relative to current devices and none of it is even possible given current constraints. It seems to me that they are just trying to patent the idea first so that in 2056 when someone actually figures out how to make a device sprout wings to stop it's fall that they can point ot this and say "look! we thought of this first!"
Personally, I'm not sure it was worth the money Apple paid to submit the patent, but they submit so many they probably thought it negligible.
It reminds me of all those patents in the 1940's for rocket propelled ... everything, when rockets were clearly the future, but before anyone could actually build a reliable one. The inventor would essentially put "rocket goes here" in the drawings even though at the time they couldn't be built.
Ta-daa!
http://www.patentlyapple.com/patently-apple/2013/03/apple-may-shift-to-sapphire-crystal-glass-for-future-idevices.html
Wow...this is why I love Apple!
And thanks Ericthehalfbee for the tip on Cycloramic....I watched the video from the developer's website pretty cool for a $!
Quote:
Originally Posted by ankleskater
What physics program did you graduate from? Newton would be shocked to hear that force = mass x speed squared.
Would you have preferred i said the kinetic energy would be equal to half mass multiplied by speed squared.
EDIT
I still think more people would understand the way i said it the first time though
I think the iPhone/iPad/MacBook/iPodtouch should activate retro rockets to reorient it and bring it safely to earth. Or better yet, deploy a "sky crane", like Curiosity's, to stop its fall, return it to its user and then lower it safely, gently into his/her waiting hands.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chrispoe
Would you have preferred i said the kinetic energy would be equal to the mass multiplied by speed squared.
EDIT
I still think more people would understand the way i said it the first time though
Allow me, the acceleration of a device is independent of its weight in a vacuum. Everything on earth accelerates at an average of 32.2 ft/s^2. Or 9.81 m/s^2. Air resistance does play a role but more of a role on terminal velocity. Over a drop of 5-10 feet, like another user said, the air can be ignored due to a small to no role in the impact speed.
That said, the kinetic energy of an object is (1/2)mV^2 where m is mass and velocity is V. So the impact energy is dependent upon the mass. But note that the velocity term is squared. So the velocity plays a much bigger role in the impact energy over longer falls. Simply, the longer the fall, the less mass matters. I do not feel like running the numbers, but reducing the weight by a few grams will have little impact in a device already so light.
It is more important to use ductile and tough materials. Not strong and brittle. (Glass is brittle).
My two bits
Seems it would be easier to install a small Mylar fan folded up inside. The phone senses that it is falling and deploys the fan like a wing, slowing the fall. Or you could just get a case that puts a rubber edge all around the phone. But I don't want a phone that saves itself. I want a phone that saves me! The iPhone Emergency Rocket Pod and Ejection Seat! Press a button and I'm outta there!
Pepper spray. Cut way down on snatch-and-grab iphone thefts.
But this patent could find application in flying robot cameras, toys or video players that follow us around. Stuff like that. The interesting part to me is the processing that goes into the decision-making before landing. Statistical analysis to act like a cat, fancy that.
That was my thinking, too. Add to that weight and complexity increasing the force that is applied when it does land the complexity and additional moving components adds to more things can go wrong makes it all seem like a 1 step forward and 10 steps backward solution.
… unless Apple is actually making robotic pets for the future. Then it makes perfect sense.