From Engadget: GE turns butterfly-inspired tech into cheap, accurate thermal sensors

GE butterfly sensor

When last we heard from GE and its Morpho-butterfly inspired sensors, all the talk was about detecting chemicals. And, with $6.3 million in funding coming from DARPA, we’re not surprised. In the latest issue of Nature Photonics, however, the company’s researchers show that the wing-like structures are just as good at detecting heat as they are ricin attacks. By coating them with carbon nanotubes the team was able to create a sensor sensitive to temperature changes as small as 0.02 degrees Celsius with a response rate of 1/40 of a second. The sensors could eventually find their way into imaging devices and medical equipment, and are expected to cost just a fraction of similar technologies currently on the market. Of course, since DARPA is still involved with the project, there are some potential security uses as well — such as screening devices and fire detection. Head after the break for a video and some PR.

Continue reading GE turns butterfly-inspired tech into cheap, accurate thermal sensors (video)

 

from Engadget

From Ars Technica: Happy Valentine’s Day: US government breaks up with LightSquared


The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) said today that it will not approve LightSquared’s proposal to build a national 4G-LTE network, after testing showed that the network would interfere with most existing GPS devices.

The decision came swiftly after the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) today warned the FCC that “LightSquared’s proposed mobile broadband network will impact GPS services and that there is no practical way to mitigate the potential interference at this time.” The FCC responded by indefinitely suspending LightSquared’s conditional waiver to operate the network, the Washington Post and others are reporting. The FCC will also issue a public notice on Wednesday seeking comment on the NTIA’s conclusions. The conditional waiver had been issued in January 2011.

LightSquared proposed to build an open-access, wholesale wireless broadband network integrating satellite and terrestrial technology, but government testing showed that the network would harm performance of 75 percent of GPS devices. GPS makers and the airline industry (which is building a GPS-based navigation system) were among numerous groups objecting to the plan, raising pressure on the FCC to block it. LightSquared can still fight on, but the NTIA recommendation and subsequent FCC decision dramatically reduce its chances of final success.

LightSquared controls spectrum originally intended for satellite communication, and wants approval to use it for terrestrial broadband service. The spectrum is adjacent to that used by GPS, and GPS makers complain the LightSquared signals will be so powerful they would cause widespread jamming of GPS devices. LightSquared has long insisted that the problem lies with the GPS community, which should have to redesign its receivers.

LightSquared has renewed its bitter complaints that the GPS industry has become “too big to fail” and is being protected by government even though its receivers often don’t filter frequencies properly and “listen” on adjacent spectrum, including that now held by LightSquared.

“You can get a cell phone for free with a two-year contract that is more resilient to GPS interference than what’s being installed in today’s commercial airliners,” the company said, though it pledged to keep working on a solution.

“This proceeding has revealed challenges to maximizing the opportunities of mobile broadband for our economy,” the FCC said in a statement. “In particular, it has revealed challenges to removing regulatory barriers on spectrum that restrict use of that spectrum for mobile broadband. This includes receivers that pick up signals from spectrum uses in neighboring bands. There are very substantial costs to our economy and to consumers of preventing the use of this and other spectrum for mobile broadband. Congress, the FCC, other federal agencies, and private sector stakeholders must work together in a concerted effort to reduce regulatory barriers and free up spectrum for mobile broadband. Part of this effort should address receiver performance to help ensure the most efficient use of all spectrum to drive our economy and best serve American consumers.”

Read the comments on this post

 

from Ars Technica

From Autoblog: Study: Cheaper cars are more expensive to insure

This makes no sense!! (OK, it does, but still!!!)
So basically, don’t buy too cheap of a car?! o.O
=======================================================================
2012 Honda Civic

Life is not fair. That’s about the only rational explanation we can offer for this little fact of life: A low MSRP is likely to mean big insurance payments.

Citing information from Insure.com, MarketWatch says the average price to insure a 2012 Honda Civic sedan, for instance, is about $2,353 per year, while a 2012 Toyota Sienna will run only $1,111 annually. The least expensive vehicles to insure tend to be relatively large vehicles, like minivans, trucks and SUV’s, according to the report. Even though those vehicles tend to be much more expensive than compact cars, they also tend to be driven by older, safer drivers.

Don’t think this is just a case of the rich getting richer, however, as expensive luxury and sports cars are none too cheap to insure either. The 2012 Audi R8 Spyder topped the Insure.com list of most expensive vehicles to insure at $3,384 per year. The Sienna had the lowest average insurance cost in the study, followed by the Jeep Patriot and Dodge Grand Caravan.

Insure.com’s editorial director, Amy Danise, told MarketWatch that the savings some people think they’re getting by buying small could evaporate because of the higher insurance premiums. Her advice to keep premiums low? “Buy the minivan, move to the farm, only drive it locally and make sure you never have an accident or kids,” she said.

I think we’ll just keep writing those checks to AAA instead.

 

from Autoblog

From Tech Review: Cancer Breath Test Enters Clinical Trials

Even if it’s only for lung cancer, this is huge if proven successful!!!

=================================================

A startup says its test can distinguish between subtypes of lung cancer.

Someday soon a breath test could do more than just tell if you’ve been drinking. Metabolomx, a startup in Mountain View, California, recently completed a clinical trial that shows that its breath test can spot lung cancer with 83 percent accuracy and can also distinguish between several different types of the disease, something that usually requires a biopsy. The accuracy of the test matches what’s possible with low-dose computerized tomography imaging of the lungs.

from Tech Review