Featured in the main post are three important posts so far:  speakers more environmentally sound, made of glass;  glass based hard drives as a final solution for communication and transmission;  an assemblage of information on the dangers of choosing microwaves as a means of communication.
 speakers more environmentally sound
Amazing Glass Speaker Technology
http://gstspeakers.com/ presented by http://www.a3network.com Greensound Technology™ offers specially engineered glass speakers that create a natural, high-fidelity sound. By utilizing a patented technology, this innovation provides an unmatched harmony of consistent high quality tone, everlasting performance, and elegant design to fit any venue. Unlike traditional speakers with components that break down over time, Greensound Technology™ is able to maintain this sophisticated level of performance forever. By employing the concept of sound projection thru glass, each of the glass speakers can deliver true 360° sound to produce an optimal listening experience for any member of an audience. Greensound Technology™ also maintains flexibility as a fundamental value. Several product lines and configurations are available for versatility, personalization, and optimal performance anywhere.
2. communication through the ages solved: glass hard drives
Computers are a very polluting industry. They got much less polluting with this option: glass memory. Plus, it solves other material category difficulties for information storage and communication that humans have always had for thousands of years. It's great for daily consumers and great for the long term views of cultural preservation and archives. Archival purposes are solved for the digital era completely. It's hard to overstate the importance of this development of glass hard drives for the human species culturally along of course with the importance for the ever cleaner environment.
Read this. Stop people from telling you we 'have to' degrade the environment to live on this planet. To say so is just someone's ignorance of our options to settle for an ongoing bad material history when we can have now a much better material future--and a durable cultural memory for the species at last.
Superman 'memory crystals' to become a reality as scientists store computer data on powerful glass hard drive
By Daniel Bates
15th August 2011
Computer users could soon be saving their work onto hard drives made of glass after scientists developed ‘memory crystals’ similar to those in the Superman films.
Researchers have used laser beams to alter glass and make it possible to store memory inside, just as Clark Kent does in his Fortress of Solitude.
They say the crystals will be able to store much more than conventional hard drives and are less prone to overheating or damage.
Poweful memory database: The process works by putting tiny dots called 'voxels' into pure silica glass which changes the way light moves through it
At home: Researchers have used laser beams to alter glass and make it possible to store memory inside, just as Clark Kent does in his Fortress of Solitude
Currently the glass shards can store up to 50GB of data, the equivalent of a whole Blu-ray Disc, on a piece the size of a mobile phone screen.
They can also withstand temperatures of up to 1,800F and last for thousands of years without the quality of the data stored degrading.
The process works by putting tiny dots called ‘voxels’ into pure silica glass which changes the way light moves through it.
These voxels can then be read using an optical decoder, allowing the user to write or delete data as often as they like.
Lead research Martynas Beresna, of Southampton University's optoelectronics research centre, said: ‘We have developed this memory which means data can be stored on the glass and last for ever. It could become a very stable and safe form of portable memory.
‘It could be very useful for organisations with big archives. At the moment companies have to back up their archives every five to ten years because hard-drive memory has a relatively short lifespan.
‘Museums who want to preserve information or places like the national archives where they have huge numbers of documents, would really benefit.'
The researchers are now working with a Lithuanian company to market the crystals.
In the Superman film series, the Fortress of Solitude was created by a crystal placed aboard a spacecraft Superman is put on to escape the war on his home planet of Krypton.
The teenage Clark Kent ends up in an ice field thought to be in the Arctic and when he throws it into the floor it becomes a cavernous crystal complex.
The memory crystals contain holograms and sound recordings of Superman’s parents Jor-El and Lara which are accessed by placing a glass ‘memory stick’ into a glass pipe.
3. microwave radiation dangers as a communication medium choice
995 - Barrie Trower (BONUS 10 of 10)
[Microwave Cancer, Lukemia, Genetic Damage Known--Dangers of Cell Phones, WiFi--for Kids and Adults; Court Cases Being Won For Removing WiFi on Health Grounds from Schools]
Mr. Trower has a background in covert military microwave weaponry from the 1960s, and from this he knows the dangers it can do. For years, microwave weaponry was perfected in select militaries of the world throughout the 20th century to cause health problems intentionally based on known different frequencies. Now, the same technologies and wave forms are in the public sector hurting you and others--in various applications from cell phones, WiFi, Bluetooth, cell phone masts, etc. Barrie Trower, U.K. citizen, knows much about the military history of microwave dangers and the updated public documented cancer/leukemia clusters of people around cell phone towers on school and private property. With this knowledge, he has been an expert witness across the world in court suits--some in which he won--revealing the documentation of dangers of microwave radiation that was crucial in removing cell phone towers.
The U.K. media hates to reveal such well documented dangers: he was told he was on a British "blacklist" as someone the BBC was "not allowed to talk to" on the issue. Despite his repeated attempts to contact the BBC, they refuse to even respond to him much less to make a documentary warning the public about the dangers. He reveals that it is the militaries of the world that are pressing this technology because it sets up an Orwellian spy grid in which even the spy/security services of all countries are completely transparent to the microwave network owners.
All parts of this two-day interview are worth seeing. (And search for Dr. George Carlo as well)
We are biologically endangered by the poor choice of utilizing electropollution as a mechanism of communication. I mean EMF as a mechanism of communiation.
The science of these dangers is not "still out". The information is available in droves about the dangers of: Wi-Fi, EMF, RF, cell phones, RFID tags, Verichip implants, cell phone towers, police communication frequency bands (TETRA), supermarket two way radios, etc. Most of this misses the major corporate owned media rounds, so it's definitely important to the consumer and citizen.
The infrastructure of your digital communication life definitely is giving you cancer, leading to numerous other health complications, leading to mental imbalances and other mental conditions in children and adults, and causing you to go blind with cataracts, and much more below.
"Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) is a controversial technology that uses tiny microchips to track items from a distance. These RFID microchips have earned the nickname "spychips" because each contains a unique identification number, like a Social Security number for things, that can be read silently and invisibly by radio waves. Over 40 of the world's leading privacy and civil liberties organizations have called for a moratorium on chipping individual consumer items because the technology can be used to track people without their knowledge or consent." Bennetton's RFID was nipped in the bud in 2003 with a huge consumer backlash. Now, companies like Levis Strauss keep mum about the U.S. test location in order to prevent such a consumer backlash, effectively lying to their consumers about adulteration of their clothing with RFID. Clothing retailer Benetton was hit hard by a consumer boycott led by Albrecht in 2003 when the company announced plans to embed RFID tags in its Sisley line of women's clothing. The resulting consumer outcry forced the company to retreat from its plans and disclaim its intentions. The same can happen to Levi Strauss doubly so because it is attempting to do this against the wide consumer opposition to being tracked much less by having it secretly introduced by Levi Strauss in the process.
A control grid, a prison without bars, is being introduced like the above on many levels.
This has health implications as well: RFID gives you cancer and a host of other problems. So if you are lax about your concerns of governmental tyranny, perhaps you will be concerned by the cancer increases in your young children from the RFID panopticon?
The "Intelligence Reform Act" of 2004 and the Real ID Act of 2005 in the USA established an ominous national ID system, ***forcing all states to standardize*** biometric-laden birth certificates, drivers licenses and other (RF)ID cards.
By 2008, personal data from USA citizens will be flowing into a biometric database full of DNA profiles that the Fuhrer's would be proud of. While coming to power over all law enforcement agencies with its directives and funding, DHS is regimenting U.S. medical establishment to collect and forward all health data....Medical history will be part of your 'file' and your DNA will be governmental property, suitable for culling? Remember, the Third Reich was unable to organize the eugenic Shoah/Holocaust without the technology of communication and monitoring in place. The USA has currently an even more improved form of eugenic monitoring than was utilized in Germany in the 1930s through silent, scannable RFID information and DNA databases. You are unable to organize a eugenic bioweapon driven Holocaust like PNAC is on record wanting without detailed individual genetic-biological lists, courtesy of, in the U.S. from 2008, a microwave based RFID file system with individual required bio-information-genetic markers carried at all times as an internal passport, mandated by the State. The next Holocaust is being organized right now via microwave RFID. All 'genetic minorities' should be concerned by the USA's activities. LET'S RECALL P.N.A.C.'s quote, signed off by dozens of appointee in Bush Administration: "...advanced forms of biological warfare that can target specific genotypes may transform biological warfare from the realm of terror to a politically useful tool."
Ban all uses of these frequencies now. They are bad for your health and a bad communications medium because they could be different frequencies.
Can I mention that the same frequencies for cell phones institutionalized right now are known to be 'useful' psychotronic mind/mood control and/or altering frequencies as long ago as the 1950s? Anyone out there getting cataracts from their cell phones?
CATARACTS AND CELL PHONES
July 29, 2005 .
CELL PHONE RADIATION MAY CAUSE VISUAL DAMAGE
In a recent scientific study conducted by a team of researchers from the Technion, a possible link between microwave radiation, similar to the type found in cellular phones, and different kinds of damage to the visual system was found. At least one kind of damage seems to accumulate over time and not heal, challenging the common view and leading the researchers to the assertion that the duration of exposure is not less important than the intensity of the irradiation.
With RFID tags, Verichip implants, and cell phones (all microwave band frequencies) capable of giving people cancer and a host of other diseases from reduced bodily soundness, a complete switch away from these harmful spectrum bands is required.
More data on these claims below, and one film about cell phone electropollution and cancer.
First, the Verichip:
AP: FDA approved microchip implants linked to animal cancer
( Published on Monday, September 10, 2007 )
A series of veterinary and toxicology studies, dating to the mid-1990s, stated that chip implants had "induced" malignant tumors in some lab mice and rats
AP: FDA approved microchip implants linked to animal cancer
Published on Monday, September 10, 2007.
Source: Associated Press - Todd Lewan AP Writer
When the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved implanting microchips in humans, the manufacturer said it would save lives, letting doctors scan the tiny transponders to access patients' medical records almost instantly. The FDA found "reasonable assurance" the device was safe, and a sub-agency even called it one of 2005's top "innovative technologies."
But neither the company nor the regulators publicly mentioned this: A series of veterinary and toxicology studies, dating to the mid-1990s, stated that chip implants had "induced" malignant tumors in some lab mice and rats.
"The transponders were the cause of the tumors," said Keith Johnson, a retired toxicologic pathologist, explaining in a phone interview the findings of a 1996 study he led at the Dow Chemical Co. in Midland, Mich.
Leading cancer specialists reviewed the research for The Associated Press and, while cautioning that animal test results do not necessarily apply to humans, said the findings troubled them. Some said they would not allow family members to receive implants, and all urged further research before the glass-encased transponders are widely implanted in people.
To date, about 2,000 of the so-called radio frequency identification, or RFID, devices have been implanted in humans worldwide, according to VeriChip Corp. The company, which sees a target market of 45 million Americans for its medical monitoring chips, insists the devices are safe, as does its parent company, Applied Digital Solutions, of Delray Beach, Fla.
"We stand by our implantable products which have been approved by the FDA and/or other U.S. regulatory authorities," Scott Silverman, VeriChip Corp. chairman and chief executive officer, said in a written response to AP questions.
The company was "not aware of any studies that have resulted in malignant tumors in laboratory rats, mice and certainly not dogs or cats," but he added that millions of domestic pets have been implanted with microchips, without reports of significant problems.
"In fact, for more than 15 years we have used our encapsulated glass transponders with FDA approved anti-migration caps and received no complaints regarding malignant tumors caused by our product."
The FDA also stands by its approval of the technology.
Did the agency know of the tumor findings before approving the chip implants? The FDA declined repeated AP requests to specify what studies it reviewed.
The FDA is overseen by the Department of Health and Human Services, which, at the time of VeriChip's approval, was headed by Tommy Thompson. Two weeks after the device's approval took effect on Jan. 10, 2005, Thompson left his Cabinet post, and within five months was a board member of VeriChip Corp. and Applied Digital Solutions. He was compensated in cash and stock options.
Thompson, until recently a candidate for the 2008 Republican presidential nomination, says he had no personal relationship with the company as the VeriChip was being evaluated, nor did he play any role in FDA's approval process of the RFID tag.
"I didn't even know VeriChip before I stepped down from the Department of Health and Human Services," he said in a telephone interview.
Also making no mention of the findings on animal tumors was a June report by the ethics committee of the American Medical Association, which touted the benefits of implantable RFID devices.
Had committee members reviewed the literature on cancer in chipped animals?
No, said Dr. Steven Stack, an AMA board member with knowledge of the committee's review.
Was the AMA aware of the studies?
No, he said.
Published in veterinary and toxicology journals between 1996 and 2006, the studies found that lab mice and rats injected with microchips sometimes developed subcutaneous "sarcomas" - malignant tumors, most of them encasing the implants.
- A 1998 study in Ridgefield, Conn., of 177 mice reported cancer incidence to be slightly higher than 10 percent - a result the researchers described as "surprising."
- A 2006 study in France detected tumors in 4.1 percent of 1,260 microchipped mice. This was one of six studies in which the scientists did not set out to find microchip-induced cancer but noticed the growths incidentally. They were testing compounds on behalf of chemical and pharmaceutical companies; but they ruled out the compounds as the tumors' cause. Because researchers only noted the most obvious tumors, the French study said, "These incidences may therefore slightly underestimate the true occurrence" of cancer.
- In 1997, a study in Germany found cancers in 1 percent of 4,279 chipped mice. The tumors "are clearly due to the implanted microchips," the authors wrote.
Caveats accompanied the findings. "Blind leaps from the detection of tumors to the prediction of human health risk should be avoided," one study cautioned. Also, because none of the studies had a control group of animals that did not get chips, the normal rate of tumors cannot be determined and compared to the rate with chips implanted.
Still, after reviewing the research, specialists at some pre-eminent cancer institutions said the findings raised red flags.
"There's no way in the world, having read this information, that I would have one of those chips implanted in my skin, or in one of my family members," said Dr. Robert Benezra, head of the Cancer Biology Genetics Program at the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center in New York.
Before microchips are implanted on a large scale in humans, he said, testing should be done on larger animals, such as dogs or monkeys. "I mean, these are bad diseases. They are life-threatening. And given the preliminary animal data, it looks to me that there's definitely cause for concern."
Dr. George Demetri, director of the Center for Sarcoma and Bone Oncology at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston, agreed. Even though the tumor incidences were "reasonably small," in his view, the research underscored "certainly real risks" in RFID implants.
In humans, sarcomas, which strike connective tissues, can range from the highly curable to "tumors that are incredibly aggressive and can kill people in three to six months," he said.
At the Jackson Laboratory in Maine, a leader in mouse genetics research and the initiation of cancer, Dr. Oded Foreman, a forensic pathologist, also reviewed the studies at the AP's request.
At first he was skeptical, suggesting that chemicals administered in some of the studies could have caused the cancers and skewed the results. But he took a different view after seeing that control mice, which received no chemicals, also developed the cancers. "That might be a little hint that something real is happening here," he said. He, too, recommended further study, using mice, dogs or non-human primates.
Dr. Cheryl London, a veterinarian oncologist at Ohio State University, noted: "It's much easier to cause cancer in mice than it is in people. So it may be that what you're seeing in mice represents an exaggerated phenomenon of what may occur in people."
Tens of thousands of dogs have been chipped, she said, and veterinary pathologists haven't reported outbreaks of related sarcomas in the area of the neck, where canine implants are often done. (Published reports detailing malignant tumors in two chipped dogs turned up in AP's four-month examination of research on chips and health. In one dog, the researchers said cancer appeared linked to the presence of the embedded chip; in the other, the cancer's cause was uncertain.)
Nonetheless, London saw a need for a 20-year study of chipped canines "to see if you have a biological effect." Dr. Chand Khanna, a veterinary oncologist at the National Cancer Institute, also backed such a study, saying current evidence "does suggest some reason to be concerned about tumor formations."
Meanwhile, the animal study findings should be disclosed to anyone considering a chip implant, the cancer specialists agreed.
To date, however, that hasn't happened.
The product that VeriChip Corp. won approval for use in humans is an electronic capsule the size of two grains of rice. Generally, it is implanted with a syringe into an anesthetized portion of the upper arm.
When prompted by an electromagnetic scanner, the chip transmits a unique code. With the code, hospital staff can go on the Internet and access a patient's medical profile that is maintained in a database by VeriChip Corp. for an annual fee.
VeriChip Corp., whose parent company has been marketing radio tags for animals for more than a decade, sees an initial market of diabetics and people with heart conditions or Alzheimer's disease, according to a Securities and Exchange Commission filing.
The company is spending millions to assemble a national network of hospitals equipped to scan chipped patients.
But in its SEC filings, product labels and press releases, VeriChip Corp. has not mentioned the existence of research linking embedded transponders to tumors in test animals.
When the FDA approved the device, it noted some Verichip risks: The capsules could migrate around the body, making them difficult to extract; they might interfere with defibrillators, or be incompatible with MRI scans, causing burns. While also warning that the chips could cause "adverse tissue reaction," FDA made no reference to malignant growths in animal studies.
Did the agency review literature on microchip implants and animal cancer?
Dr. Katherine Albrecht, a privacy advocate and RFID expert, asked shortly after VeriChip's approval what evidence the agency had reviewed. When FDA declined to provide information, she filed a Freedom of Information Act request. More than a year later, she received a letter stating there were no documents matching her request.
"The public relies on the FDA to evaluate all the data and make sure the devices it approves are safe," she says, "but if they're not doing that, who's covering our backs?"
Late last year, Albrecht unearthed at the Harvard medical library three studies noting cancerous tumors in some chipped mice and rats, plus a reference in another study to a chipped dog with a tumor. She forwarded them to the AP, which subsequently found three additional mice studies with similar findings, plus another report of a chipped dog with a tumor.
Asked if it had taken these studies into account, the FDA said VeriChip documents were being kept confidential to protect trade secrets. After AP filed a FOIA request, the FDA made available for a phone interview Anthony Watson, who was in charge of the VeriChip approval process.
"At the time we reviewed this, I don't remember seeing anything like that," he said of animal studies linking microchips to cancer. A literature search "didn't turn up anything that would be of concern."
In general, Watson said, companies are expected to provide safety-and-effectiveness data during the approval process, "even if it's adverse information."
Watson added: "The few articles from the literature that did discuss adverse tissue reactions similar to those in the articles you provided, describe the responses as foreign body reactions that are typical of other implantable devices. The balance of the data provided in the submission supported approval of the device."
Another implantable device could be a pacemaker, and indeed, tumors have in some cases attached to foreign bodies inside humans. But Dr. Neil Lipman, director of the Research Animal Resource Center at Memorial Sloan-Kettering, said it's not the same. The microchip isn't like a pacemaker that's vital to keeping someone alive, he added, "so at this stage, the payoff doesn't justify the risks."
Silverman, VeriChip Corp.'s chief executive, disagreed. "Each month pet microchips reunite over 8,000 dogs and cats with their owners," he said. "We believe the VeriMed Patient Identification System will provide similar positive benefits for at-risk patients who are unable to communicate for themselves in an emergency."
And what of former HHS secretary Thompson?
When asked what role, if any, he played in VeriChip's approval, Thompson replied: "I had nothing to do with it. And if you look back at my record, you will find that there has never been any improprieties whatsoever."
FDA's Watson said: "I have no recollection of him being involved in it at all." VeriChip Corp. declined comment.
Thompson vigorously campaigned for electronic medical records and healthcare technology both as governor of Wisconsin and at HHS. While in President Bush's Cabinet, he formed a "medical innovation" task force that worked to partner FDA with companies developing medical information technologies.
At a "Medical Innovation Summit" on Oct. 20, 2004, Lester Crawford, the FDA's acting commissioner, thanked the secretary for getting the agency "deeply involved in the use of new information technology to help prevent medication error." One notable example he cited: "the implantable chips and scanners of the VeriChip system our agency approved last week."
After leaving the Cabinet and joining the company board, Thompson received options on 166,667 shares of VeriChip Corp. stock, and options on an additional 100,000 shares of stock from its parent company, Applied Digital Solutions, according to SEC records. He also received $40,000 in cash in 2005 and again in 2006, the filings show.
The Project on Government Oversight called Thompson's actions "unacceptable" even though they did not violate what the independent watchdog group calls weak conflict-of-interest laws.
"A decade ago, people would be embarrassed to cash in on their government connections. But now it's like the Wild West," said the group's executive director, Danielle Brian.
Thompson is a partner at Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP, a Washington law firm that was paid $1.2 million for legal services it provided the chip maker in 2005 and 2006, according to SEC filings.
He stepped down as a VeriChip Corp. director in March to seek the GOP presidential nomination, and records show that the company gave his campaign $7,400 before he bowed out of the race in August.
In a TV interview while still on the board, Thompson was explaining the benefits - and the ease - of being chipped when an interviewer interrupted:
"I'm sorry, sir. Did you just say you would get one implanted in your arm?"
"Absolutely," Thompson replied. "Without a doubt."
"No concerns at all?"
But to date, Thompson has yet to be chipped himself.
Microchip implants cause fast-growing, malignant tumors in lab animals
( Published on Saturday, September 08, 2007 )
Damning research findings could spell the end of VeriChip
Source: Intel Daily - Dr. Katherine Albrecht
The Associated Press will issue a breaking story this weekend revealing that microchip implants have induced cancer in laboratory animals and dogs, says privacy expert and long-time VeriChip opponent Dr. Katherine Albrecht.
As the AP will report, a series of research articles spanning more than a decade found that mice and rats injected with glass-encapsulated RFID transponders developed malignant, fast-growing, lethal cancers in up to 1% to 10% of cases. The tumors originated in the tissue surrounding the microchips and often grew to completely surround the devices, the researchers said.
Albrecht first became aware of the microchip-cancer link when she and her "Spychips" co-author, Liz McIntyre, were contacted by a pet owner whose dog had died from a chip-induced tumor. Albrecht then found medical studies showing a causal link between microchip implants and cancer in other animals. Before she brought the research to the AP's attention, the studies had somehow escaped public notice.
A four-month AP investigation turned up additional documents, several of which had been published before VeriChip's parent company, Applied Digital Solutions, sought FDA approval to market the implant for humans. The VeriChip received FDA approval in 2004 under the watch of then Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy Thompson who later joined the company's board.
Under FDA policy, it would have been VeriChip's responsibility to bring the adverse studies to the FDA's attention, but VeriChip CEO Scott Silverman claims the company was unaware of the research.
Albrecht expressed skepticism that a company like VeriChip, whose primary business is microchip implants, would be unaware of relevant studies in the published literature.
"For Mr. Silverman not to know about this research would be negligent. If he did know about these studies, he certainly had an incentive to keep them quiet," said Albrecht. "Had the FDA known about the cancer link, they might never have approved his company's product."
Since gaining FDA approval, VeriChip has aggressively targeted diabetic and dementia patients, and recently announced that it had chipped 90 Alzheimer's patients and their caregivers in Florida. Employees in the Mexican Attorney General's Office, workers in a U.S. security firm, and club-goers in Europe have also been implanted.
Albrecht expressed concern for those who have received a chip implant, urging them to get the devices removed as soon as possible.
"These new revelations change everything," she said. "Why would anyone take the risk of having a cancer chip in their arm?"
CASPIAN (Consumers Against Supermarket Privacy Invasion and Numbering) is a grass-roots consumer group fighting retail surveillance schemes since 1999 and irresponsible RFID use since 2002. With thousands of members in all 50 U.S. states and over 30 countries worldwide, CASPIAN seeks to educate consumers about marketing strategies that invade their privacy and encourage privacy-conscious shopping habits across the retail spectrum.
FOR MORE INFORMATION OR TO ARRANGE AN INTERVIEW, PLEASE CONTACT:
Dr. Katherine Albrecht
Founder and Director, CASPIAN Consumer Privacy
(877) 287-5854, kma[at]spychips.com
Host of "Uncovering the Truth"
We the People Radio Network, M-F 10AM-12PM EST
Co-author of "SPYCHIPS: How Major Corporations and Government Plan to Track Your Every Move with RFID"
Human Chipping: http://www.AntiChips.com
Shopper Cards: http://www.NoCards.org
Bio online at: http://www.spychips.com/media/katherine-albrecht.html
More on the cell phone frequencies:
Dangers of the Wireless Cell Phone, Wi-Fi and EMF (Electromagnetic Frequency) Age, Part 1 (9 min) (four parts)
World-renowned Epidemiologist Dr. George Carlo provided a high impact presentation that exposed the dangers of living in the wireless age in a way that everyone could understand. As the chief scientist of the world's largest research effort into wireless safety, the Safe Wireless Initiative (SWI), he discussed the effects of electromagnetic radiation, specifically Information Carrying Radio Waves (IRCWs) and how they negatively affect the body's ability to function and repair damage affecting our cells. This is great information about how emf effects our health.
Recent Swedish epidemiological studies confirm that, after 2,000 hours of cellular phone exposure, or a latency period of about 10 years, brain cancer risk rises by 240 percent. Brain cancer has leaped forward as the #1 cancer killer of people in the world. There are about 2.5 billion users of cell phones in 2007.
What about graphene?
What is Graphene?
Ideas of flexible graphene:
The wonder stuff that could change the world: Graphene is so strong a sheet of it as thin as clingfilm could support an elephant
By David Derbyshire
Last updated at 7:39 AM on 7th October 2011
Revolutionary: Graphene, which is formed of honeycomb pattern of carbon atoms, could be the most important new material [transparent, electric, and strong building material as well] material for a century [it's a completely unique mixture of consumptive categories in this material: a thin, transparent, super-strong (harder than diamond) structural building material that has electrical conduction properties better than copper (copper is hardly a structural material), though graphene's lack of semiconductor principles may make it difficult for some fantasy computer operations that currently are based on mostly silicon's physical capacities of 'on/off' switching in the material itself (there are other options for this switching though than polluting silicon industries: see the category on communication materials for more options); thus with graphene always 'on' in other words, and very efficiently so, it makes it difficult to do any anticipated Boolean/operations in the material itself in base 2--the insight of all computers from Shannon onward.]
Revolutionary: Graphene, which is formed of honeycomb pattern of carbon atoms, could be the most important new material for a century
It is tougher than diamond, but stretches like rubber. It is virtually invisible, conducts electricity and heat better than any copper wire and weighs next to nothing. Meet graphene — an astonishing new material which could revolutionise almost every part of our lives.
Some researchers claim it’s the most important substance to be created since the first synthetic plastic more than 100 years ago.
If it lives up to its promise, it could lead to mobile phones that you roll up and put behind your ear, high definition televisions as thin as wallpaper, and bendy electronic newspapers that readers could fold away into a tiny square.
It could transform medicine, and replace silicon as the raw material used to make computer chips [perhaps everything except this however, see note above.]
The ‘miracle material’ was discovered in Britain just seven years ago, and the buzz around it is extraordinary.
Last year, it won two Manchester University scientists the Nobel Prize for physics, and this week Chancellor George Osborne pledged £50 million towards developing technologies based on the super-strong substance.
In terms of its economics, one of the most exciting parts of the graphene story is its cost. Normally when scientists develop a new wonder material, the price is eye-wateringly high.
But graphene is made by chemically processing graphite — the cheap material in the ‘lead’ of pencils. Every few months researchers come up with new, cheaper ways of mass producing graphene, so that some experts believe it could eventually cost less than £4 per pound.
But is graphene really the wonder stuff of the 21st century?
For a material with so much promise, it has an incredibly simple chemical structure. A sheet of graphene is just a single layer of carbon atoms, locked together in a strongly-bonded honeycomb pattern.
Pledge: George Osborne, pictured visiting the University of Manchester lab where graphene is being researched, has said £50m will be set aside to help with development of technologies based on the substance
That makes it the thinnest material ever made. You would need to stack three million graphene sheets on top of each other to get a pile one milimetre high. It is also the strongest substance known to mankind — 200 times stronger than steel and several times tougher than diamond.
A sheet of graphene as thin as clingfilm could hold the weight of an elephant. In fact, according to one calculation, an elephant would need to balance precariously on the end of a pencil to break through that same sheet.
Despite its strength, it is extremely flexible and can be stretched by 20 per cent without any damage.
It is also a superb conductor of electricity — far better than copper, traditionally used for wiring — and is the best conductor of heat on the planet.
But perhaps the most remarkable feature of graphene is where it comes from. Graphene is made from graphite, a plentiful grey mineral mostly mined in Chile, India and Canada.
A pencil lead is made up of many millions of layers of graphene. These layers are held together only weakly — which is why they slide off each other when a pencil is moved across the page.
Graphene was first isolated by Professors Konstantin Novoselov and Andrew Geim at Manchester University in 2004. The pair used sticky tape to strip away thin flakes of graphite, then attached it to a silicon plate which allowed the researchers to identify the tiny layers through a microscope.
Discovery: Professors Andre Geim, left, and Dr Konstantin Novoselov first isolated graphene in 2004. They later won the Nobel Prize for Physics last year
Russian-born Prof Novoselov, 37, believes graphene could change everything from electronics to computers.
‘I don’t think it has been over-hyped,’ he said. ‘It has attracted a lot of attention because it is so simple — it is the thinnest possible matter — and yet it has so many unique properties.
‘There are hundreds of properties which are unique or superior to other materials. Because it is only one atom thick it is quite transparent — not many materials that can conduct electricity which are transparent.’
Its discovery has triggered a boom for material science. Last year, there were 3,000 research papers on its properties, and 400 patent applications.
The electronics industry is convinced graphene will lead to gadgets that make the iPhone and Kindle seem like toys from the age of steam trains.
Modern touch-sensitive screens use indium tin oxide — a substance that is transparent but which carries electrical currents. But indium tin oxide is expensive, and gadgets made from it shatter or crack easily when dropped. Replacing indium tin oxide with graphene-based compounds could allow for flexible, paper-thin computer and television screens. South Korean researchers have created a 25in flexible touch-screen using graphene.
Ancient history: If the development of graphene is successful it will make the iPad and Kindle seem like toys from the age of the steam train
Imagine reading your Daily Mail on a sheet of electric paper. Tapping a button on the corner could instantly update the contents or move to the next page. Once you’ve finished reading the paper, it could be folded up and used afresh tomorrow.
Other researchers are looking at many ways of using graphene in medicine. It is also being touted as an alternative to the carbon-fibre bodywork of boats and bikes [and car tires?] Graphene in tyres could make them stronger.
Some even claim it will replace the silicon in computer chips. In the future, a graphene credit card could store as much information as today’s computers.
‘We are talking of a number of unique properties combined in one material which probably hasn’t happened before,’ said Prof Novoselov. ‘You might want to compare it to plastic. But graphene is as versatile as all the plastics put together.
‘It’s a big claim, but it’s not bold. That’s exactly why there are so many researchers working on it.’
Dr Sue Mossman, curator of materials at the Science Museum in London, says graphene has parallels with Bakelite — the first man-made plastic, invented in 1907.
Resistant to heat and chemicals, and an excellent electrical insulator, Bakelite easily made electric plugs, radios, cameras and telephones.
‘Bakelite was the material of its time. Is this the material of our times?’ she says. ‘Historically we have been really good at invention in this country, but we’ve been really bad at capitalising on it.’
If graphene isn’t to go the same way as other great British inventions which were never properly exploited commercially at home — such as polythene and carbon fibre — it will need massive investment in research and development.
Core material: Graphene comes from a base material of graphite and is so thin that three millions sheets of the substance would be needed to make a layer 1mm thick
That’s why the Government’s move to support its development in the UK got a warm round of applause at the Conservative Party conference.
But compared to the investment in graphene in America and Asia, the £50 million promised by the Chancellor is negligible. South Korea is investing £195million into the technology. The European Commission is expected to invest one billion euros into graphene in the next ten years.
Yet despite the flurry of excitement, many researchers doubt graphene can live up to such high expectations.
It wouldn’t be the first wonder material that failed to deliver. In 1985 another form of carbon, called fullerenes or buckyballs, was hailed as the revolutionary new material of the era. Despite the hype, there has yet to be a major practical application.
And there are already some problems with using graphene. It is so good at conducting electricity that turning it into devices like transistors — which control the flow of electrical currents, so need to be able to stop electricity flowing through them — has so far proved problematic.
Earlier this year computer company IBM admitted that it was ‘difficult to imagine’ graphene replacing silicon in computer chips.
And sceptics point out that most new materials — such as carbon-fibre — take 20 years from invention before they can be used commercial use.
You might think from all the hype, that the road to a great graphene revolution has already been mapped out.
But its future is far from certain. In fact it’s barely been penciled out in rough.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2045825/Graphene-strong-sheet-clingfilm-support-elephant.html#ixzz1aMt2nBVJ