Now this is cool - underwater WIFI

[avb3]

Its only experimental at this stage, but what a boon this would be for cruisers.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-24550015

[zeehag]

i wonder if the signals would be better than the ones we cannot receive via atmosphere.......

[Opie91]

But will the whales get headaches?

[MBLittle]

This is just a horrible idea. We're going to constantly bombard the ocean and all the creatures in it with non-stop sound waves so we can access Facebook while SCUBA diving? My faith in humanity is yet another notch lower.

[zboss]

Sounds like they are already doing this but they all use different standards.

[El Rubio]

Probably not as cool as you might think. Sound waves are extremely low frequency compared to RF and even with the best modulation schemes, will basically hit a brick wall long before any useful data rate is realized. It could be very useful for slow data like text, or other extremely small files.

[barnakiel]

I like it. I hope it will work. If I can get wifi mid-ocean, I buy it.

b.

[Richard5]

You can bet this is already occurring using the meso- and bathypelagic zones. If I were the US Navy or other such orgs I certainly would construct a system which is secure from unauthorized users.

With respect to sound waves, I would think info could be bundled into a burst or flash. I mean, to inquire of the EE's or sound engineers, don't you think the transmission of information (after all, this is the intended goal) does not require a constant stream, why couldn't it be a singular burst?

[MBLittle]

Originally Posted by Richard5

You can bet this is already occurring using the meso- and bathypelagic zones. If I were the US Navy or other such orgs I certainly would construct a system which is secure from unauthorized users. With respect to sound waves, I would think info could be bundled into a burst or flash. I mean, to inquire of the EE's or sound engineers, don't you think the transmission of information (after all, this is the intended goal) does not require a constant stream, why couldn't it be a singular burst?

Single bursts can only carry so much information. The more 1s and 0s you send on a burst like that, the more errors in receiving there are. More errors equates to incomplete or corrupt transmissions. More or less makes it not worth the time, effort or money.

[transmitterdan]

The story is a bit misleading. This isn't Wi-Fi at all and they are not doing it for Internet access. It's an idea for a network that uses sound frequencies instead of radio waves. Lower sound frequencies travel farther than higher frequencies. But even high sound frequencies (above human hearing) can transmit only a tiny fraction as much data as Wi-Fi radio waves.

The idea they have is ok. Science projects would be easier and cheaper if all the devices spoke the same language. But the Navy of any country isn't going to let just anybody listen in on their acoustic networks. And they might have a thing or two to say about noise pollution in the oceans. But anybody that thinks the ocean is a quiet place has never been scuba diving. It's noisy as heck down there what with all the fish crunching and stuff rolling around in the surf. Ocean going ships are noisy too.

[Richard5]

Originally Posted by MBLittle

Single bursts can only carry so much information. The more 1s and 0s you send on a burst like that, the more errors in receiving there are. More errors equates to incomplete or corrupt transmissions. More or less makes it not worth the time, effort or money.

If it were encrypted couldn't a single ideogram be sent rather than an entire block of information. The sender and the intended recipient(s) would know that a single word would mean an entire course of action which does not need to be said.

[Richard5]

Originally Posted by transmitterdan

But anybody that thinks the ocean is a quiet place has never been scuba diving.

I agree with all else you said but in response to this one thing you said...I have dove open ocean meaning thousands of miles from land in some very deep water. Still, even there the ocean is very noisy. I guess it's the krill or the diatoms.

[svmariane]

Originally Posted by Richard5

If it were encrypted couldn't a single ideogram be sent rather than an entire block of information. The sender and the intended recipient(s) would know that a single word would mean an entire course of action which does not need to be said.

Yeah... The Old North Church "One if by Land; Two if by Sea" type thing? You're delving into cryptology (one of its aspects,anyway) which is all well and good for certain uses. Example: contacting a submerged submarine via ELF, Extremely Low Frequency, with a freq range of zero to 300 Hz. That needs a transmitting antenna about 14.0 to 28 miles long, though.

But sound signals, audio, are in the range of 20 Hz to 20,000 Hz. (Plus or minus some, we need not quibble the exact range. To avoid argument let's bump it up to 40,000 Hz.) And sounds can be generated with underwater speakers the size of a child's hand. Heck - no need to repeat the whole concept of sonar here in the thread.

Still, even with compression formulas a data bit is a data bit and effective "WiFi" would require, what, a minimum 56 KBytes transfer rate? 56,000 X 8 = 448,000 bits and is just a tad over the 40,000 number for audio.

But to run with your query: using pre-agreed codes? Yes, communications of a SPECIFIC nature would be possible. EG: "diver in trouble", or, "return to surface ASAP", or "cocktails at 16:30 hrs". But that's not underwater "WiFi" where the diver's hand-held camera transmits (sans wires) up to the cockpit some colour, real time, live action images of the local coral fish population.

But it's an interesting concept. And it's a start.

[delmarrey]

Originally Posted by MBLittle

This is just a horrible idea. We're going to constantly bombard the ocean and all the creatures in it with non-stop sound waves so we can access Facebook while SCUBA diving? My faith in humanity is yet another notch lower.

How about sonar and fish finders. It's not going to change much.

[svBeBe]

Originally Posted by zboss

Sounds like they are already doing this but they all use different standards.

well every boat with a depth sounder does that now...are you still using your lead line?