Buy a used Phillishave, and replace the 2 dead cells inside and you will come out ahead. Bought 2 115VAC mains powered ones recently, though they are almost antiques.
So the only conceivable way this works on all types of hair is by using NIR lasers.
A couple Watt of <1300nm NIR is not eye safe though. The neat concept of FTIR would help with detecting hair to save on power but it can't contain the light. A simple water drop could couple out the light as well and if it can burn a hair it can burn a spot on your retina.
Who shaves with blades anymore though?
So the only conceivable way this works on all types of hair is by using NIR lasers.
A couple Watt of <1300nm NIR is not eye safe though. The neat concept of FTIR would help with detecting hair to save on power but it can't contain the light. A simple water drop could couple out the light as well and if it can burn a hair it can burn a spot on your retina.
Large amounts of the classical 1970s Laser Safety research are starting to show as being very conservative. Things like audience scanning during laser light shows in Europe and recent tests involving exposure to laser pointers have shown the damage thresholds for retinas that were put into place may be extra conservative. I'm a certified LSO for laser shows, my old hobby. So I keep an "eye" on this area. I'm usually the de-facto LSO for the area I'm working in, as not many organizations these days can afford a full time LSO. Remember when the standards were formed in the 1970s, calibrated devices for measuring laser power were in their infancy.
Couple that with high multiplication factors tacked on by researchers who
RIGHTFULLY wanted to ensure public safety, and you can see that some of the numbers are very high. Back then they did not have confocal imaging to see lesions or photochemical damage on the test animal tissue, either.
I still tell people never to fail to take precautions around with anything hotter then Class IIIA devices, but some of the classic thresholds and teachings are very, very conservative. There is a current campaign to allow "Ten Times MPE" for audience scanned laser shows by trained operators with certified fail safes in the scanning gear.
That said, the only way to ensure laser safety in ANY real world situation is to NEVER assume anything and take actual measurements.
Steve
So the only conceivable way this works on all types of hair is by using NIR lasers.
A couple Watt of <1300nm NIR is not eye safe though. The neat concept of FTIR would help with detecting hair to save on power but it can't contain the light. A simple water drop could couple out the light as well and if it can burn a hair it can burn a spot on your retina.
Large amounts of the classical 1970s Laser Safety research are starting to show as being very conservative. Things like audience scanning during laser light shows in Europe and recent tests involving exposure to laser pointers have shown the damage thresholds for retinas that were put into place may be extra conservative. I'm a certified LSO for laser shows, my old hobby. So I keep an "eye" on this area. I'm usually the de-facto LSO for the area I'm working in, as not many organizations these days can afford a full time LSO. Remember when the standards were formed in the 1970s, calibrated devices for measuring laser power were in their infancy.
Couple that with high multiplication factors tacked on by researchers who RIGHTFULLY wanted to ensure public safety, and you can see that some of the numbers are very high. Back then they did not have confocal imaging to see lesions or photochemical damage on the test animal tissue, either.
I still tell people never to fail to take precautions around with anything hotter then Class IIIA devices, but some of the classic thresholds and teachings are very, very conservative. There is a current campaign to allow "Ten Times MPE" for audience scanned laser shows by trained operators with certified fail safes in the scanning gear.
That said, the only way to ensure laser safety in ANY real world situation is to NEVER assume anything and take actual measurements.
Steve
If this is true then please post links to the studies.
/She who is skeptical....
Who shaves with blades anymore though?
I use both, nothing as clean as a wet shave with blades, it even removes the dead cellsupper layer. In a hurry i take the ele tronic shave.
Who shaves with blades anymore though?
This never produced clean shave for me regardless of make/model. I use blades and shaving gel.
Without more information I have to call BS on this....
I am calling bs too. The only difference between this campaign and other failed KS campaigns is that this product has a technical team with some established track record and that lends them some credibility. However, once you grow through their publicatipon records, and read up their own disclosures; nothing quite adds up. Talks about their "breakthrough" and new way to target hair is just words.
Hence, my conclusion is that they'll raise something over $2M through this campaign and then we'll probably not see any updates from them for months before they come back in 12-18 months saying they ran out of all the money
Who shaves with blades anymore though?
I use both, nothing as clean as a wet shave with blades, it even removes the dead cellsupper layer. In a hurry i take the ele tronic shave.
I have to agree that wet shave is a better option than using a shaver. I have a Braun foil shaver which gives me a pretty close shave on the flat portions of my face; but it doesnt come close at the neck. Phillips rotary shaver is quite the opposite, with slightly better at my neck area. Both of these are waterproof models so I can use it for a wet shave if needed. However, that kinda defeats the purpose of using a shaver; so I only stick with dry shave.
I try to atleast have a wet shave with a 5 bladed Gillette razor couple of times a week just because its less irritating, and gets me the closest shave out of all the other options.
As research these days is so technical and team oriented, you often cannot find out until you try.
Besides I think its time for a revolution. My favorite razor company just forced everyone to buy their new product by making the connector on the razor handle obsolete. Which was covered by calling it a "New and Improved" product. (again!)
We shall see...
Steve
As research these days is so technical and team oriented, you often cannot find out until you try.
Besides I think its time for a revolution. My favorite razor company just forced everyone to buy their new product by making the connector on the razor handle obsolete. Which was covered by calling it a "New and Improved" product. (again!)
We shall see...
Steve
I know that you are not likely to be able to sell this product in the US without FDA approval, and I sure hope you are right about the safety issue or your business venture will only last to the first law suite.
I'm a certified LSO for laser shows, my old hobby. So I keep an "eye" on this area.
Do you keep only the remaining eye ?
)
Is there any paper with your research on the subject and real data of the prototypes?
Will white hair absorb you l.a.s.e.r.?
They don't show a working device in their video, but at 1:30 in the video you can see how good a laser cuts hair
with probably even a much more powerful laser than what is used in the laser razors, judging by the heavy eye protection glasses.
Yeah. An AAA cell cannot supply more than 2W.
Powering a laser with that is possible, but with the bad efficiency of the laser, the so-so coupling to a fiber, the huge losses when leaking out light from the fiber at a very small contact point, touching the hair for, say, 50 ms. Let's saw the hair got 1mW of optical power ( and that's really optimistic)
That is not going to smell like burnt hair
I smell ..... I smell Bullshit !
Very interesting technology that they have.
The laser runs in a glas fiber and when a hair touches the fiber, the laser light gets coupled out and burns/cuts the hair.
But this system seems very delicate and fiddly. And it doesn't seem to cut the hairs reliably, or at least very slowly.
But maybe they can solve these problems.
Greetings
Very interesting technology that they have.
The laser runs in a glas fiber and when a hair touches the fiber, the laser light gets coupled out and burns/cuts the hair.
But this system seems very delicate and fiddly. And it doesn't seem to cut the hairs reliably, or at least very slowly.
But maybe they can solve these problems.
Greetings
To quote Tim The Tool Man Taylor "More Power"...
That is quite an inefficient cutting system. It burns your hair and if there is a glass fiber that is doing the work, it won't be long until it is covered by carbonated deposits of your burned hair follicles. It will have to be cleaned and the fiber surface will need to be smooth again and not scratched.
The smell is going to be quite awful (have you smelled burning hair?), and it will require a dry environment. You will not be using any shaving creams or soaps with this, and not in the shower either. It just seems to me like it is not the right solution for the problem. Another consideration is hair color.... is the cutting power based on absorption of light? Will dark hair cut easier than white or blonde?
Good luck to them for trying, I hope the backers won't be disappointed. I'll wait until I see one that really works the way it should. I'll wait and observe for now how it goes....
TIR need not only occur in a fiber, they could use a coated sapphire or quartz wedge for example... That would solve the frail fiber problem.
Steve
That is quite an inefficient cutting system. It burns your hair and if there is a glass fiber that is doing the work, it won't be long until it is covered by carbonated deposits of your burned hair follicles. It will have to be cleaned and the fiber surface will need to be smooth again and not scratched.
Assuming the carbon still couples out power and they pulse it a bit it might be self cleaning (won't evaporate it obviously, but temperature cycling might pulverize it).