originally posted by: INEVERQUIT
I have been hearing for sometime now how micro-chipping is being used for gps in animals ...
It's not. RFID and GPS are two very disparate technologies. Dog implants are very bottom level near-field devices that return a serial number when
interrogated. They don't have (and can't have) GPS receivers. And it wouldn't make sense anyway, if you think about it.
and how there are even some parents that have done this with their children (Trax is a GPS-tracker that lets you locate your children and pets -
through a mobile App or computer. It's smart, affordable and getting started is as easy as a ...).
This isn't and can't be an implant. These devices are actually GPS receivers combined with a GSM phone module, an antenna generally hidden in the
strap and a decent sized battery you have to recharge fairly often. None of this is the sort of thing you can stick into someone.
There has, also been many that think it will only be a matter of time before we all are required to be "chipped".
Generally these people don't understand technology all that well and are religious, but not enough so that they actually try to understand what their
religion is telling them. So you get people who read the Revelation of St John and try to bludgeon the concept of 'the mark of the Beast' into fitting
an RFID. But they dodge out on the part where they consider what it is that a Jewish man at the time would wear on his forehead and hand, and don't
bother to dig into 'what does it mean by "mark"' and lacking this information, the concept of a 'chip' makes sense to them.
Nano-technology (the branch of technology that deals with dimensions and tolerances of less than 100 nanometers, especially the manipulation of
individual atoms and molecules) has been around for decades now, so, maybe we are already implanted and do not even realize it.
RF technology, the branch of technology that deals with radiating away propagating EM signals, will tell you that you can't make teeny weeny antennas
for big radio signals. It also will tell you that the smaller the antenna, the shorter the wavelength you can efficiently receive and transmit with
it. It will also tell you that the higher that frequency goes, the more power it takes to produce it, and the faster it is absorbed into the salt
water that is inside your body.
This is one reason why you don't see nanobot conceptual designs using radio, after they get below a certain size. That's because you just can't run a
THz radio very well with a few atoms.
One thing you see people do who don't design with this sort of thing, and that's read bits and pieces of data sheets and press releases and then
misunderstand what the vendor is trying to tell them. The usefulness of making the chip part of an RFID tag small is that the smaller it is, the
cheaper it is. Also, you don't have as many problems with flex cracking the part. But the chip is not the tag. It's a part of the tag. Unless you're
designing the thing with DIP packaged CMOS on a breadboard for a lab experiment, the antenna part of the tag sets the size. The chip can be the size
of an atom and the tag's size won't change a bit, because the design's size is antenna bound when the chip is smaller than, say, a pistachio.
And it won't work without the antenna. And the antenna's size is set by the frequency it's designed for.
So you can't look at the electronics part of the tag and say 'wow, if it gets smaller they could INJECT ME WITH IT!!!' because it doesn't work that
way. At all.
That's just ignoring all the other issues, like the fact you have to use h-field parts for implants, and the range is very circumscribed by physics.
But no, there are no nano GPS tags that can dial up the GSM network from inside you.