Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

New 4100 Lumen Flashlight Can Set Things On Fire

Posted by ScuttleMonkey on Mon Jan 28, 2008 04:04 PM
from the no-telling-ghost-stories-with-this-baby dept.
i4u writes "Engadget is reporting that Wicked Lasers has introduced The Torch. It is the world's brightest and most powerful flashlight. The Flashlight is capable of melting plastic, lighting paper on fire within seconds, and if you like, fry an egg or a marshmallow on a stick. At 4100 lumens, The Torch is 100 lumens more powerful than The Polarion Helios, the former most powerful flashlight, and retails for around $300. The Torch is apparently also undergoing review at the Guinness Book of World Records."
+ -
story

Related Stories

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • Campfires! (Score:5, Funny)

    by San-LC (1104027) on Monday January 28 2008, @04:07PM (#22212922)
    It would make campfire storytelling even more interesting! "Here's the tale of the man whose face melted off, oooOoooOoohhh AGHH MY FACE IS FALLING OFF!" Subsequently, many camp counselors have crapped their pants at the mere thought.
      • Re:Campfires! (Score:4, Insightful)

        by tylernt (581794) on Monday January 28 2008, @10:30PM (#22217404)

        Sweet ... now I can strap one of these on my car, pointing backwards,
        Me too, but I want to flick it on whenever an SUV pulls up behind my car at night and fries my retinas with their high-mounted headlights.

        Revenge is a dish that is best served cold, but this would work pretty well too.
      • by bobstay (137547) on Tuesday January 29 2008, @04:21AM (#22219338) Homepage
        Maybe you have the muscles in your right arm to pump away at that torch for 48 hours straight, but most of us haven't had quite that much practice.
        • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 29 2008, @10:36AM (#22221812)

          right arm ... pump away ... for 48 hours straight, but most of us haven't had quite that much practice.
          You must be new here.
  • Omg (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 28 2008, @04:08PM (#22212936)
    It pumps out so much light that there is a recoil when you switch it on!
  • warning labels (Score:5, Insightful)

    by LM741N (258038) on Monday January 28 2008, @04:09PM (#22212950)
    Last time I bought an extension cord it had 4 different warning labels I had to take off. I wonder how many warning labels this flashlight will carry?
    Welcome to the Nanny Nation.
    • Re:warning labels (Score:5, Insightful)

      by riseoftheindividual (1214958) on Monday January 28 2008, @04:15PM (#22213070) Homepage
      I wish it was only warning labels. After reading TFA and watching that video, all I could think was "I better order before it's banned". Nanny nation indeed.
    • Re:warning labels (Score:5, Insightful)

      by apathy maybe (922212) on Monday January 28 2008, @04:16PM (#22213096) Homepage Journal
      What the fuck? Why shouldn't it have a shit load of warning labels? I can understand you complaining about an extension cord (though seriously, some people are stupid enough to need them), but a light that can burn shit?

      It is fucking dangerous! Maybe you think that chainsaws shouldn't have warning labels as well? "Mummy what happens if I do this? Ahhhhhhhhhhhh" (though actually, all the chainsaws I've handled recently have quite good safety features).

      • by Ultra64 (318705) on Monday January 28 2008, @04:34PM (#22213372) Homepage

        It is fucking dangerous! Maybe you think that chainsaws shouldn't have warning labels as well?

        Of course they shouldn't. If someone is so brain damaged that they can't figure out that a SAW can hurt them, why shouldn't they suffer the consequences?

        You can't protect stupid people from themselves, and you shouldn't try. It just encourages the spread of stupidity among the general population.
        • Re:warning labels (Score:5, Insightful)

          by jddj (1085169) on Monday January 28 2008, @05:53PM (#22214554)

          Of course they shouldn't. If someone is so brain damaged that they can't figure out that a SAW can hurt them, why shouldn't they suffer the consequences?

          Chainsaws have warning labels because they can hurt the user in ways the novice wouldn't expect by looking at the saw. Thinks like binding in the kerf and kicking.

      • Re:warning labels (Score:5, Informative)

        by Mr. Slippery (47854) <`tms' `at' `infamous.net'> on Monday January 28 2008, @05:27PM (#22214124) Homepage

        but a light that can burn shit?

        Only if you put the shit right up against the light.

        A 300 watt halogen bulb puts out almost 6000 lumens [acehardware.com], much more powerful than this light. You can start a fire with one, but not across the room or anything. You have to get the combustibles right up against it. (Which is why the newer floor lamps using this sort of bulb have a safety cage.)

        There are many things in your house more dangerous than this super-bright flashlight. Should they all have labels? The problem is that when everything has a warning label, the chatter drowns out the important warnings.

        • Re:warning labels (Score:4, Insightful)

          by shawn(at)fsu (447153) on Monday January 28 2008, @04:36PM (#22213400) Homepage
          Well it does kind of look like a regular mag lite at least looking at the picture on TFA. If it does look like a normal flashlight one would hope it has a warning not for the buyer but for the safety of others where it is kept.
          • Re:warning labels (Score:5, Insightful)

            by pla (258480) on Monday January 28 2008, @04:48PM (#22213576) Journal
            one would hope it has a warning not for the buyer but for the safety of others where it is kept.

            Quiz time - You just bought a cool black anodized aluminum high-powered flashlight, with a huge ugly orange sticker on the handle warning you not to look at the beam. Do you:

            A) Have the warning professionally engraved directly onto the barrel of the flashlight, so it can never wear off,
            B) Remove that sucker before you even put in the batteries,
            C) Leave the sticker alone, ruining the look of your new toy, or
            D) Take it back to the store and ask for one with a more permanantly-affixed label?
        • Re:warning labels (Score:5, Insightful)

          by syukton (256348) on Monday January 28 2008, @04:49PM (#22213584)
          They keep people in the gene pool who Darwin-the-Lifeguard needs to toss out ASAP.

          People like the child/wife/friend/visitor who picks up this neat little flashlight and, while remarking "I hate these maglite knock-offs" proceeds to permanently blind themselves?

          As another commenter pointed out, you can't use the design and form-factor of a harmless device when packaging an extremely dangerous device, because you will confuse and possibly harm people unintentionally. Would you package rat poison to look like candy bars or perhaps like a nice slice of deliciously moist cake? Warning labels protect people. They may not serve to protect the buyer of a given device, because they generally tend to know what they're buying and what it's used/not used for; but it can serve to protect somebody unfamiliar with the device, somebody who may happen upon it by random chance. If I owned one of these lights, I would have a sticker on it that said "DO NOT POINT AT FACE. EVER. SRSLY."
    • Re:warning labels (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Pojut (1027544) on Monday January 28 2008, @04:19PM (#22213152) Homepage
      I'm sorry to tell you this, but the reason that extension cord you bought had 4 different warning labels on it was because of morons that do something completely stupid, and then blame the manufacturer for not having a warning label telling you not to do it.

      "Hey! There was nothing that said it was dangerous to chew on the cord while it was plugged in! Nor was their anything telling me I shouldn't plug a coffee pot, a space heater, and a PS3 onto the same cord! I should sue their asses!"

      The above example may be a tad bit extreme (actually, it may not be...) but that is why those labels are there. If the company's lawyers could think of someone suing them over something, they would be stupid to not put a warning label on the product. Seeing as so many people would sue over so many little things (but NEVER over their own stupidity), a large number of labels go onto everyday products. Blame your fellow citizens for that gripe.
        • by Pojut (1027544) on Monday January 28 2008, @04:40PM (#22213460) Homepage
          Don't take this the wrong way, but that sounded EXACTLY like something my Dad would say.

          "So I'm sitting there, installing this new valve for a toilet...everything is going great, until I turn the water back on, twist the new valve open and realize that I didn't put any sealing tape on the threads. So water is flying everywhere, right? I quickly shut off the valve, and proceed to stand up to go back downstairs to shut off the water. Up I go, on my feet...down I go, on my back. Floors are slippery when they are wet. Don't forget that."
          • by gnick (1211984) on Monday January 28 2008, @04:56PM (#22213706) Homepage
            No offense taken - Hopefully my son will learn not to do idiotic things like this just like I should have from my father. Quoth my father:
            "If nothing else, maybe I can serve as a bad example."
        • by mOdQuArK! (87332) on Monday January 28 2008, @06:13PM (#22214866)
          You know you're really playing with Darwin when you actually get USED to getting shocked by line current. I fell into that mode when I was fixing up all the outlets in my house. I was too lazy to set up a battery-powered lamp & work in the dark, so I did everything with the breakers still on. I kept on brushing the wires with my bare skin & getting shocked. After a dozen or so "d*mnit"s, I started ignoring the shocks & just doing the work.

          Granted, I didn't actually grab any of the bare wire ends and hang on, but in retrospect it wasn't exactly the safest behavior to be following.

          Not long after that, I tried testing a 220V outlet with the back of my hand & ended up punching myself in the face. Beauty of a black eye, and a great conversation starter :-)
            • by RalphSleigh (899929) on Monday January 28 2008, @04:55PM (#22213694) Homepage
              Nerd card. Now.
            • Re:warning labels (Score:5, Informative)

              by dbitter1 (411864) <katz.allyourbasearebelong2@us> on Monday January 28 2008, @05:11PM (#22213918) Homepage

              I would really appreciate it if all my extension cords were clearly labeled for recommended maximum voltage.
              I'll assume you are serious and that isn't trollbait.

              Firstly, every cord *SHOULD* be labeled with maximium voltage... most likely 600V for most equipment. This is based on the voltage the insulation on the wires can withstand in a normal environment.

              What you likely meant to say is the maximum AMPERAGE (or wattage, which is voltage*amperage) a cable is designed for. This is a much harder thing to spec... just like a CPU, it depends what the temperature is. The larger a conductor (think cross-sectional area), the less resistance it has, and the less current will be lost to heat while in use. It is this heat that makes things unpleasant... you could take a "standard" cord and run 29384092385902380953A through it, but not for more than a millisecond or two whilst the metal melts and subsequently vaporizes in an explosive poof at room temperature.

              However, if you put it in liquid nitrogen, you likely will increase that time by several orders of magnitude... more assuming you can keep the cold flowing in (maybe a continual stream of L/N?)

              Coming back to reality, it may be safe to run your vacuum cleaner for a few minutes on the cord, even if it gets warm... assuming you *KNOW* it is getting warm, and you will stop using it shortly. Where it isn't safe is if you run a heater off of an undersized cord, then throw a rug on top of it to further keep ambient losses from cooling the cord, then spill something with a low flashpoint on the rug.

              Would make a hell of a warning label...

          • Just curious (Score:4, Insightful)

            by mcmonkey (96054) on Monday January 28 2008, @05:10PM (#22213898) Homepage

            Why not? I'll admit I consider most people abysmally stupid, but they should have a pretty good grasp of the idea that you can't safely run a 20ga 100ft cord from your basement to your garage "beer fridge".

            I usually think of myself as not abysmally stupid, but why can't I safely run a 20ga 100ft cord from my basement to my garage beer fridge? The purpose of the cord is to connect an outlet at one end to an appliance at the other.

            Does it matter that one end is in my basement and the other is in my garage? I know some cords are rated for outdoor use and some are not, but what if my garage is attached? Is there something intuitively obvious about 20ga cords that aren't suitable for beer fridges? And how do you know if my beer fridge is one of those little travel jobbies that can run off AC or 12-volt DC, or if my beer fridge is a full size Kenmore? (I drink a lot of beer.)

            Something so "mind-numbingly obvious" should be easy to explain. Maybe I'm just abysmally stupid.

            • Re:Just curious (Score:5, Informative)

              by WhiteWolf666 (145211) <moornblade at gmail.com> on Monday January 28 2008, @05:57PM (#22214636) Homepage Journal
              I'll assume this is a serious query. It isn't all that obvious.

              A 20gauge cord is most likely not capable of carrying enough amperage to power your beer fridge without either A)heating up, or B)outright failing.

              Situation A: A 100ft cord that heats up to unsafe temperatures may start a fire with any number of low-flashpoint items between your garage and basement.

              Situation B: Failing outright means that the cord heats up to sufficient temperatures in order melt the insulation off, exposing bare, high-temperature, semi-high voltage wires to the environment. They may spark, which can easily start a fire, the insulation might burn or char, and the exposed wires represent an electrocution hazard. This would be unsafe for a 4ft core, but a 100ft cord represents a line of death stretching the length of your house.

              Take a look at http://www.interfacebus.com/Reference_Cable_AWG_Sizes.html [interfacebus.com] . Those are conservative numbers for load carrying capacity, and deemed "safe" for 100ft or longer runs. You can potentially multiply those numbers by 2-3 for shorter runs.

              Even so, 20 gauge wire should really only be used for a 2-6 amp load; and on the lower end of that scale for a longer (100 ft+) run. A pretty average, smallish home fridge has a "max" current draw of 15 amps. Even your beer-mini-fridge probably draws 7-8 peak. 7-8 is greater than 2, and as such, is a fire hazard. And, with a 100ft run, most people would probably stick it under a rug, which results in even MORE heat buildup.

              The thing about it that makes it worse is that the circuit breaker will only protect you against over-current based upon the wiring load (assuming the electrician did a good job), not electrical cords, particularly wimpy electric cords. The only time the circuit breaker will kick in is after the electrical cord has shorted, and it may be too late by that point. If its a ground fault, and not a fire, and not an electrocution, a GFCI circuit might protect you, but it'll probably be too late for that, as well.

              That all being said, it's not common knowledge; but it should be. It takes a bit to educate yourself on this stuff, but its important knowledge, and a lot of lives could be saved, and fires stopped, if they taught this stuff in highschool.

              IMHO, its a bit pretentious to say that this, stuff is "common sense". The little endian nature of the gauge scale (not to mention that it is logarithmic so 19 gauge is 2x the diameter of 20 gauge), and the unclear nature of the warnings on the stuff is kinda useless. It would make far more sense to make the Amperage of all devices clearer (peak), and simply put "This cable can carrying X amps at Y temperature, and is unsafe for use at higher temperatures" on extension cables.
    • Re:warning labels (Score:5, Insightful)

      by jayhawk88 (160512) <rockchalk88@yahoo.com> on Monday January 28 2008, @04:31PM (#22213332) Homepage
      So let me get this straight: A company is building a device that can literally set things on fire with visible light, built to almost exactly duplicate the form, shape, and function of the traditional flashlight, a device that after ~100 years is nearly universally recognized and known to be relatively harmless. And you think that it should not come with a warning label of some kind?
    • by FleaPlus (6935) on Monday January 28 2008, @04:46PM (#22213562) Homepage Journal
      "Please do not shine flashlight into remaining face"
  • Lumens War (Score:4, Funny)

    by blankaBrew (1000609) on Monday January 28 2008, @04:09PM (#22212964)
    Now begins the lumens war.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 28 2008, @04:10PM (#22212972)
    Think how much longer your batteries will last by using the light from the fires you start.
  • by apathy maybe (922212) on Monday January 28 2008, @04:11PM (#22212992) Homepage Journal
    OK, I can understand having rather bright spotlights (for example, to go shooting), but I cannot understand what use this sort of light has for civilian usage.

    It is far to dangerous to do many of the things that you often do with bright lights (for example, to go shooting), and so why?

    Perhaps it says something in the article? Not that I can see... (Though it does say, 15 minute battery life! WTF is the point of it then?)
  • oblig. (Score:5, Funny)

    by Rob T Firefly (844560) on Monday January 28 2008, @04:12PM (#22213004) Homepage Journal
    Do not look into flashlight with remaining eye.
  • by unassimilatible (225662) on Monday January 28 2008, @04:13PM (#22213030) Journal
    These are kind of cheap. At first it looked really bright, but I stared into it and after a while, the light is barely visible. I think it's defective.
  • by hansamurai (907719) <hansamurai@gmail.com> on Monday January 28 2008, @04:16PM (#22213086) Homepage Journal
    Let me know when you make a Fleshlight version.
  • by Bob-taro (996889) on Monday January 28 2008, @04:18PM (#22213122)

    My invention, "An Actual Torch" can set things on fire in even less time. It also has a much more disperse beam so it illuminates a wide area. The only drawback is it has a much shorter range. But then again on the plus side, it can't be accidentally used to destroy airplanes.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 28 2008, @04:22PM (#22213210)
    Will it blend?
  • by Stereodude (1228710) on Monday January 28 2008, @04:22PM (#22213218)
    This thing is total weak sauce compared to some of the home-brew / modified flashlights people have over at the Candlepower forums. In fact one of them (Maxablaster) is featured in this month's Popular Science on the How2.0 page. Apparently Guinness will only consider production flashlights for their records.

    Regardless, I'd link to some of them, but the forums there have enough time staying up as it is and they don't need the extra traffic. Here's a beam shot of the Maxablaster shining on some clouds 4 miles up. http://img231.imageshack.us/my.php?image=spotoncloud2dp4ta1.jpg [imageshack.us]

  • coming soon (Score:4, Funny)

    by Khashishi (775369) on Monday January 28 2008, @04:26PM (#22213260) Journal
    waterproof shark harness
  • by PirateBlis (1208936) on Monday January 28 2008, @04:27PM (#22213276)
    Are you a Peeping Tom? Does the person you're "watching" often tease you through your binoculars because she won't remove that silly bra? Well get teased no more! New from Wicked Lasers, it's The Torch!!! Now, just point The Torch at your obsession, press the button, and burn away those pesky garments in seconds!!! Do yourself a favor and see what you've really wanted to see! Buy The Torch!!! 30 easy payments of $10 per week. Act now!
  • ObStephenson (Score:4, Informative)

    by Dr. Manhattan (29720) <.moc.liamg. .ta. .171rorecros.> on Monday January 28 2008, @04:35PM (#22213384) Homepage
    Ah, it's no Galvanick Lucipher [candlepowerforums.com].