|
Scout wrote:
I'd like to hear opinions regarding supposed adverse health effects of a close proximity to high tension wires. I'm looking at a nice piece of land on the side of a mountain, about 200 feet from the lines. I'm inclined to think a cell phone is more dangerous. I know we have a few here who are knowledgeable in the field (no pun intended). There's never been a definitive statistical link between proximity to high tension power transmission lines and any sort of health problem. There are all sorts of studies that vaguely infer such links, and I'm not one to say that there isn't any effect... especially when there is such a huge variation in people. IMHO 99.99% of people would be totally unaffected... but that doesn't help you if you're one of the few! A plus of buying property adjacent to a power line easment is that you get the effect of a lot of free land, a really nice hiking trail, plus a secondary access. A minus is that a lot of people believe that electricity causes brain cancer, or something. Hope this helps Doug "A Statistical Universe Of One" King |
Scout wrote:
The hard part is finding a blender that runs on 33,000 volts. Think how quickly you could charge up your boat battery... DSK |
Photovoltaics, storage batteries, inverter. CN "Horvath" wrote in message ... Then how do you get the power for your computer? ! |
Psssst.....Doug, he doesn't have a boat.
SV "DSK" wrote in message ... Scout wrote: The hard part is finding a blender that runs on 33,000 volts. Think how quickly you could charge up your boat battery... DSK |
Many replies are so full of urban myth that I must restart.
Lets start with health effects rumored to be caused by electricity (and ignore that original study was later discovered with gross statistical errors). Many immediately assume danger was in high tension wires. They first failed to learn or demand the numbers. Those health effects, if exist, were more likely from something that creates stronger fields - such as wires underneath floor and inside walls, from circuit breaker box to central air conditioner. Those who jump to conclusions immediately assumed the study was about high tension wires. 'Those' include many news anchors who refuse to first do what all responsible anchormen are suppose to do - verify the story - hold the reporter's feet to the fire - do as Walter Cronkite did so routinely and so viciously. Immediately, the reply from many posters is suspect - having confused health risk warnings about something else - then assuming it must be high tension wires. They assumed as many irresponsible news anchors did on local news shows. Urban myth is now rampant even in this thread. We take it farther. Being an enemy of junk science reasoning, I first took a meter. I got numbers. Magnetic fields generated by an automobile dashboard may be higher that those from high tension wires. So you tell me where dangers exist? Already I am posting information that negates many of your replies. IOW too many people have 'knowledge' before they learn facts. They fail to temper their assumptions with numbers. Among the numbers not provided were line voltages. 128 kV? 230 kV? 765 kV? These also define other conditions such a noise. What is on those electric distribution towers? Bottom line. You need numbers before anyone can properly answer your question. Lets not forget, the original Scandinavian study that started all this hype was later discovered to have manipulated the statistics. This was discovered by other scientists who finally got access to the raw data. IOW hype continued until numbers were revealed. Any yet the speculation continues here - again without numbers. Too many never heard the whole story which is why they even blame high voltage towers rather than low voltage, high current wires. The original study blamed the latter. Therefore others here blamed the former. Wires with larger fields - that can even distort computer CRT screens in some rooms - should be of greater concern. Scout wrote: I'd like to hear opinions regarding supposed adverse health effects of a close proximity to high tension wires. I'm looking at a nice piece of land on the side of a mountain, about 200 feet from the lines. I'm inclined to think a cell phone is more dangerous. I know we have a few here who are knowledgeable in the field (no pun intended). Scout |
Join the crowd, sweetie, everybody loves the Good Captain Neal®
"Lady Pilot" wrote in message news:n18Cd.32272$F25.1456@okepread07... No kidding? (And here I thought I loved him...) LP "katysails" wrote: He steals batteries from K-Mart... "Horvath" wrote: On Sun, 2 Jan 2005 18:38:02 -0500, Capt. Neal® wrote this crap: There's no power lines within half a mile of my home. (At least for now.) Then how do you get the power for your computer? CN "Horvath" scribbled Everybody lives near power lines. There's some going down most streets. Pathetic Earthlings! No one can save you now! |
Warrantees! The word is warrantees.
CN "katysails" wrote in message ... He steals batteries from K-Mart... "Horvath" wrote in message ... On Sun, 2 Jan 2005 18:38:02 -0500, Capt. Neal® wrote this crap: There's no power lines within half a mile of my home. (At least for now.) Then how do you get the power for your computer? CN "Horvath" scribbled Everybody lives near power lines. There's some going down most streets. Pathetic Earthlings! No one can save you now! |
The flux must cross a closed conductor (loop) for current to flow. But that
is pertinent to a permanent magnet. Atoms have magnetic fields from the electron orbits. The electron is in motion around the nucleus in a closed path. The electron, through its motion, is a current and generates a magnetic field. If enough atoms are in correct alignemnt you have a net magnetic field. "Scout" wrote in message ... I thought the flux had to cross a conductor for current to flow. "Bob Crantz" wrote in message link.net... A permanent magnet does have current flow. "Scout" wrote in message ... "JG" wrote in message ... I believe the Swedes did a study that showed there were know ill effects on people, but I would pass on it if it were overhead. I believe their study was directly overhead. 200 feet probably wouldn't be an issue. More investigation is, of course, warranted. Makes one wonder about the magic magnetic bracelets and bands people wear for pain management. Why would magnetic flux be a miracle cure when produced by a permanent magnet but not when produced by current flow? Scout |
Where are you facts to support your assertions? You infer the Leeper study
and then don't mention it by name. You completely fail to even consider molecular resonance. You fail to consider aggregate resonance of the human body. You cite the complexity of field conditions, which is true, but fail to cite controlled laboratory experiments which can isolate cause and effect and show the effects of electric and magnetic fields on biological systems. Here's just one example of magnetic fields used to control brain chemistry: http://nursing.vanderbilt.edu/pain/r.../pub-prot.html Here's some Q&A: http://www.mcw.edu/gcrc/cop/powerlin...r-FAQ/toc.html Note the conclusions in the article say powerlines can't hurt you as far as cancer and leukemia go. Just for fun, take a light steel or copper cable/wire (uninsulated)and use it as a jump rope with your bare, sweaty hands under a power line. Try it at different distances and orientations from the line. "w_tom" wrote in message ... Many replies are so full of urban myth that I must restart. Lets start with health effects rumored to be caused by electricity (and ignore that original study was later discovered with gross statistical errors). Many immediately assume danger was in high tension wires. They first failed to learn or demand the numbers. Those health effects, if exist, were more likely from something that creates stronger fields - such as wires underneath floor and inside walls, from circuit breaker box to central air conditioner. Those who jump to conclusions immediately assumed the study was about high tension wires. 'Those' include many news anchors who refuse to first do what all responsible anchormen are suppose to do - verify the story - hold the reporter's feet to the fire - do as Walter Cronkite did so routinely and so viciously. Immediately, the reply from many posters is suspect - having confused health risk warnings about something else - then assuming it must be high tension wires. They assumed as many irresponsible news anchors did on local news shows. Urban myth is now rampant even in this thread. We take it farther. Being an enemy of junk science reasoning, I first took a meter. I got numbers. Magnetic fields generated by an automobile dashboard may be higher that those from high tension wires. So you tell me where dangers exist? Already I am posting information that negates many of your replies. IOW too many people have 'knowledge' before they learn facts. They fail to temper their assumptions with numbers. Among the numbers not provided were line voltages. 128 kV? 230 kV? 765 kV? These also define other conditions such a noise. What is on those electric distribution towers? Bottom line. You need numbers before anyone can properly answer your question. Lets not forget, the original Scandinavian study that started all this hype was later discovered to have manipulated the statistics. This was discovered by other scientists who finally got access to the raw data. IOW hype continued until numbers were revealed. Any yet the speculation continues here - again without numbers. Too many never heard the whole story which is why they even blame high voltage towers rather than low voltage, high current wires. The original study blamed the latter. Therefore others here blamed the former. Wires with larger fields - that can even distort computer CRT screens in some rooms - should be of greater concern. Scout wrote: I'd like to hear opinions regarding supposed adverse health effects of a close proximity to high tension wires. I'm looking at a nice piece of land on the side of a mountain, about 200 feet from the lines. I'm inclined to think a cell phone is more dangerous. I know we have a few here who are knowledgeable in the field (no pun intended). Scout |
http://ston.jsc.nasa.gov/collections...003-212054.pdf
"Scout" wrote in message ... I'd like to hear opinions regarding supposed adverse health effects of a close proximity to high tension wires. I'm looking at a nice piece of land on the side of a mountain, about 200 feet from the lines. I'm inclined to think a cell phone is more dangerous. I know we have a few here who are knowledgeable in the field (no pun intended). Scout |
I see what you mean. Each electron orbit is a closed circuit.
Does emf play some role in propelling an electron through its orbit? Scout "Bob Crantz" wrote The flux must cross a closed conductor (loop) for current to flow. But that is pertinent to a permanent magnet. Atoms have magnetic fields from the electron orbits. The electron is in motion around the nucleus in a closed path. The electron, through its motion, is a current and generates a magnetic field. If enough atoms are in correct alignemnt you have a net magnetic field. "Scout" wrote in message ... I thought the flux had to cross a conductor for current to flow. "Bob Crantz" wrote in message link.net... A permanent magnet does have current flow. "Scout" wrote in message ... "JG" wrote in message ... I believe the Swedes did a study that showed there were know ill effects on people, but I would pass on it if it were overhead. I believe their study was directly overhead. 200 feet probably wouldn't be an issue. More investigation is, of course, warranted. Makes one wonder about the magic magnetic bracelets and bands people wear for pain management. Why would magnetic flux be a miracle cure when produced by a permanent magnet but not when produced by current flow? Scout |
What a behind-the-times bunch of Putzes!
It has been proven electrons don't have an orbit. According to quantum mechanics, electrons only have probability of filling those areas around the core of an atom where the wave component of the electron can exist without canceling itself out. I hope this helps. CN "Scout" wrote in message ... I see what you mean. Each electron orbit is a closed circuit. Does emf play some role in propelling an electron through its orbit? Scout "Bob Crantz" wrote The flux must cross a closed conductor (loop) for current to flow. But that is pertinent to a permanent magnet. Atoms have magnetic fields from the electron orbits. The electron is in motion around the nucleus in a closed path. The electron, through its motion, is a current and generates a magnetic field. If enough atoms are in correct alignemnt you have a net magnetic field. "Scout" wrote in message ... I thought the flux had to cross a conductor for current to flow. "Bob Crantz" wrote in message link.net... A permanent magnet does have current flow. "Scout" wrote in message ... "JG" wrote in message ... I believe the Swedes did a study that showed there were know ill effects on people, but I would pass on it if it were overhead. I believe their study was directly overhead. 200 feet probably wouldn't be an issue. More investigation is, of course, warranted. Makes one wonder about the magic magnetic bracelets and bands people wear for pain management. Why would magnetic flux be a miracle cure when produced by a permanent magnet but not when produced by current flow? Scout |
but isn't Bob's point that the electron is moving, and in doing so must have
a path, and hence, by definition, is electrical current? Scout "Capt. Neal®" wrote in message ... What a behind-the-times bunch of Putzes! It has been proven electrons don't have an orbit. According to quantum mechanics, electrons only have probability of filling those areas around the core of an atom where the wave component of the electron can exist without canceling itself out. I hope this helps. CN "Scout" wrote in message ... I see what you mean. Each electron orbit is a closed circuit. Does emf play some role in propelling an electron through its orbit? Scout "Bob Crantz" wrote The flux must cross a closed conductor (loop) for current to flow. But that is pertinent to a permanent magnet. Atoms have magnetic fields from the electron orbits. The electron is in motion around the nucleus in a closed path. The electron, through its motion, is a current and generates a magnetic field. If enough atoms are in correct alignemnt you have a net magnetic field. "Scout" wrote in message ... I thought the flux had to cross a conductor for current to flow. "Bob Crantz" wrote in message link.net... A permanent magnet does have current flow. "Scout" wrote in message ... "JG" wrote in message ... I believe the Swedes did a study that showed there were know ill effects on people, but I would pass on it if it were overhead. I believe their study was directly overhead. 200 feet probably wouldn't be an issue. More investigation is, of course, warranted. Makes one wonder about the magic magnetic bracelets and bands people wear for pain management. Why would magnetic flux be a miracle cure when produced by a permanent magnet but not when produced by current flow? Scout |
You're trying to discuss quantum physics with a fool like Neal? He gets all
of his learning from the back of soda cans. -- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com "Scout" wrote in message ... but isn't Bob's point that the electron is moving, and in doing so must have a path, and hence, by definition, is electrical current? Scout "Capt. Neal®" wrote in message ... What a behind-the-times bunch of Putzes! It has been proven electrons don't have an orbit. According to quantum mechanics, electrons only have probability of filling those areas around the core of an atom where the wave component of the electron can exist without canceling itself out. I hope this helps. CN "Scout" wrote in message ... I see what you mean. Each electron orbit is a closed circuit. Does emf play some role in propelling an electron through its orbit? Scout "Bob Crantz" wrote The flux must cross a closed conductor (loop) for current to flow. But that is pertinent to a permanent magnet. Atoms have magnetic fields from the electron orbits. The electron is in motion around the nucleus in a closed path. The electron, through its motion, is a current and generates a magnetic field. If enough atoms are in correct alignemnt you have a net magnetic field. "Scout" wrote in message ... I thought the flux had to cross a conductor for current to flow. "Bob Crantz" wrote in message link.net... A permanent magnet does have current flow. "Scout" wrote in message ... "JG" wrote in message ... I believe the Swedes did a study that showed there were know ill effects on people, but I would pass on it if it were overhead. I believe their study was directly overhead. 200 feet probably wouldn't be an issue. More investigation is, of course, warranted. Makes one wonder about the magic magnetic bracelets and bands people wear for pain management. Why would magnetic flux be a miracle cure when produced by a permanent magnet but not when produced by current flow? Scout |
Negative! There is no current unless there is a conductor.
A conductor allows low-energy electrons to jump from atom to atom. CN "Scout" wrote in message ... but isn't Bob's point that the electron is moving, and in doing so must have a path, and hence, by definition, is electrical current? Scout "Capt. Neal®" wrote in message ... What a behind-the-times bunch of Putzes! It has been proven electrons don't have an orbit. According to quantum mechanics, electrons only have probability of filling those areas around the core of an atom where the wave component of the electron can exist without canceling itself out. I hope this helps. CN "Scout" wrote in message ... I see what you mean. Each electron orbit is a closed circuit. Does emf play some role in propelling an electron through its orbit? Scout "Bob Crantz" wrote The flux must cross a closed conductor (loop) for current to flow. But that is pertinent to a permanent magnet. Atoms have magnetic fields from the electron orbits. The electron is in motion around the nucleus in a closed path. The electron, through its motion, is a current and generates a magnetic field. If enough atoms are in correct alignemnt you have a net magnetic field. "Scout" wrote in message ... I thought the flux had to cross a conductor for current to flow. "Bob Crantz" wrote in message link.net... A permanent magnet does have current flow. "Scout" wrote in message ... "JG" wrote in message ... I believe the Swedes did a study that showed there were know ill effects on people, but I would pass on it if it were overhead. I believe their study was directly overhead. 200 feet probably wouldn't be an issue. More investigation is, of course, warranted. Makes one wonder about the magic magnetic bracelets and bands people wear for pain management. Why would magnetic flux be a miracle cure when produced by a permanent magnet but not when produced by current flow? Scout |
You're doing much better lately, Gaynz This is at least the second time you've posted something without a gay connotation. CN "JG" wrote in message ... You're trying to discuss quantum physics with a fool like Neal? He gets all of his learning from the back of soda cans. -- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com "Scout" wrote in message ... but isn't Bob's point that the electron is moving, and in doing so must have a path, and hence, by definition, is electrical current? Scout "Capt. Neal®" wrote in message ... What a behind-the-times bunch of Putzes! It has been proven electrons don't have an orbit. According to quantum mechanics, electrons only have probability of filling those areas around the core of an atom where the wave component of the electron can exist without canceling itself out. I hope this helps. CN "Scout" wrote in message ... I see what you mean. Each electron orbit is a closed circuit. Does emf play some role in propelling an electron through its orbit? Scout "Bob Crantz" wrote The flux must cross a closed conductor (loop) for current to flow. But that is pertinent to a permanent magnet. Atoms have magnetic fields from the electron orbits. The electron is in motion around the nucleus in a closed path. The electron, through its motion, is a current and generates a magnetic field. If enough atoms are in correct alignemnt you have a net magnetic field. "Scout" wrote in message ... I thought the flux had to cross a conductor for current to flow. "Bob Crantz" wrote in message link.net... A permanent magnet does have current flow. "Scout" wrote in message ... "JG" wrote in message ... I believe the Swedes did a study that showed there were know ill effects on people, but I would pass on it if it were overhead. I believe their study was directly overhead. 200 feet probably wouldn't be an issue. More investigation is, of course, warranted. Makes one wonder about the magic magnetic bracelets and bands people wear for pain management. Why would magnetic flux be a miracle cure when produced by a permanent magnet but not when produced by current flow? Scout |
How about when a CRT fires electrons through a vacuum and onto phosphorus
coated screen, would you consider that to be current flowing without a conductor? Scout "Capt. Neal®" wrote in message ... Negative! There is no current unless there is a conductor. A conductor allows low-energy electrons to jump from atom to atom. CN "Scout" wrote in message ... but isn't Bob's point that the electron is moving, and in doing so must have a path, and hence, by definition, is electrical current? Scout "Capt. Neal®" wrote in message ... What a behind-the-times bunch of Putzes! It has been proven electrons don't have an orbit. According to quantum mechanics, electrons only have probability of filling those areas around the core of an atom where the wave component of the electron can exist without canceling itself out. I hope this helps. CN "Scout" wrote in message ... I see what you mean. Each electron orbit is a closed circuit. Does emf play some role in propelling an electron through its orbit? Scout "Bob Crantz" wrote The flux must cross a closed conductor (loop) for current to flow. But that is pertinent to a permanent magnet. Atoms have magnetic fields from the electron orbits. The electron is in motion around the nucleus in a closed path. The electron, through its motion, is a current and generates a magnetic field. If enough atoms are in correct alignemnt you have a net magnetic field. "Scout" wrote in message ... I thought the flux had to cross a conductor for current to flow. "Bob Crantz" wrote in message link.net... A permanent magnet does have current flow. "Scout" wrote in message ... "JG" wrote in message ... I believe the Swedes did a study that showed there were know ill effects on people, but I would pass on it if it were overhead. I believe their study was directly overhead. 200 feet probably wouldn't be an issue. More investigation is, of course, warranted. Makes one wonder about the magic magnetic bracelets and bands people wear for pain management. Why would magnetic flux be a miracle cure when produced by a permanent magnet but not when produced by current flow? Scout |
Actually I do have a gauss meter (gaussometer?) on its way. I am curious to
know what the magnetic field strength is. My desk at work is about 3 feet from a large 480-240/120 step down xformer. I'm probably getting more from that than I'd ever get anywhere else. Once I get the meter, I'll do some experimenting and report back. Scout "w_tom" wrote in message ... Many replies are so full of urban myth that I must restart. Lets start with health effects rumored to be caused by electricity (and ignore that original study was later discovered with gross statistical errors). Many immediately assume danger was in high tension wires. They first failed to learn or demand the numbers. Those health effects, if exist, were more likely from something that creates stronger fields - such as wires underneath floor and inside walls, from circuit breaker box to central air conditioner. Those who jump to conclusions immediately assumed the study was about high tension wires. 'Those' include many news anchors who refuse to first do what all responsible anchormen are suppose to do - verify the story - hold the reporter's feet to the fire - do as Walter Cronkite did so routinely and so viciously. Immediately, the reply from many posters is suspect - having confused health risk warnings about something else - then assuming it must be high tension wires. They assumed as many irresponsible news anchors did on local news shows. Urban myth is now rampant even in this thread. We take it farther. Being an enemy of junk science reasoning, I first took a meter. I got numbers. Magnetic fields generated by an automobile dashboard may be higher that those from high tension wires. So you tell me where dangers exist? Already I am posting information that negates many of your replies. IOW too many people have 'knowledge' before they learn facts. They fail to temper their assumptions with numbers. Among the numbers not provided were line voltages. 128 kV? 230 kV? 765 kV? These also define other conditions such a noise. What is on those electric distribution towers? Bottom line. You need numbers before anyone can properly answer your question. Lets not forget, the original Scandinavian study that started all this hype was later discovered to have manipulated the statistics. This was discovered by other scientists who finally got access to the raw data. IOW hype continued until numbers were revealed. Any yet the speculation continues here - again without numbers. Too many never heard the whole story which is why they even blame high voltage towers rather than low voltage, high current wires. The original study blamed the latter. Therefore others here blamed the former. Wires with larger fields - that can even distort computer CRT screens in some rooms - should be of greater concern. Scout wrote: I'd like to hear opinions regarding supposed adverse health effects of a close proximity to high tension wires. I'm looking at a nice piece of land on the side of a mountain, about 200 feet from the lines. I'm inclined to think a cell phone is more dangerous. I know we have a few here who are knowledgeable in the field (no pun intended). Scout |
"Scout" wrote in message ... I'd like to hear opinions regarding supposed adverse health effects of a close proximity to high tension wires. I'm looking at a nice piece of land on the side of a mountain, about 200 feet from the lines. I'm inclined to think a cell phone is more dangerous. I know we have a few here who are knowledgeable in the field (no pun intended). I wouldn't live near HT wires. A few years ago I visited a power station. I swear that I felt something as I drove under the HT wires. I don't know what I felt. However, I was left with the feeling that I could tell when I was under the HT lines with a blindfold on. The voltages were 400k, and I only felt the effect 30ft either side of the wires. Regards Donal -- |
Scout - you are correct. To create an electric current, the
magnetic field must be changing. This is basic and fundamental to Maxwell's equations and should have been known to those posting permanent magnets creating electricity. Electrons moving inside 'shells' of the atom are totally irrelevant to electricity. Electricity means electrons move from atom to atom. It means the conductive path is a complete circuit. A permanent magnet has no moving field; therefore creates no electricity. Motion is also necessary. Furthermore note many half truths. Where are the numbers? Yes the sun can vaporize anything. Therefore we must keep everything out of the sun? Too much salt kills. Therefore the salt shaker should be treated as a hazardous material. This is how others promote hype and fear. No place do these fears apply to high voltage power towers. You would think from these posts that those high voltage towers subject the human body to 5 Telsa. In one cited study, 200 mGauss caused changes to cellular growth. That proves fields from electric lines will harm humans. Wait. That field is less than the earth's magnetic field. Therefore we are all being killed by the earth? This is the type of hype and fear being promoted. Worry. Where the wire bends, then fields are so much stronger? How much stronger? Trivial stronger. Again numbers would expose the hype. And hype it is. Posted is proof that all electric fields kill? Why do trivial fields from power lines kill when significantly larger fields (a decade+ larger) from the CRT do not? In another citation, field exceed 1 gauss before considered dangerous. So where is this 1 gauss field from the high voltage distribution line? It must be if the line is 230 Kv? Again, posted was fear without considering what actual numbers would be from that power line. So what is cited as dangerous? Because fields generated by a building transformer might be hazardous, then high voltage transmission lines also must be dangerous? Again, notice which electric lines are discussed. Not those high voltage transmission lines. Lower voltage, high current electric wires inside the building. Again there is this problem with hyping all electricity as dangerous only because very high magnetic fields MIGHT be dangerous. Ball park numbers. Long before the location is dangerous, a CRT or TV would have display problems. Now we have something concrete to consider. IOW we have a ballpark number AND some way to measure for that number. More interesting. What fields are really deadly? Magnetic or Electric? I wonder if those hyping fear even know the difference. But most shocking is some ridiculous idea that a motionless magnet creates electricity. Get the gauss meter. Take some measurements. Suddenly much of the hype being promoted here by some will disappear. Amazing what a few numbers can do to make so many previous posts irrelevant or misleading. Scout wrote: I thought the flux had to cross a conductor for current to flow. "Bob Crantz" wrote in message link.net... A permanent magnet does have current flow. |
Where are your numbers, Bob Crantz? A stationary and
permanent magnetic creates electricity? Which field is dangerous - electric or magnetic? And how much? How much are the fields under a high voltage transmissions lines? And why do you worry about those high voltage wires when your own citations, instead, discuss lower voltage wires inside the building? It is a classic junk science maneuver. Hype some fear. Provide no numbers. Then when numbers expose the fear as hype, attack the messenger rather than provide required numbers. Tell us Bob Crantz. How strong are those fields underneath that high voltage transmission line? You hyped the fear. But you forgot to mention whether such fearful numbers even exist under that transmission line. In the meantime, others should again remember which electric lines are accused of being dangerous. Not the high voltage transmission lines. Even Bob Crantz's own citation discusses which electric lines were originally suspect. Those low voltage wires inside the building. Worry more about where the wire to your electric stove is routed - if there is anything to even worry about. Molecular resonance. Fine. Why is it so dangerous? You forgot to mention field size - provide numbers - that make molecular resonance significant. It was not an accidental omission. Don't take an MRI. Those fields are so much stronger as to kill everyone who gets an MRI? Or maybe the hype should first provide some numbers? According to what Bob Crantz has posted, then clearly MRIs must kill some people. Why? Where are his numbers to go along with all those dead brain cells? Fortunately Scout will get a meter and learn the numbers. Numbers are what the first posts in this thread should have provided up front. Missing numbers are why so many can post fear about electric transmission lines. No numbers is the source of so much 'junk science' promoted fear. Bob Crantz wrote: Where are you facts to support your assertions? You infer the Leeper study and then don't mention it by name. You completely fail to even consider molecular resonance. You fail to consider aggregate resonance of the human body. You cite the complexity of field conditions, which is true, but fail to cite controlled laboratory experiments which can isolate cause and effect and show the effects of electric and magnetic fields on biological systems. Here's just one example of magnetic fields used to control brain chemistry: http://nursing.vanderbilt.edu/pain/r.../pub-prot.html Here's some Q&A: http://www.mcw.edu/gcrc/cop/powerlin...r-FAQ/toc.html Note the conclusions in the article say powerlines can't hurt you as far as cancer and leukemia go. Just for fun, take a light steel or copper cable/wire (uninsulated) and use it as a jump rope with your bare, sweaty hands under a power line. Try it at different distances and orientations from the line. "w_tom" wrote in message ... Many replies are so full of urban myth that I must restart. Lets start with health effects rumored to be caused by electricity (and ignore that original study was later discovered with gross statistical errors). Many immediately assume danger was in high tension wires. They first failed to learn or demand the numbers. Those health effects, if exist, were more likely from something that creates stronger fields - such as wires underneath floor and inside walls, from circuit breaker box to central air conditioner. Those who jump to conclusions immediately assumed the study was about high tension wires. 'Those' include many news anchors who refuse to first do what all responsible anchormen are suppose to do - verify the story - hold the reporter's feet to the fire - do as Walter Cronkite did so routinely and so viciously. Immediately, the reply from many posters is suspect - having confused health risk warnings about something else - then assuming it must be high tension wires. They assumed as many irresponsible news anchors did on local news shows. Urban myth is now rampant even in this thread. ... Among the numbers not provided were line voltages. 128 kV? 230 kV? 765 kV? These also define other conditions such a noise. What is on those electric distribution towers? Bottom line. You need numbers before anyone can properly answer your question. Lets not forget, the original Scandinavian study that started all this hype was later discovered to have manipulated the statistics. This was discovered by other scientists who finally got access to the raw data. IOW hype continued until numbers were revealed. Any yet the speculation continues here - again without numbers. ... |
Capt. Neal® wrote:
Negative! There is no current unless there is a conductor. A conductor allows low-energy electrons to jump from atom to atom. How does a vacuum tube work, then? A vacuum isn't a conductor, right? -- Wally www.artbywally.com www.wally.myby.co.uk |
Lady Pilot wrote:
Your love powers his computer? Hehee. Probably so, I'm such a great power source...TONAL Ah, my email address is why you thought I might be Donal in disguise? 'Fraid not- it's tonal, as in 'tone', as in musical. -- Wally www.artbywally.com www.wally.myby.co.uk |
The E and H field of an orbiting, non radiating electron are in phase
quadrature. When an electron spins on its own axis, it creates a magnetic field. Interestingly, a discovery by Faraday, shows that a moving charged dielectric creates a magnetic field. Another item of interest is Farady's unipolar generator where there is no relative motion between the conductor and magnet and current is produced. These type of generators are used to generate high currents. Falling water droplets can generate very high voltages, as discovered by Lord Kelvin (Kelvin electrostatic generator). Amen! Bob Crantz "Scout" wrote in message ... I see what you mean. Each electron orbit is a closed circuit. Does emf play some role in propelling an electron through its orbit? Scout "Bob Crantz" wrote The flux must cross a closed conductor (loop) for current to flow. But that is pertinent to a permanent magnet. Atoms have magnetic fields from the electron orbits. The electron is in motion around the nucleus in a closed path. The electron, through its motion, is a current and generates a magnetic field. If enough atoms are in correct alignemnt you have a net magnetic field. "Scout" wrote in message ... I thought the flux had to cross a conductor for current to flow. "Bob Crantz" wrote in message link.net... A permanent magnet does have current flow. "Scout" wrote in message ... "JG" wrote in message ... I believe the Swedes did a study that showed there were know ill effects on people, but I would pass on it if it were overhead. I believe their study was directly overhead. 200 feet probably wouldn't be an issue. More investigation is, of course, warranted. Makes one wonder about the magic magnetic bracelets and bands people wear for pain management. Why would magnetic flux be a miracle cure when produced by a permanent magnet but not when produced by current flow? Scout |
"w_tom" wrote in message ... Where are your numbers, Bob Crantz? Read the NASA citation. There's numbers. Read the handbook for Magnetic shielding. There's numbers. Every reference I gave has numbers. A stationary and permanent magnetic creates electricity? Yes it can, if you move relative to it. Faradays unipolar generator (featured on the English 20 pound note) needs no relative motion between the conductor and magnet to produce electricity. Look it up. Which field is dangerous - electric or magnetic? They both can be. And how much? 80 mv transmembrane potential is all it takes. How much are the fields under a high voltage transmissions lines? Between the lines take the voltage between them and divide by the separation of the lines to get the field strength in volts per meter. If you know the location of the ground below them (as in electrical ground) you can create the image circuit (using the method of images) and calculate the field strength also at the ground level. And why do you worry about those high voltage wires when your own citations, instead, discuss lower voltage wires inside the building? The high voltage is ionizing the air. Ever hear that crackling noise? What is the voltage induced in a moving object under a power line? Any idea? Indoor wiring = very bad! It is a classic junk science maneuver. Hype some fear. Provide no numbers. Then when numbers expose the fear as hype, attack the messenger rather than provide required numbers. Well, where's the proof of your point? Tell us Bob Crantz. How strong are those fields underneath that high voltage transmission line? You hyped the fear. But you forgot to mention whether such fearful numbers even exist under that transmission line. 100 V/m typically, which would induce 200 volts in a standing human. 80 mV is all it takes. In the meantime, others should again remember which electric lines are accused of being dangerous. Not the high voltage transmission lines. Even Bob Crantz's own citation discusses which electric lines were originally suspect. Those low voltage wires inside the building. Worry more about where the wire to your electric stove is routed - if there is anything to even worry about. I'd really worry about wiring in the house! Molecular resonance. Fine. Why is it so dangerous? You forgot to mention field size - provide numbers - that make molecular resonance significant. It was not an accidental omission. In large molecules, such as DNA, resonance can be used to alter the molecule. The field strength or magnetic moment would have to exceed the bond energy of the particular molecular link. Don't take an MRI. Those fields are so much stronger as to kill everyone who gets an MRI? Don't get X-Rays. Those are so much stronger as to kill everyone who gets an X-Ray? (XRays are ioninzing radiation, much stronger, much more dangerous than the 27 MHz field of an NMR machine.) Why do MRI machine operators work in a shielded area? It's the cumulative dose that counts! You can get one big dose in a short time or live under a powerline for decades. Or maybe the hype should first provide some numbers? According to what Bob Crantz has posted, then clearly MRIs must kill some people. Why? Where are his numbers to go along with all those dead brain cells? It's the cumulative dose. MRI's have killed people. Fortunately Scout will get a meter and learn the numbers. Numbers are what the first posts in this thread should have provided up front. Missing numbers are why so many can post fear about electric transmission lines. No numbers is the source of so much 'junk science' promoted fear. Didn't check my references did you? Bob Crantz wrote: Where are you facts to support your assertions? You infer the Leeper study and then don't mention it by name. You completely fail to even consider molecular resonance. You fail to consider aggregate resonance of the human body. You cite the complexity of field conditions, which is true, but fail to cite controlled laboratory experiments which can isolate cause and effect and show the effects of electric and magnetic fields on biological systems. Here's just one example of magnetic fields used to control brain chemistry: http://nursing.vanderbilt.edu/pain/r.../pub-prot.html Here's some Q&A: http://www.mcw.edu/gcrc/cop/powerlin...r-FAQ/toc.html Note the conclusions in the article say powerlines can't hurt you as far as cancer and leukemia go. Just for fun, take a light steel or copper cable/wire (uninsulated) and use it as a jump rope with your bare, sweaty hands under a power line. Try it at different distances and orientations from the line. "w_tom" wrote in message ... Many replies are so full of urban myth that I must restart. Lets start with health effects rumored to be caused by electricity (and ignore that original study was later discovered with gross statistical errors). Many immediately assume danger was in high tension wires. They first failed to learn or demand the numbers. Those health effects, if exist, were more likely from something that creates stronger fields - such as wires underneath floor and inside walls, from circuit breaker box to central air conditioner. Those who jump to conclusions immediately assumed the study was about high tension wires. 'Those' include many news anchors who refuse to first do what all responsible anchormen are suppose to do - verify the story - hold the reporter's feet to the fire - do as Walter Cronkite did so routinely and so viciously. Immediately, the reply from many posters is suspect - having confused health risk warnings about something else - then assuming it must be high tension wires. They assumed as many irresponsible news anchors did on local news shows. Urban myth is now rampant even in this thread. ... Among the numbers not provided were line voltages. 128 kV? 230 kV? 765 kV? These also define other conditions such a noise. What is on those electric distribution towers? Bottom line. You need numbers before anyone can properly answer your question. Lets not forget, the original Scandinavian study that started all this hype was later discovered to have manipulated the statistics. This was discovered by other scientists who finally got access to the raw data. IOW hype continued until numbers were revealed. Any yet the speculation continues here - again without numbers. ... |
"w_tom" wrote in message ... Scout - you are correct. To create an electric current, the magnetic field must be changing. This is basic and fundamental to Maxwell's equations and should have been known to those posting permanent magnets creating electricity. Maxwell's equations are boundary conditions. They are not causal equations. The changing E does not create the changing H and vice versa. Here's two examples that demonstrate this: The E and H fields of cellular phone signals in a high multipath environment are uncorrelated. If the E caused the H they would be correlated. Maxwell's equations do not apply to these signals at the point they are measured. The E and H fields of a plane wave in free space are related through the intrinsic impedance of space and supposedly "Maxwells equations" (as you "understand" them). The plane wave impinges on an H field shielded room. Inside the room the H field virtually goes to zero, the E field is virtually unaffected. The E field exists without the H field. The magnetic field of a permanent magnet comes from moving charge - electrical current. There's no other way to produce a magnetic field. It's the curl of E according to Maxwell. How is the magnetic field of a permanent magnet produced? Electrons moving inside 'shells' of the atom are totally irrelevant to electricity. Electricity means electrons move from atom to atom. It means the conductive path is a complete circuit. A permanent magnet has no moving field; therefore creates no electricity. Motion is also necessary. The movement of charge alone is what is defined as electricity. It doesn't matter if its atom to atom. Bound charge on a moving macroscopic body is also considered electricitiy - current flow. The source of magnetism in a permanent magnet is the motion of charge. Furthermore note many half truths. Where are the numbers? Yes the sun can vaporize anything. Therefore we must keep everything out of the sun? The sun is an uncontrolled fission reaction spewing its waste products at earth. Sit in the sun for 9 hours on a nice summer day with no sun protection and your chances of getting cancer are much higher than living next to 3 Mile Island all your life! Too much salt kills. Therefore the salt shaker should be treated as a hazardous material. It is. Ever see the MSDS sheet for it? The warnings on children's play sand in California? This is how others promote hype and fear. No place do these fears apply to high voltage power towers. You would think from these posts that those high voltage towers subject the human body to 5 Telsa. Read the conclusions of the NASA paper. Low doses can change cellular growth. In one cited study, 200 mGauss caused changes to cellular growth. That proves fields from electric lines will harm humans. Wait. That field is less than the earth's magnetic field. Therefore we are all being killed by the earth? This is the type of hype and fear being promoted. The earth's field is essentially static. Powerlines fields are electromagnetic - they are changing 60 times a second. Big difference! Worry. Where the wire bends, then fields are so much stronger? How much stronger? Trivial stronger. Again numbers would expose the hype. And hype it is. Strong enough to induce arcing and radiation. Posted is proof that all electric fields kill? Why do trivial fields from power lines kill when significantly larger fields (a decade+ larger) from the CRT do not? CRT fields are at 15 KHz, not 60 Hz. What do you use the word kill when all the references cited talk of increases in cellular activity? In another citation, field exceed 1 gauss before considered dangerous. So where is this 1 gauss field from the high voltage distribution line? It must be if the line is 230 Kv? Again, posted was fear without considering what actual numbers would be from that power line. Magnetic field depends on current, not kV. So what is cited as dangerous? Because fields generated by a building transformer might be hazardous, then high voltage transmission lines also must be dangerous? They could be. The field of a transformer is contained within the core of the transformer, it's designed that way. The magnetic field of a transmission line is external to it. In fact, all the power of a transmission line is contained in the field suurrounding it, not in the conductor. The conductor is net neutral. Again, notice which electric lines are discussed. Not those high voltage transmission lines. Lower voltage, high current electric wires inside the building. Again there is this problem with hyping all electricity as dangerous only because very high magnetic fields MIGHT be dangerous. Interior wiring very bad! Power lines bad! Ball park numbers. Long before the location is dangerous, a CRT or TV would have display problems. Not so, they are shielded with mu metal. Now we have something concrete to consider. IOW we have a ballpark number AND some way to measure for that number. More interesting. What fields are really deadly? Magnetic or Electric? I wonder if those hyping fear even know the difference. But most shocking is some ridiculous idea that a motionless magnet creates electricity. Go back and read again what I wrote. A permanent magnet does have current flow. That IS what produces the magnetic field. Go check your Maxwell's equations to find the source of magnetism. It's the curl of E, electric field lines that close upon themselves. The path of an orbiting electron is a closed E path. Can you name another source of curl E that causes magnetism in a permanent magnet? That is also why del dot B is zero. There are no magnetic monopoles. Get the gauss meter. Take some measurements. Suddenly much of the hype being promoted here by some will disappear. Amazing what a few numbers can do to make so many previous posts irrelevant or misleading. Check the frequency response of the gauss meter. Then check your readings against the field strengths causing biological changes in the numerous scientific references I gave and decide for yourself. Statistical studies show correlation, not causality. In fact, you can have a study in which E fields changed the outcomes of the test group on an individual basis, yet the statistics show no change. Real science is the lab -cause and effect is the only definitive answer. Satan and Demons live under power lines! Amen!!! Praise!!!! Bob Crantz Scout wrote: I thought the flux had to cross a conductor for current to flow. "Bob Crantz" wrote in message link.net... A permanent magnet does have current flow. |
Negative. There are large electromagnets that control the path of the electron on its way to the phosphors on the viewing screen. There is no current only bare electrons moving across a vacuum by magnetic forces to the phosphors. There is no conductor. A conductor is usually a metal like a wire that is made of copper or silver or gold in which the atoms have loosely bound electrons in the outer shell which can jump from one atom to the next. CN "Scout" wrote in message ... How about when a CRT fires electrons through a vacuum and onto phosphorus coated screen, would you consider that to be current flowing without a conductor? Scout "Capt. Neal®" wrote in message ... Negative! There is no current unless there is a conductor. A conductor allows low-energy electrons to jump from atom to atom. CN "Scout" wrote in message ... but isn't Bob's point that the electron is moving, and in doing so must have a path, and hence, by definition, is electrical current? Scout "Capt. Neal®" wrote in message ... What a behind-the-times bunch of Putzes! It has been proven electrons don't have an orbit. According to quantum mechanics, electrons only have probability of filling those areas around the core of an atom where the wave component of the electron can exist without canceling itself out. I hope this helps. CN "Scout" wrote in message ... I see what you mean. Each electron orbit is a closed circuit. Does emf play some role in propelling an electron through its orbit? Scout "Bob Crantz" wrote The flux must cross a closed conductor (loop) for current to flow. But that is pertinent to a permanent magnet. Atoms have magnetic fields from the electron orbits. The electron is in motion around the nucleus in a closed path. The electron, through its motion, is a current and generates a magnetic field. If enough atoms are in correct alignemnt you have a net magnetic field. "Scout" wrote in message ... I thought the flux had to cross a conductor for current to flow. "Bob Crantz" wrote in message link.net... A permanent magnet does have current flow. "Scout" wrote in message ... "JG" wrote in message ... I believe the Swedes did a study that showed there were know ill effects on people, but I would pass on it if it were overhead. I believe their study was directly overhead. 200 feet probably wouldn't be an issue. More investigation is, of course, warranted. Makes one wonder about the magic magnetic bracelets and bands people wear for pain management. Why would magnetic flux be a miracle cure when produced by a permanent magnet but not when produced by current flow? Scout |
Here's a reference from a company that produces permanent magnets. They
explain the cause of magnetism in the permanent magnet: http://www.arnoldmagnetics.com/mtc/pm_manual_chap_1.htm "Magnetic fields from permanent magnets arise from two atomic sources: the spin and orbital motions of electrons. Therefore, the magnetic characteristics of a material may change as a function of alloying with other elements. For example, a non-magnetic material such as aluminum can become magnetic in materials such as alnico or manganese-aluminum-carbon. It may also change from mechanical working or any other stress to the crystal lattice." The orbital motion as well as the spin are regarded as electrical currents. By definition I= dQ/dt (the current is equal to the change in charge with regard to time at a specific location). If a charge moves, it is current, it is electricity. For example, solar flares are huge charge ejections that create magnetic fields with no conductor involved. Remember the electric and magnetic field of the sun is so small it can't possibly knock out satellites, let alone affect power grids here on earth! The gravitational field follows the same decay rate as the electric field from a charged sphere. Hence, the gravitational field of the sun or moon is so weak it can't affect us here on earth! Sunlight is so weak in field strength (it's an electromagnetic wave too) it can't possible cause cancer! Amen! Bob Crantz "Scout" wrote in message ... I see what you mean. Each electron orbit is a closed circuit. Does emf play some role in propelling an electron through its orbit? Scout "Bob Crantz" wrote The flux must cross a closed conductor (loop) for current to flow. But that is pertinent to a permanent magnet. Atoms have magnetic fields from the electron orbits. The electron is in motion around the nucleus in a closed path. The electron, through its motion, is a current and generates a magnetic field. If enough atoms are in correct alignemnt you have a net magnetic field. "Scout" wrote in message ... I thought the flux had to cross a conductor for current to flow. "Bob Crantz" wrote in message link.net... A permanent magnet does have current flow. "Scout" wrote in message ... "JG" wrote in message ... I believe the Swedes did a study that showed there were know ill effects on people, but I would pass on it if it were overhead. I believe their study was directly overhead. 200 feet probably wouldn't be an issue. More investigation is, of course, warranted. Makes one wonder about the magic magnetic bracelets and bands people wear for pain management. Why would magnetic flux be a miracle cure when produced by a permanent magnet but not when produced by current flow? Scout |
You're sinking fast here, Neal. That "Physics for English Majors"
course you took gave you a few buzzwords, but no knowledge. Capt. Neal® wrote: Negative. There are large electromagnets that control the path of the electron on its way to the phosphors on the viewing screen. There is no current only bare electrons moving across a vacuum by magnetic forces to the phosphors. There is no conductor. A conductor is usually a metal like a wire that is made of copper or silver or gold in which the atoms have loosely bound electrons in the outer shell which can jump from one atom to the next. CN "Scout" wrote in message ... How about when a CRT fires electrons through a vacuum and onto phosphorus coated screen, would you consider that to be current flowing without a conductor? Scout "Capt. Neal®" wrote in message ... Negative! There is no current unless there is a conductor. A conductor allows low-energy electrons to jump from atom to atom. CN "Scout" wrote in message ... but isn't Bob's point that the electron is moving, and in doing so must have a path, and hence, by definition, is electrical current? Scout "Capt. Neal®" wrote in message ... What a behind-the-times bunch of Putzes! It has been proven electrons don't have an orbit. According to quantum mechanics, electrons only have probability of filling those areas around the core of an atom where the wave component of the electron can exist without canceling itself out. I hope this helps. CN "Scout" wrote in message ... I see what you mean. Each electron orbit is a closed circuit. Does emf play some role in propelling an electron through its orbit? Scout "Bob Crantz" wrote The flux must cross a closed conductor (loop) for current to flow. But that is pertinent to a permanent magnet. Atoms have magnetic fields from the electron orbits. The electron is in motion around the nucleus in a closed path. The electron, through its motion, is a current and generates a magnetic field. If enough atoms are in correct alignemnt you have a net magnetic field. "Scout" wrote in message ... I thought the flux had to cross a conductor for current to flow. "Bob Crantz" wrote in message as.earthlink.net... A permanent magnet does have current flow. "Scout" wrote in message ... "JG" wrote in message . .. I believe the Swedes did a study that showed there were know ill effects on people, but I would pass on it if it were overhead. I believe their study was directly overhead. 200 feet probably wouldn't be an issue. More investigation is, of course, warranted. Makes one wonder about the magic magnetic bracelets and bands people wear for pain management. Why would magnetic flux be a miracle cure when produced by a permanent magnet but not when produced by current flow? Scout |
Capt. Neal® wrote:
Negative. There are large electromagnets that control the path of the electron on its way to the phosphors on the viewing screen. There is no current only bare electrons moving across a vacuum by magnetic forces to the phosphors. What's that called if it isn't current? -- Wally www.artbywally.com www.wally.myby.co.uk |
It's called controlled static electricity.
CN "Wally" wrote in message ... Capt. Neal® wrote: Negative. There are large electromagnets that control the path of the electron on its way to the phosphors on the viewing screen. There is no current only bare electrons moving across a vacuum by magnetic forces to the phosphors. What's that called if it isn't current? -- Wally www.artbywally.com www.wally.myby.co.uk |
"Wally" wrote in message ... Capt. Neal® wrote: Negative. There are large electromagnets that control the path of the electron on its way to the phosphors on the viewing screen. There is no current only bare electrons moving across a vacuum by magnetic forces to the phosphors. What's that called if it isn't current? -- Wally www.artbywally.com www.wally.myby.co.uk It used to be referred to as "emission". Same thing occurs in vacuum tubes. To further confuse, I recall the correct terminology as being "emission current". Eisboch |
I have a home made Kelvin electrostatic generator!
Scout "Bob Crantz" wrote in message hlink.net... The E and H field of an orbiting, non radiating electron are in phase quadrature. When an electron spins on its own axis, it creates a magnetic field. Interestingly, a discovery by Faraday, shows that a moving charged dielectric creates a magnetic field. Another item of interest is Farady's unipolar generator where there is no relative motion between the conductor and magnet and current is produced. These type of generators are used to generate high currents. Falling water droplets can generate very high voltages, as discovered by Lord Kelvin (Kelvin electrostatic generator). Amen! Bob Crantz "Scout" wrote in message ... I see what you mean. Each electron orbit is a closed circuit. Does emf play some role in propelling an electron through its orbit? Scout "Bob Crantz" wrote The flux must cross a closed conductor (loop) for current to flow. But that is pertinent to a permanent magnet. Atoms have magnetic fields from the electron orbits. The electron is in motion around the nucleus in a closed path. The electron, through its motion, is a current and generates a magnetic field. If enough atoms are in correct alignemnt you have a net magnetic field. "Scout" wrote in message ... I thought the flux had to cross a conductor for current to flow. "Bob Crantz" wrote in message link.net... A permanent magnet does have current flow. "Scout" wrote in message ... "JG" wrote in message ... I believe the Swedes did a study that showed there were know ill effects on people, but I would pass on it if it were overhead. I believe their study was directly overhead. 200 feet probably wouldn't be an issue. More investigation is, of course, warranted. Makes one wonder about the magic magnetic bracelets and bands people wear for pain management. Why would magnetic flux be a miracle cure when produced by a permanent magnet but not when produced by current flow? Scout |
"Donal" wrote
A few years ago I visited a power station. I swear that I felt something as I drove under the HT wires. I don't know what I felt. However, I was left with the feeling that I could tell when I was under the HT lines with a blindfold on. The voltages were 400k, and I only felt the effect 30ft either side of the wires. No doubts Donal. I worked in a nuclear generating station for two years. On most days I'd get a static shock when I touched my vehicle, which was parked directly beneath the 225KV lines. Scout |
so, where exactly is this dump? Is the land relatively cheap due to
the HTL? How close is the nearest landfill? Scott Vernon Plowville Pa _/)__/)_/)_ |
But Bob Crantz gave no numbers for the fields around high
voltage power lines. Other fields should cause more worry. They are the missing numbers. Is it 100 volts/meter underneath the transmission line? But the those fields are also found inside the house. Don't worry about those high voltage transmission lines. Instead, move the bedroom depending on how the house is constructed and wired ... in every house. If fields are a problem, then the problem are things found inside every house. I am impressed that you do have fundamental knowledge of the concepts - even though you confuse electron spin (a concept in quantum physics) with electric current. But that is not the problem. The problem is that fields from high voltage power lines are not the source of potentially dangerous fields - if those fields are even dangerous. You have provided numbers for some observed scientific research - providing numbers that are only speculative. But those fields are everywhere - even confronting passengers in a car front seat. The problem is that you don't provide any useful numbers for making a conclusion - other than industry benchmark numbers. If field strength numbers you have provided are accurate, then we all are at high risk, constantly, in all homes. And would be dying more often. Many theories exist on what constitutes dangerous fields. Some research suggests as little as 1 gauss. A house, adjacent or not, to high voltage power lines contains no such fields. Others suggest limits like 100 milligauss. This is further complicated by how measurements are taken. But again, the original post is about high voltage transmission lines. The 'dangerous' fields, if they even are dangerous, are from elsewhere. Those worrying about fields from a high voltage power line are using classic "penny rich and pound poor" reasoning. BTW, I am not suggesting that citations Bob Crantz has provided are in error. Bottom line is that we don't really know what extremely long term health effects of these low magnetic and electric fields are. But one must live in reality. That means one must have numbers. Numbers - if these lower level fields are so dangerous, then we literally must rewire all homes. If you thought lead paint was a problem, then removing all TVs and other displays would be trivial compared to replacing or relocating househould wire. Yes it could become a problem just like lead paint. Or it just as easily become another witch hunt. We don't know. But we do know what fields currently exist in the house. We do know the source of those 'theoretically dangerous' fields are not high voltage transmission lines as some totally irresponsible news anchors suggest. Low voltage, higher current wires inside walls should cause concern - if concern is justified. That is what too many if not most posters failed to comprehend. Provided is a crude tool to find locations with high fields. Fields will cause the TV or CRT picture to shimy or distort. This is a numerical perspective provided by ball park measurements. Bob Crantz wrote: "w_tom" wrote in message ... Where are your numbers, Bob Crantz? Read the NASA citation. There's numbers. Read the handbook for Magnetic shielding. There's numbers. Every reference I gave has numbers. A stationary and permanent magnetic creates electricity? Yes it can, if you move relative to it. Faradays unipolar generator (featured on the English 20 pound note) needs no relative motion between the conductor and magnet to produce electricity. Look it up. Which field is dangerous - electric or magnetic? They both can be. And how much? 80 mv transmembrane potential is all it takes. How much are the fields under a high voltage transmissions lines? Between the lines take the voltage between them and divide by the separation of the lines to get the field strength in volts per meter. If you know the location of the ground below them (as in electrical ground) you can create the image circuit (using the method of images) and calculate the field strength also at the ground level. And why do you worry about those high voltage wires when your own citations, instead, discuss lower voltage wires inside the building? The high voltage is ionizing the air. Ever hear that crackling noise? What is the voltage induced in a moving object under a power line? Any idea? Indoor wiring = very bad! It is a classic junk science maneuver. Hype some fear. Provide no numbers. Then when numbers expose the fear as hype, attack the messenger rather than provide required numbers. Well, where's the proof of your point? Tell us Bob Crantz. How strong are those fields underneath that high voltage transmission line? You hyped the fear. But you forgot to mention whether such fearful numbers even exist under that transmission line. 100 V/m typically, which would induce 200 volts in a standing human. 80 mV is all it takes. In the meantime, others should again remember which electric lines are accused of being dangerous. Not the high voltage transmission lines. Even Bob Crantz's own citation discusses which electric lines were originally suspect. Those low voltage wires inside the building. Worry more about where the wire to your electric stove is routed - if there is anything to even worry about. I'd really worry about wiring in the house! ... |
w_tom,
Using your own advice, please tell us what kind of meter were you using for your car dash test. Should we believe you when you don't specify type of meter, what you were measuring, what the values were, under what conditions were your testing done. IOW you have ignored the very things you are condemning. I stated ; "The jury was still out on effects" You haven't really said anything of value other than your own slant on your "Urban Myth" Ole Thom |
Eisboch wrote:
It used to be referred to as "emission". Same thing occurs in vacuum tubes. It's called 'thermionic emission', since it is the heating of the cathode causes the electrons to be released from same. It should be noted, however, that there is no need to create a directed flow from one electrode to another for there to be emission (a hot soldering iron is a thermionic emitter). Indeed, without an anode, the emitted electrons congregate within the glass envelope and create what is called a 'space charge'. To accurately describe the *transfer* of electrons from one electrode to another, the term 'emission' is insufficient. To further confuse, I recall the correct terminology as being "emission current". I see no reason to be confused by referring to it as current. If one connects an ammeter between the anode and the +HT supply, or between the cathode and ground, one will read a current. If there is current at one side of the valve, and current at the other, then surely there is current within it? If the flow of electrons from cathode to anode is not current, then what is it? -- Wally www.artbywally.com www.wally.myby.co.uk |
"Wally" wrote in message ... I see no reason to be confused by referring to it as current. If one connects an ammeter between the anode and the +HT supply, or between the cathode and ground, one will read a current. If there is current at one side of the valve, and current at the other, then surely there is current within it? If the flow of electrons from cathode to anode is not current, then what is it? -- Wally www.artbywally.com www.wally.myby.co.uk I certainly agree. It is current. Same as in a vacuum sputter system, although the current is supported by an ionized gas or plasma. Which brings up another question. If a cathode is typically negative and an anode is typically positive, and current flows from the cathode to anode in a DC circuit, then who the heck upset my understanding half way through my career and changed current flow from positive to negative? Eisboch |
Scott Vernon wrote:
so, where exactly is this dump? Just a few miles East of your place, near Bucktown. Scout |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:02 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com