EMP blast - what would happen really?

I saw the power spectrum of different EMP sources and the amazing thing about the nuke-induced EMP was that the peak was at sub-Hertz. I.e., it's a huge V/cm potential lasting a fraction of a minute.

no.

yep.

that too.

probably.

the main stuff that's likely to fail are semiconductors, that means electronic devices (except old valve equipment)

Bye. Jasen

On 14 Aug 2006 15:07:56 -0700, almo wrote in Msg.

Not any more.

Both. Or none. "Wave" and "particle" are just aggregations of glyphs describing abstract concepts.

Yes.

robert

In article , wrote: [...]

I heard a different version of the story that ended like this:

Then someone suggested that if the soviet aircraft were so backwards, it would be safe to cut the airforce's budget. Then they stopped laughing and *discovered* how EMP proof the aircraft was.

In article , colin wrote: [....]

Sheldon Breiner had a rubidium (or was it cesium) magnetometer set up at Stanford University in California during the south pacific test. He saw a few hundred nT of field change. It was not a step function but more like a few cycles of a sine wave. The effects decreased with time. Initially the decrease was rapid but once it was down to a few nT, it remained at that sort of level for an hour or so.

He also had a magnetometer right above an underground test. That magnetometer showed nothing measurable when the blast happened. I think this is good evidence that the EMP effect is entirely caused by the bombs interaction with its environment. It is not a property of the blast its self.

In message , dated Tue, 15 Aug 2006, Ken Smith writes

I have seen an explanation involving the ionised air from the detonation short-circuiting the E-layer of the ionosphere to the surface.

So... does our modern fighter aircraft fleet now have this... um... EMP-resistant "feature"?

Thanks guys,

Michael

If you follow the links there is a lot of infomation

martin

"Jim Thompson" wrote in message news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com...

Gosh, I should be persona non gratis or whatever. Apologies for my last rant.

Of course it'll probably happen again.

DNA

Modern military equipment is normally protected against (and tested for resistance to) EMP damage. This is usually accomplished by a combination of shielding, I/O transient suppression, and special power supply techniques.

The USAF used to ahve a large test rig that looked like a railroad trestle build over a hemispherical pit that is surrounded by pulse generating coils. It was large neough that an entire airplane can be placed on the trestle for testing. For purity of testing (and to reduce the likelihood of damage) no steel fasteners were used in the construction of the trestle.

It's probably indeterminate - the EMP is, after all, one HUGE photon, which presents as a quantum wave front; where it collapses would depend on what it hits, I'd think.

Cheers! Rich

The molten rock around the blast was probably conductive, and shorted it out, like a Farady cage.

Thanks, Rich

In message , dated Tue, 15 Aug 2006, Rich Grise writes

Where did you get that idea? Weird!

-- OOO - Own Opinions Only. Try

John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK

My older brother, who is with the Navy, once brought home some, lesse I have the datasheets, CK5703 and CK5744 type miniature (wire-lead, T-3 bulb) single triodes. He said that, on the fighters (F-18ish) he was working with, there are the normal systems, backup systems, robust backup-backup systems, and at the very bottom, when all the hit s**ts the fan...a handful of tubes so you don't completely drop out of the air.

Tim

Curious, even if it contains harmonics to 1GHz, that's a single-photon energy of E = hf = 4.136e-15 eV-s * 1e9 s^-1 = 4.136e-6 = 4.14ueV. We're talking colder than the universe's background radiation temperature (average

Nah, there's just a few 10^12's of photons in that pulse, mmmkay.

Tim

I think you mis-spelled "rock vapor".

I don't think the time constant of that shorted turn would be long enough to keep the low frequencies in.

In article , Rich Grise wrote: [...]

No, its the other way. An EMP is such a crowd of low energy photons that they trip over each other as they try to spread out. Thats why the spread rate is less than the speed of light. :)

What, no radio? :-)

On Tue, 15 Aug 2006 20:11:35 GMT, Rich Grise Gave us:

Interesting observation.