Unique Material Search, RF energy

Can you be a little more specific? Do you need a solid, a liquid, or a gas? How much RF?

For instance, a standard neon lamp (the NE-2 variety) has very commonly been used to check for the presence of RF around various HF transmitter bits...

Bob M.

Ordinary Florescent lames work, as do Neon lamps. The fluorescents are more impressive.

I've used them to show standing waves on an antenna. Like a magic wand the brightness varies with the signal strength.

The external envelope is glass so there is no possibility of a shock. You can hold the tube in your hand.

------------ Flourescent tube glows. If you need it smaller, pump out a tiny tube after painting inside it with the rare earths white stuff from a white fluoro tube.

-Steve

Florescent or neon type tubes will glow if the RF is strong enough. The only problem is that if the energy is strong enough to make something like this glow, there may be speculation about the health concerns to people and animals in the area of this emission.

--

Jerry G. ==========================

Thanks, Doyle

NOT really. Fear monger at work. Brief exposure is never a problem at the low levels required to get a lamp to glow. I use a

Bettrer to warn and be wrong that not warn and be right.

When we have got 20 or so generations of people exposed to greater than background RF then I will believe it does no harm but until then, at least for me, it is not proven to do no damage. :)

: > NOT really. Fear monger at work. Brief exposure is never a : > problem at the low levels required to get a lamp to glow. I use a : > 18 watt tube, and it glows nicely with a transmitter with a 3 watt : > output. NBD : >

: >

: : Bettrer to warn and be wrong that not warn and be right. : : When we have got 20 or so generations of people exposed to greater than : background RF then I will believe it does no harm but until then, at least : for me, it is not proven to do no damage. :) : Well la ti da! So you should hide in a deep hole.

Just out of curiousity, what mechanism do you suggest that would cause the damage you are warning against?

Robert

Not always; for instance, if your warning causes undue concern, and THAT results injury or has other undesirable consequences, then your warning could actually turn out to do more harm than good.

What's best, of course, is that a warning, if any, comes from someone who's reasonably sure that they're right.

It's awfully hard to prove a negative - not impossible, as some mistakenly claim, but generally pretty difficult. The problem in this particular case is that there already IS a good deal of experience with people in fairly high-intensity RF fields, and little or nothing in the way of evidence of a problem (unless, of course, the intensity/frequency is sufficient to cause damage through heating). RF radiation isn't ionizing, and to date NOTHING has been proposed as a mechanism through which any non-heating-related health problems could occur.

Bob M.

least

Is this addressed to me? I wasn't aware that I was warning against any.

"Mjolinor" wrote : "R Adsett" wrote : > mjolinor wrote : > > "Roger Gt" wrote : > > > "Jerry G." wrote

: > > > : Florescent or neon type tubes will glow if the RF is strong : > > > enough. The only : > > > : problem is that if the energy is strong enough to make something : > > > like this : > > > : glow, there may be speculation about the health concerns to : > > > people and : > > > : animals in the area of this emission.

It was intended to "Jerry G." who seems to think it is dangerous to breath the air!

Mostly, but since the suggestion was raised (maybe half in jest?) that 20 generations would need to pass w/o effect before considering higher than background safe I was curious as to what sort of effect was envisioned that would not be visible until nearly that length of time had passed.

Robert

: > It was intended to "Jerry G." who seems to think it is dangerous : > to breath the air! : Mostly, but since the suggestion was raised (maybe half in jest?) that 20 : generations would need to pass w/o effect before considering higher than : background safe I was curious as to what sort of effect was envisioned : that would not be visible until nearly that length of time had passed. : Robert

Good Point, what would create damage that would not show up for so long?

Well I suppose if we knew that then we could probably try to ascertain the effect now. It's just an unknown. What bothers me is the fact that I can "feel" a GSM phone transmit. Anything that affects me in that way can't be good I don't think. I just reserve judgement until it's proven one way or the other and as no-one has detected any conclusive proof I guess it will be a long time.

Maybe we have actually just discovered a 6th sense, sight, touch, hearing, smell, taste and mobile phone detection. Makes you wonder why we would evolve with mobil;e phone detection built in.

It doesn't take a lot of effort to imagine radio waves in the same bracket as the work the Curie's were doing. We know how to make them and use them but we don't really know what they are.

: > > "Mjolinor" wrote : > > : "R Adsett" wrote : > > : > mjolinor wrote : > > : > > "Roger Gt" wrote : > > : > > > "Jerry G." wrote : > >

: > > : > > > : Florescent or neon type tubes will glow if the RF is : > > strong : > > : > > > enough. The only : > > : > > > : problem is that if the energy is strong enough to make : > > something : > > : > > > like this : > > : > > > : glow, there may be speculation about the health concerns : > > to : > > : > > > people and : > > : > > > : animals in the area of this emission. : > >

: > > It was intended to "Jerry G." who seems to think it is dangerous : > > to breath the air! : > Mostly, but since the suggestion was raised (maybe half in jest?) that 20 : > generations would need to pass w/o effect before considering higher than : > background safe I was curious as to what sort of effect was envisioned : > that would not be visible until nearly that length of time had passed. : >

: > Robert : : Well I suppose if we knew that then we could probably try to ascertain the : effect now. It's just an unknown. What bothers me is the fact that I can : "feel" a GSM phone transmit. Anything that affects me in that way can't be : good I don't think. I just reserve judgement until it's proven one way or : the other and as no-one has detected any conclusive proof I guess it will be : a long time. : : Maybe we have actually just discovered a 6th sense, sight, touch, hearing, : smell, taste and mobile phone detection. Makes you wonder why we would : evolve with mobil;e phone detection built in. : : It doesn't take a lot of effort to imagine radio waves in the same bracket : as the work the Curie's were doing. We know how to make them and use them : but we don't really know what they are.

See a doctor if you feel anything at all. I've worked with radio for many years, I can't feel it and it has never harmed anyone I know. (Lots of Ham radio people have almost constant exposure and no effect.)

There is far too little energy to cause any sensation from a Cell phone of any protocol. The battery should give you a greater sensation if you put your Finger on the terminals than the Radio Frequency energy. UV from the sun does more damage than any cell phone.

There is NO proof that there is any harm done by the low level RF from Cell phone. THAT has been proven.

It's fairly easy to prove, try it yourself. To make it fair you need someone to come close to you with some phones, one of which has a call on it and you will be suprised how many of you can allways tell which phone is active.

I can tell from about 2 feet but I do have friends who can do it from 6 ft or more.

I thought I had already said that.

: >

: : I thought I had already said that. : I thought you implied the data was incomplete.

: > : > > "Mjolinor" wrote : > : > > : "R Adsett" wrote : > : > > : > mjolinor wrote : > : > > : > > "Roger Gt" wrote : > : > > : > > > "Jerry G." wrote : > : > >

: > : > > : > > > : Florescent or neon type tubes will glow if the RF : > is : > : > > strong : > : > > : > > > enough. The only : > : > > : > > > : problem is that if the energy is strong enough to : > make : > : > > something : > : > > : > > > like this : > : > > : > > > : glow, there may be speculation about the health : > concerns : > : > > to : > : > > : > > > people and : > : > > : > > > : animals in the area of this emission. : > : > >

: > : > > It was intended to "Jerry G." who seems to think it is : > dangerous : > : > > to breath the air! : > : > Mostly, but since the suggestion was raised (maybe half in : > jest?) that 20 : > : > generations would need to pass w/o effect before considering : > higher than : > : > background safe I was curious as to what sort of effect was : > envisioned : > : > that would not be visible until nearly that length of time had : > passed. : > : >

: > : > Robert : > : : > : Well I suppose if we knew that then we could probably try to : > ascertain the : > : effect now. It's just an unknown. What bothers me is the fact : > that I can : > : "feel" a GSM phone transmit. Anything that affects me in that : > way can't be : > : good I don't think. I just reserve judgement until it's proven : > one way or : > : the other and as no-one has detected any conclusive proof I : > guess it will be : > : a long time. : > : : > : Maybe we have actually just discovered a 6th sense, sight, : > touch, hearing, : > : smell, taste and mobile phone detection. Makes you wonder why we : > would : > : evolve with mobil;e phone detection built in. : > : : > : It doesn't take a lot of effort to imagine radio waves in the : > same bracket : > : as the work the Curie's were doing. We know how to make them and : > use them : > : but we don't really know what they are. : >

: > See a doctor if you feel anything at all. : > I've worked with radio for many years, I can't feel it and it has : > never harmed anyone I know. (Lots of Ham radio people have almost : > constant exposure and no effect.) : >

: > There is far too little energy to cause any sensation from a Cell : > phone of any protocol. The battery should give you a greater : > sensation if you put your Finger on the terminals than the Radio : > Frequency energy. UV from the sun does more damage than any cell : > phone. : >

: > There is NO proof that there is any harm done by the low level RF : > from Cell phone. THAT has been proven. : : It's fairly easy to prove, try it yourself. To make it fair you need someone : to come close to you with some phones, one of which has a call on it and you : will be suprised how many of you can allways tell which phone is active. : : I can tell from about 2 feet but I do have friends who can do it from 6 ft : or more.

No one I know can feel a telephone signal, you have some strange friends. I can see when they hold it to their ear though.

BTW: What has this to do with getting a material to show the presance of RF?