Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#41
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sep 8, 4:30*pm, "Dave" wrote:
"Art Unwin" wrote in message ... Jim Since you are with the space agency I jumped threads to ask a question. When a space ship leaves earth or a satellite is stable in the sky I assume that all are in thier own magnetic field because of relative motion of earth. *Is it possible that there are a connecting magnetic field in the Universe of a like polarity tp that of a geo satellite? I would assume spacecraft record magnetic changes on their journey but I have read no details of such measurements. When I use computer programs to determine a radiation field in free space of an antenna in equilibrium the resulting radiation is zero as predicted by the extension of Gaussian law! Which begs the question, what provides the two like magnetic fields in a geosatellite or are charges just sliding off the end of antennas not in equilibrium? ( no gravity or combative weak fields being present) Regards Art well art, this sounds like a challenging situation for your theory to predict what happens... if there is no gravity to cause the magical mystery particles to settle on the diamagnetic elements and therefore they keep sliding off, how do satellites communicate with each other? *a zero radiation by your extended guassian law sure doesn't help either! *maybe you need to do some more thinking about all this stuff.... or you could do some actual research and see what the magnetic field environment is at geosynchronous altitude... *just as a hint, take a look at this GOES Hp plot hehttp://www.swpc.noaa.gov/today.html*then to get a look even farther out you can see the magnetic field that is part of the solar wind that moves your magical particles hehttp://www.swpc.noaa.gov/ace/MAG_SWEPAM_24h.html*maybe the particle densities they measure can actually be related to your magical mystery particles? David what you presented is way beyond my pay scale and requires a detailed knoweledge of the particular procedures and measurements Same goes for the URL of the compass presented by NAVY? But with reference to your term "magical mystery" which I take as a knock on my knoweledge of physics. David you cannot deny that the intersection of two magnetic fields provides a extra force that is not in line. A short study on levitation should resolve that one. The other one is the sorting methods used in savaging materials. There are many pictures and references to the use of levitation and non invasive metal measurements all of which are a following of Newtons laws as well as the well founded reference to eddy currents as the return force which creates stabalization. As I stated before this same law of Newton can be visualed by reviewing the mode of rotation of the two rotors on a helicopter to achieve stabalization or equilibrium in movement Knowing the above which I am sure you do, the use of "magical mystery" can be seen as a some what mocking statement, and for why? And where does particle density fit in as opposed the energy content of something that is so small. If indications such as Weber or Gauss were measured maybe it would make sense thus I am totally lost. With respect to compasses I never realized that it consistedf of so many components to protect against so many actions as well as the induced magnetism created during manufacture . the disasters in the golden triangle as well as with Amy in the pacific it would seem that all should carry a sextant as a backup! Art Art |
#42
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sep 5, 2:27*pm, Jon Mcleod wrote:
Art Unwin wrote: What you are refering to is the induction process as applied to present day induction cookers available in stors for the general consumer Best regards Actually, no, the induction cooker uses a much stronger field. *This is a low voltage field (1v/cm) that doesn't cook (or heat) the steak. Supposedly it disrupts internal structures inside bacteria when they try to divide, at least so goes the hypothesis. Hmmm...I thought the induction cooking process was merely a "cool-top" cooking appliance using a large inductor to generate an AC magnetic field. The h field does nothing at all to the food but it induces currents in the (ferrous) cookware which heats the cookware allowing it to be used in a manner similar to "hot" top resistive cooking elements. In this case the resistance is in the cookware itself, dissipating power from the induced current. That's what I thought it was anyways... If you want to really prevent bacteria growth in food, may I suggest a good dose of Cobalt 60. |
#43
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sep 6, 3:48*pm, Richard Clark wrote:
In the 1960s, a product for cooking hotdogs (10cm) was sold. *It consisted of exposed metal prongs that penetrated to each end of the hot dog, and were, in turn, plugged into the wall. *Net result: in 3 minutes you had a broiled hot dog from 12V/cm. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC I remember that: It was called the "Hot Dogger". It worked quite well. Oscar Mayer hot dogs and the like are assisted in the hot dog zap- cooking process by the large amount of electrolyes (salt content) used in processing the "meat". It was a resistive heat cooking process of course, nothing exotic, but 12V/cm it was. |
#45
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sep 8, 8:20*pm, wrote:
On Sep 5, 2:27*pm, Jon Mcleod wrote: Art Unwin wrote: What you are refering to is the induction process as applied to present day induction cookers available in stors for the general consumer Best regards Actually, no, the induction cooker uses a much stronger field. *This is a low voltage field (1v/cm) that doesn't cook (or heat) the steak. Supposedly it disrupts internal structures inside bacteria when they try to divide, at least so goes the hypothesis. Hmmm...I thought the induction cooking process was merely a "cool-top" cooking appliance using a large inductor to generate an AC magnetic field. The h field does nothing at all to the food but it induces currents in the (ferrous) cookware which heats the cookware allowing it to be used in a manner similar to "hot" top resistive cooking elements. In this case the resistance is in the cookware itself, dissipating power from the induced current. That's what I thought it was anyways... If you want to really prevent bacteria growth in food, may I suggest a good dose of Cobalt 60. I believe you are correct since special cookware is required with induction cooking and I would imagine it also has a large magnet inside the inductance as opposed to air |
#46
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Jon Mcleod wrote in
m: Michael Coslo wrote: Well put! I notice that the rules have been changed so that veggies will be irradiated to kill the e.coli and salmonella bacteria on them. Actually, e-field could be a much better way to kill bacteria on the surface of vegetables, if this whole kooky idea works. I mean, holy crap, if they're using it to cure brain tumors, it can probably sterilize the food without genetically damaging it. It's already an FDA approved device, first application I've heard of is pasturization of apple juice. Google PEF (pulsed electric field) Diversified Technologies in MA manufactured the device. They're experts in generating pulses for the DOD and seem to be venturing into new applications now. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
MEAT PLOW EXPOSED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! | Policy | |||
i lkie meat | Policy | |||
Burying radials with a meat cleaver? | Antenna | |||
"We want to put our meat in your |
Broadcasting | |||
Meat and Feces: Here’s the Poop! | Shortwave |