Power grids and substations.

[Sunfish]

Im not sure how aurora's occur nor whether that comment was but according to the ski.com.au thread;

You need an electric voltage of about 100v to light a fluoro.... so the electric field needs to be quite substantial to light one.

I was serious Ben. That is how auroras happen. If the neon tube had been "lit" it would have been obvious in the daylight and you could have read by it at night.

Today's Australian published results of yet another study in Denmark which "disproved" (you cannot prove a -ve) the link between brain tumors and mobile phones.

Scaring people sells!!!!!

Thommo

 

[XBenX]

In the story here it only lit up at night... but it will work at all times according to the other thread I linked before.

How does an aurora occur?

 

[madmurf]

http://www.mcw.edu/gcrc/cop/powerlines-cancer-FAQ/toc.html

 

[Sunfish]

In the story here it only lit up at night... but it will work at all times according to the other thread I linked before.

How does an aurora occur?

I've got to be very careful of what I say because I am a radio/communicatios TRADESMAN who did his theory 40yrs ago, not a practicing scientist.

This background allows me to pick up enough pseudo science in my area of knowledge to be highly sceptical of media beat-ups in all others.

At trade school we put the fluro tube beside a transmission line in the lab and it did indeed glow but not "light up". The instructor was teaching us about standing waves because the tube had bright and dark bands corresponding to the wavelength of the transmission and that they were stationary, showing that the wave was indeed a "standing wave".

This can only happen with special ionising gasses of which neon is the most famous. When the gas molecules are agitated (by the electro-magnetic radiation) the friction with other molecules causes them to glow. The auroras are caused by sunlight agitating stratospheric gasses, causing them to glow. Different gasses, different colour (something like that).

To get enough light from a fluro tube to read by the gasses must be stirred violently enough to start an avalanche effect. Once this avalanche begins it will continue until the power is removed. This explains why you need a starter in a fluro light to kick start this effect. As an aside, a fluro tube brightens and darkens 100 times/second and causes strobe effects. The Neptune ASW aircraft I worked on had massive, 14ft dia fans and working around them at night under fluro light was scary. The strobe effect showed just how big and ugly they were.

If we are to continue this discussion it may be best in another thread called "A little knowledge is a dangerous thing." because it may sound as if I am advocating buying property under HV power lines, which I am not. I am just rubbishing "pseudo" science, which I enjoy

Thommo

 

[Sunfish]

http://www.mcw.edu/gcrc/cop/powerlines-cancer-FAQ/toc.html

According to this, Xrays are 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 times higer freq. than 50Hz power.

Think about it. That is one awfully big number. It is probably unreasonable to equate the effects of one to the other.

Thommo

 

[JP1746]

Personally, I reckon the neon light did nothing more than demonstrate how the great auroras happen.

Thommo

Thommo - interesting about the auroras, as was your subsequent longer post. Though I must ask, why don't the four neons in my garage (or the several I have in storage) do the same thing as a result of aurora ? (Perhaps they do but I haven't noticed ? I doubt it though).

Also, I should add, the guy who did the experiment under the power line pointed out that the neon lit up (about 2 hours after set up) not because of the length of time it sat there, but because of the peaking of flow in the lines - it was mid winter - at about nightfall, around 5.30 pm, people get home, start cooking, turn on heating, etc. As best I can recall, he called it a significant increase in the ambiant electromagnetism in the vicinity of the power lines.

I should also add - one of the most annoying and disconceting things about living next to them (the powerlines, not the neighbours), was the hissing and crackling - often, especially in damp weather, it went on, and on ...

JamesP

 

[JP1746]

Electro magnetic fields and electro magnetic radiation is just one of the myriad of health hazard we subject ourselves by conforming to current day living.
In the EMF debate, power companies and governments defend themselves by measuring EMF with meters, and comparing it with toasters. That is just deceptive behaviour. No one has a toaster on 24/7 and sits in front of it, besides what does a EMF meter tells but the intensity of the field? Does it measure the influence it has on a living organism?
A bacteria culture can be greatly influenced with a mild EMF, and its growth will accelerate or slow down according to the field polarity. There are many experiments with living material that proves how EMF has a huge impact on living organism.

Electro magnetic fields and electro magnetic radiation add one more stress load on our immune system already on overload because of the hundreds of "low level" poisons we ingest with our food every day.
It is interesting that to ban a certain additive from our food the health organisations need to proove that one particualr item is deleterious to our health, yet they cannot make a case adding up all the other "permissible" items the person is bound to injest.

Is EMF harmfull? Perhaps for a healthy individual without any genetic predisposition, living in a world whitout pesticides nor syntetic materials in the house, no car and eating home grown organic vegetables and a stress free life, it is perfectly safe.

Put an individual with a mild predisposition towards cancer under a powerline, give him a car that sits in the sun and accumulates carcinogenic fumes for him to breathe, synthetic carpets, particleboard furniture, large varnished floors, a mobile phone and it's tower nearby, a microwave oven, processed food, imported vegetables and tinned tuna from Thailand, and he will be subjected to such a barrage of carcinogenic material each one individually "perfectly safe", yet collectively deadly.
Add to that the fact that his food is grown in depleted soils that contain none of the micronutrients that his body needs to produce antioxidants to fight off the free radicals galore that are chewing up his organism, and you can understand why today we die from degenerative diseases.

If we can reduce the exposure to one free radicals promoter, that is one less enemy our body needs to worry about.

Others might laugh, Marc1, but I would keep my counsel. In this day and age of advancement in science and medicine we see a new 'miracle' cure, drug or process on the telly virtually every night (and sometines two). One would think we were on the cusp of becoming immortal super humans by now, but the reverse is the truth - sickness abounds, and worse, kids cancer wards are more full than they've ever been.

Here's a thought I have in my more idle moments - excessive ambiant electromagnetism is going to be the 'asbestos' of the 21st century (just an idle thought guys, don't flay me for it !)

JamesP

 

[GreatPig]

excessive ambiant electromagnetism is going to be the 'asbestos' of the 21st century

I think police radar is really, really bad for you.

We should all do everything we possibly can to get it banned.

GP

 

[Sunfish]

Thommo - interesting about the auroras, as was your subsequent longer post. Though I must ask, why don't the four neons in my garage (or the several I have in storage) do the same thing as a result of aurora ? (Perhaps they do but I haven't noticed ? I doubt it though).

James, the garage is the least likely place for this to occur.

Take the fluro and put it beside your main household power cables with the stove and airconditioners on, but lights off. I've never tried it but you may see a glow. Then remember the inverse square law mentioned earlier and you wil realise that any radiation generated 50m away will need to be 2,500 times stronger to have the same effect of that which you are standing 1m from.

Also, I should add, the guy who did the experiment under the power line pointed out that the neon lit up (about 2 hours after set up) not because of the length of time it sat there, but because of the peaking of flow in the lines - it was mid winter - at about nightfall, around 5.30 pm, people get home, start cooking, turn on heating, etc. As best I can recall, he called it a significant increase in the ambiant electromagnetism in the vicinity of the power lines.

I suggest that the glow was simply too dull to be seen in bright ambient light.

I should also add - one of the most annoying and disconceting things about living next to them (the powerlines, not the neighbours), was the hissing and crackling - often, especially in damp weather, it went on, and on ...

JamesP

This would deter me more than the health effects.

Lets go back to basic theory again, shall we?

It doesn't matter about the voltage, it is the current measured in Amps which determines the amplitude of the vibration of the molecules affected. The frequency determines the number of times per second they actually vibrate. Amplitude X Frequency determines the frictional energy (heat) generated. Overhead power cables do indeed carry a lot of current, so much so that they get hot from the resistive losses in the copper/alluminium conductors. Excessive heat will permanently damage the conductor. (When there is a steady, cooling wind they can pump more current down the line.)

The electrons, atoms and molecules of all matter are in constant motion if they are above absolute zero so something happening at the incredibably slow rate of 50Hz is surely inconsequential? Radar frequencies which are about a billion times higher are another thing entirely. You've got to take a lot of precautions before you can test run aircraft radar on a flight line.

Here endeth the second lesson.

 

[marc1]

Thommo,when I find you explanations interesting, they seem (even when perhaps not intended), to imply that the risks from living under/near power lines, substations, phone towers and the likes, are not there.
That is precisely the technical smokescreen used by governments and power and phone companies. They will go even to the length of faking intentionally so call studies funded by themselves, to "disprove" health effects.

Unfortunately the ill effects of electromagnetic fields and electro magnetic radiation are proven beyond reasonable doubt. The only thing that cannot be shown so far is the measure of such ill effect.

The reason for this is that we are not the same as an electronic test instrument, we are individuals with individuals sensitivities, individual genetic make up and an individual and differing immune stress due to many other factors all duly tooted to be perfectly safe by the relevant authorities.

The disparaging results when testing low levels of EMF is due mainly to such large variables between individuals. When it is obvious that no one will fall down dead if leaving one week under power lines, to do so is to play Russian roulette with our own health since we ignore largely the myriad of other factors that are being aggravated by our stay within a source of Electromagnetic radiation. If a comparison is necessary I would equate living under power lines to smoking a pack of cigarettes a day.

 

[grubar30]

Bottom line guys - its about investment potential. Nothing more, nothing less. EMF this, EMF that.

Firstly, would I live near one of these towers or its lines? No way. I mean, why risk it? Just to prove that there's no risk? No thanks.

On the other hand, would I invest in an IP that was within close proximity of these towers (i.e., a property whose overall value was influenced by the perception that these towers cause cancer)? Hmmm, that depends on its investment potential. That is, would such an IP give the same returns - CF or CG - as a similar IP that didn’t have the presence of these towers hanging over its head? No, I don't think it would.

In conclusion, it doesn't make sense to either live or invest in one of these properties.

 

[Sunfish]

Thommo,when I find you explanations interesting, they seem (even when perhaps not intended), to imply that the risks from living under/near power lines, substations, phone towers and the likes, are not there.
That is precisely the technical smokescreen used by governments and power and phone companies. They will go even to the length of faking intentionally so call studies funded by themselves, to "disprove" health effects.

Unfortunately the ill effects of electromagnetic fields and electro magnetic radiation are proven beyond reasonable doubt. The only thing that cannot be shown so far is the measure of such ill effect.

The reason for this is that we are not the same as an electronic test instrument, we are individuals with individuals sensitivities, individual genetic make up and an individual and differing immune stress due to many other factors all duly tooted to be perfectly safe by the relevant authorities.

The disparaging results when testing low levels of EMF is due mainly to such large variables between individuals. When it is obvious that no one will fall down dead if leaving one week under power lines, to do so is to play Russian roulette with our own health since we ignore largely the myriad of other factors that are being aggravated by our stay within a source of Electromagnetic radiation. If a comparison is necessary I would equate living under power lines to smoking a pack of cigarettes a day.

Note that I said "I've got to be very careful of what I say because I am a radio/communicatios TRADESMAN who did his theory 40yrs ago, not a practicing scientist."

This means that I am not trying to prove or disprove anything. What I am trying to do is to show you some of the factual hurdles which Chicken Little would have to clear before he convinced me that the sky is indeed falling.

What I have tried to say would be understood by less than 1% of the population but it is simple physics, known nearly a centuary ago. I believe that 1% (who understand) has an obligation to raise, on behalf of everyone, such questions to see if the scare-mongers can explain without resorting GWB's defence about "known knowns, known unknowns and unknown unknowns" type logic which switches me off quicker than a light bulb.

No, I am not trying to change your opinion just give you food for thought before you ever say again "Unfortunately the ill effects of electromagnetic fields and electro magnetic radiation are proven beyond reasonable doubt." because, frankly, it isn't.

And please do me the courtesy of withdrawing this comment which I find offensive "That is precisely the technical smokescreen used by governments and power and phone companies." because facts are never a smoke screen. To call them such implies you are a believer in the old adage "Never let the facts stand in the way of an argument".

Thommo

 

[duncan_m]

because facts are never a smoke screen. To call them such implies you are a believer in the old adage "Never let the facts stand in the way of an argument".

Facts are far and few between.

Almost every week I see things that I've often considered a "fact" suddenly turn out to be nothing more than a wild theory that became accepted without proper research and then spent decades masquerading as a fact.

 

[XBenX]

I've got to be very careful of what I say because I am a radio/communicatios TRADESMAN who did his theory 40yrs ago, not a practicing scientist.

This background allows me to pick up enough pseudo science in my area of knowledge to be highly sceptical of media beat-ups in all others.

At trade school we put the fluro tube beside a transmission line in the lab and it did indeed glow but not "light up". The instructor was teaching us about standing waves because the tube had bright and dark bands corresponding to the wavelength of the transmission and that they were stationary, showing that the wave was indeed a "standing wave".

This can only happen with special ionising gasses of which neon is the most famous. When the gas molecules are agitated (by the electro-magnetic radiation) the friction with other molecules causes them to glow. The auroras are caused by sunlight agitating stratospheric gasses, causing them to glow. Different gasses, different colour (something like that).

To get enough light from a fluro tube to read by the gasses must be stirred violently enough to start an avalanche effect. Once this avalanche begins it will continue until the power is removed. This explains why you need a starter in a fluro light to kick start this effect. As an aside, a fluro tube brightens and darkens 100 times/second and causes strobe effects. The Neptune ASW aircraft I worked on had massive, 14ft dia fans and working around them at night under fluro light was scary. The strobe effect showed just how big and ugly they were.

If we are to continue this discussion it may be best in another thread called "A little knowledge is a dangerous thing." because it may sound as if I am advocating buying property under HV power lines, which I am not. I am just rubbishing "pseudo" science, which I enjoy

Thommo

Cheers Thommo, never knew how Aurora's occured, will look at the differently now =)

 

[JP1746]

I think police radar is really, really bad for you.

We should all do everything we possibly can to get it banned.

GP

... and someone should blow up speed cameras too !

But seriously, some police radar was banned ...by the police, because it really really bad ... for the police.

Recall some years ago, coppers sitting by the side of the road with a radar thing in front of them, and a box or controller or something, between their legs ?

Several of them developed testicular cancer as a result of the excessive electromagnetism, and after investigations, law suites, etc, that particular system was banned. I clearly recall it in the news back then, but can't recall specifics.

JamesP

 

[JP1746]

Hi Thommo;

I must confess, I still don't understand how the efffect could have been caused by the auroras.

The prospect that it was caused by intense ambient electromagnetism existing under said powelines seems plausable.

I continue to wonder how I've never seen any neon light glow because of the said aurora effect.

Example - In rural properies, I recall huge machinery sheds, (full or empty) in the rarified atmosphere of inland NSW, where in a moonless night, it was utterly pitch black - couldn't see a thing whatsoever in such a shed (or outside for that matter). Most have rows of neon lights. But never ever did I see any of them glow, even faintly, while not switched on as a result of aurora (although some continued to glow faintly for 30 secs or so, after switched off). Why no aurora effect there ?

No big deal, anyway Thommo - I'm just interested in what you said and trying to understand it.

JamesP