Part II of II
=
Date sent:Tue, 01 Jul 1997 22:48:16 -0700
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: "A.J. Craddock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: HAARP - More Disturbing News
HAARP has always had a bad smell to it, and this erudite and credible
post raises the ugly specter of us paying for one Government Program to
destroy another.
One wonders what HAARP's true purpose really is?
Tony Craddock
Web Administrator
CSETI
http://www.cseti.org
To: Jeane Manning
I have read two of your books, "The Coming Energy Revolution," and
"Angels Don't Play this Haarp." Thank you for the excellent
expositional works. They have meant alot to me. I found out about you
through an old friend, Walt Rosenthal. He encouraged me to share my
ideas with you, so here goes the first one.
In thinking about the HAARP project, I started thinking about what it
means to spacecraft within that region of the ionosphere, and I mean
normal everyday spacecraft such as the space shuttle and satellites. It
means very bad things. Even if they limit themselves to increasing the
charge particle density to only double or triple, ionospheric heating
still means more energetic particles on average, and this will have
catastrophic effects on certain spacecraft materials. I have just
completed a three year study of ionospheric interactions with the new
International Space Station, and even though the problem is still very
fresh in my mind, it took awhile for me to grasp what an ionospheric
heater is really doing, then it took me even longer to analyze these
effects and apply understand the ramifications on my recent work.
If I understand you correctly, we could start out by saying that the
ionosphere is comprised primarily of Atomic Oxygen. In its natural
state (before the invention of electricity) a fraction of this oxygen
(and the other constituent gases) was constantly being ionized by solar
and other radiations. The ionized atoms would then re-combine with an
electron (usually within milliseconds) to lose their charge. Thus an
equilibrium condition was reached, where depending on the level of solar
activity, the portion of the atmospheric gases in that region settled in
the ballpark of 0.01 - 0.1% ionized gas at any one time. This condition
began to change however, with the advent of hi-power transmission
equipment and power lines. The new technology affected both the
ionization and re-combination processes, and resulted in localized
effects to the ionosphere.
Now enter spacecraft into the picture. NASA has been fighting a war for
a decade on the effects that Atomic Oxygen has on polymer spacecraft
materials. Essentially what's happening is that Atomic Oxygen is
ramming into the weak organic chemical bonds at orbital + thermal
velocities, and eroding away the material slowly. This is essentially
the same thing that will happen with the ionized portion of the
ionosphere as well, but only if the particular spacecraft structure is
electrically neutral. As a detail point, the ionized atoms tend to be
at the higher end of the gasses' energy distribution, because once they
become ionized they become accelerated by electric forces. Conversely,
atoms which are ionized by deliberate application of EM fields get
accelerated by that same EM field, hence the effect of raising
temperature. The ionospheric heater fits in here I now realize. And it
is insanity.
Consider the effects on the new thin-film Space Station Solar Arrays.
They do not have the property of being electrically neutral in the
ionosphere by any means. 1,000 to 20,000 times a second, the entire EM
field surrounding them is collapsed by the voltage regulating SSU
(non-shunt) circuit controller, and herein lies the problem. The copper
circuitry is covered by 2 - 10 mil thick polymers like Kapton. When we
analyzed the naturally occuring effects that the ionized portion of the
ionosphere has on the arrays in 1994, we found the following interesting
fact. The AC electric field present in the array circuitry switches 140
volts at 1 khz, and couples like a capacitor to the ions through the
Kapton dielectric. The ions then slam the charged particles into the
array polymers with a velocity fifty times greater than the
orbital/thermal velocities of the non-charged gasses. That's like 2,000
times the energy in the collision. The result is that these atoms now
have enough energy to damage copper and steel. The process is well
known as ion sputtering.
When we completed our analysis, the result was within an order of
magnitude of saying that the arrays would not survive the requisite
fifteen years. We argued and argued and eventually NASA took
responsibility of the problem from us. AKA it disappeared.
We based our analysis on the 1986 model of the ionosphere which takes no
man-made ionospheric effects into account. If
