Dave--
One possible effect is the resonant absorbtion of radiation by biologically
active molecules, which cause ionization and destruction of the molecules.
This is particularly damaging when the molecule is a DNA or RNA molecule. Weak
H bonds occur in these molecules and such destruction leads to modified DNA or
RNA activity. The average heating idea also is appropriate, however it is not
as much as a problem as the destruction or disabling of the large molecules
that control the body's production of other complex molecules. DNA in skin and
eye cells would be more susceptible than those more deeply situated in the
body. Reproductive organs near the surface of the body are more venerable to
such radiation and hence to genetic changes that are passed on to offspring.
Such a problem applies to humans as well a smaller animals and birds that have
the least amount of shielding of their gonads.
The other issue associated with DNA destruction could be the stimulated
emission of tritium by the exposure to the intense radiation of the radars.
Tritium is a bad actor when it decays in a nucleus of a cell. The beta from
the tritium is about 18 Kev. This energy is deposited over a path of about 6
microns. The average dimension of a cell nucleus is about 6 to 10 microns.
This means a large fraction of the beta from tritium decay is deposited in the
nucleus where it is bound to cause numerous double breaks of DNA molecules and
the genetic damage that goes along with these breaks. Such mutagenic effects
were observed in the vole population around Chernobyl after the nuclear
accident as a result of tritium contamination in the drinking water consumed by
the vole population.
(Considering the damage to gene cells of the body, the EPA drinking water
standard for tritium, 20,000 pico curies per liter, is way to high (about 100
times) to prevent unreasonable damage to gene cells. Small breeding
populations of animals, including some populations of humans, can be
unreasonably affected by such high bodily tritium concentrations as allowed by
the current standards. The justification by the EPA and the ICRP that any
defects in the genetics passed on to the society get greatly diluted to reduce
risk, does not apply to small breeding populations. And of course, if you are
one in a million of the people at risk that develop a health problem that is
non-mutagenic , it does not help you at all.)
I am one to believe that there should be no risk to vertebrates, except birds,
existing around hazards that causes more than one health effect of the
population subjected to the hazard. Important insects such as bees should be
included in this no risk criteria.
Bob
----- Original Message -----
From: David Roberson
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Monday, May 12, 2014 7:57 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Vector Potential Wave Radio
Radar systems detect the target based upon the average power incident upon
it. This is due to the continuous behavior of noise which tends to mask the
signal. Heating of the target becomes averaged out during the complete period
of the base pulse which in this case is about 1 milisecond.
Of course, the reflected wave must be generated by instantaneous currents on
the target surface as you suggest. If the problem you are analyzing occurs
during the 1 microsecond time frame then it is quite possible for it to be
demonstrated. The skin effect also comes into consideration at the high RF
frequencies which tends to reduce penetration of the signal into the target.
Better conductivity of the material decreases the dept rapidly.
A true Doppler radar would have the full heating effect due to the RF maximum
power level as long as the antenna pattern illuminates the target you are
considering. Also, the pulsed radar pattern of the radar mentioned impacts
upon your desired target for a small portion of the dish rotation time. The
average target heating must be adjusted accordingly.
I do not understand the nature of the damage that you are considering with
your research. If it is associated with the average heating as with a
microwave oven then the pulse duty cycle, etc. needs to be integrated into the
equations. My comments earlier were directed toward clarifying the difference
between a true Doppler radar and a more of less standard pulsed system.
Dave
-----Original Message-----
From: ChemE Stewart <cheme...@gmail.com>
To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Sent: Mon, May 12, 2014 7:17 am
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Vector Potential Wave Radio
David, the ASR-9 is an airport survellience radar. That is correct about
the gain, weather/military doppler radar gains are 45-50 dbi, more focused
dishes. The instantaneous pulses are > 1,000,000 watts but they are only on
for 1/1000 of each second. Does nature average that high power pulse over 1
second like you are doing? And if it does, how does nature do that? Does it
induce instantaneous electrical currents? Nature operates at the speed of
light, right? A lot goes on in nature in 1/1000 of a second that we don't even
see.
On Sunday, May 11, 2014, David Roberson <dlrober...@aol.com> wrote:
The specifications for the radar system below are typical of a pulsed radar
system and not what I would expect from a standard Doppler radar. The duty
cycle appears to be .1% for the unit listed whereas a Doppler radar is CW. The
average power is 1300 watts of RF into the antenna, I assume. The gain of the
antenna may be 34 dB relative to an isotropic radiator.
Someone might be thinking of a pulsed Doppler radar which measures the
change in transmit frequency of the returning pulses to get target velocity
information. That type of radar is not a standard Doppler.
Dave
-----Original Message-----
From: Eric Walker <eric.wal...@gmail.com>
To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Sent: Sun, May 11, 2014 9:18 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Vector Potential Wave Radio
Stewart,
I have glanced at your web site. I have not taken a close look at your
research, but I would not be surprised if you ended up being onto something
about doppler radar being a source of hypoxia, oxygen free radicals and the
death of nearby animal and plant life. You also have a theory of dark matter,
and a hunch that dark matter is indirectly responsible for the conclusions
concerning doppler radar that you arrive at in your informal research.
On the connection to dark matter, I personally have no opinion. I am
skeptical, however, that your research is sufficient to establish any kind of
linkage between the effects of doppler radar and dark matter, however. In
light of this doubt, I think you might be able to get your investigation into
doppler radar out to a wider audience if you did not combine it with the
question of dark matter. Adding dark matter into the mix asks too much of
people in their suspension of disbelief for them to be able to give much
credibility to your doppler radar hunch, even if both hunches ended up being
true.
Eric
On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 5:55 PM, ChemE Stewart <cheme...@gmail.com> wrote:
Radar/Call Sign MHT
Model ASR-9
Max Pulsed Power (Watts) 1,300,000
Gain (dBi) 34
Frequency (MHz) 2,800
RPM 12.5
Max Power Density (W/m2) @ 10 km 10.39
Pulse Duration(uSec) 1.00
Pulse Repition Factor (Hz) 1,000
Range Est. (Miles) 60
Latitude 42.937248
Longitude -71.437286
FIPS 33011
County Hillsborough
State NH
