Bob,
Thanks for clarifying that situation since I misunderstood your point entirely.
Dave
-----Original Message-----
From: Bob Cook <frobertc...@hotmail.com>
To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Sent: Mon, May 12, 2014 10:46 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Vector Potential Wave Radio
Dave--
The issue I raised regarding tritium is not that tritium is produced by the
radiation, but that existing tritium assimilated from the environment, is
stimulated to decay by emission of a beta particle at a rate that is higher
than its natural decay half life of about 10.5 years.
Bob
----- Original Message -----
From: David Roberson
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Monday, May 12, 2014 11:29 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Vector Potential Wave Radio
Bob,
I suspect that you are correct in your concern provided that the organism DNA
is damaged. Perhaps we should think about the energy associated with each
photon as it impacts the cell instead of a complete wave front. Each photon
has much less than .1 eV of energy, a level which I assume could be
dangerous. If we consider a large number of photons acting as a group we
most likely should consider heat damage instead of individual point damage.
After all, the action of many simultaneous photons results in the
interference patterns that measure in the near fractional wave lengths.
If a high Q resonance exists one might see coupling from the induced fields.
I do not recall anyone finding a resonance of this nature that could be
excited to a dangerous extent. One might think that any energy coupling to a
DNA strand would be shared among the nearby molecules, especially water.
The tritium radiation hazard seems to be of a different nature and much more
concerning. In that case the energy released by a single event is
concentrated in space and capable of direct damage to DNA. I have not seen
reason to suspect that normal cellular towers or radar systems are capable of
producing tritium. I would expect that the energy is far too un concentrated
to achieve that goal.
Dave
-----Original Message-----
From: Bob Cook <frobertc...@hotmail.com>
To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Sent: Mon, May 12, 2014 12:21 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Vector Potential Wave Radio
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
