EMP blast - what would happen really?

Discussion in 'Electronic Design' started by mrdarrett@gmail.com, Aug 14, 2006.

  1. Guest

    I've heard that if an EMP weapon were used, *nothing* in the blast area
    that relies on electricity would work.

    Is this really true?

    If you had an alkaline battery, it would still put out a voltage,
    correct?

    Failing that, one could still take a roll of paper towels, immerse the
    towels in a salt solution (table salt should do), place alternating
    plates of copper and zinc (or any two dissimilar metals), and obtain a
    current... right?

    Would motors still work, or would their windings be guaranteed
    destroyed in an EMP blast?

    Thanks,

    Michael
     
    , Aug 14, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. almo Guest

    wrote:
    > I've heard that if an EMP weapon were used, *nothing* in the blast area
    > that relies on electricity would work.
    >
    > Is this really true?
    >
    > If you had an alkaline battery, it would still put out a voltage,
    > correct?
    >
    > Failing that, one could still take a roll of paper towels, immerse the
    > towels in a salt solution (table salt should do), place alternating
    > plates of copper and zinc (or any two dissimilar metals), and obtain a
    > current... right?
    >
    > Would motors still work, or would their windings be guaranteed
    > destroyed in an EMP blast?
    >
    > Thanks,
    >
    > Michael


    Michael - The EMP (electro-magnetic pulse) would not affect batteries.
    In fact, it's really only a concern for IC's, especially
    microprocessors. The big deal several years ago was that U.S. military
    aircraft relied heavily on silicon ICs and microprocessors, but the
    stone-age Soviet planes were still using vacuum tubes and the vacuum
    tubes would be pretty much immune to a nuclear EMP. The EMP problem
    goes back to Einstein, et. al. wherein a wave can also be an atomic
    particle, which is true of course, and can, and does occasionally knock
    out one bit of a memory cell, usually in spacecraft. However, the
    caveat being that the nuclear blast causing the EMP doesn't evaporate
    you and your battery cell, thereby leaving you no reason to worry abut
    the EMP :)))

    Almo
     
    almo, Aug 14, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. tlbs101 Guest

    wrote:
    > I've heard that if an EMP weapon were used, *nothing* in the blast area
    > that relies on electricity would work.
    >
    > Is this really true?
    >
    > If you had an alkaline battery, it would still put out a voltage,
    > correct?
    >
    > Failing that, one could still take a roll of paper towels, immerse the
    > towels in a salt solution (table salt should do), place alternating
    > plates of copper and zinc (or any two dissimilar metals), and obtain a
    > current... right?
    >
    > Would motors still work, or would their windings be guaranteed
    > destroyed in an EMP blast?
    >
    > Thanks,
    >
    > Michael


    After an EMP event, batteries will still hold their chemical charge,
    electrical motors will still function (except, perhaps, for the
    smallest micro-motors), relays will still function, as would
    electron-tubes. The power grids will see a major overload, and
    protection circuits will "kick" in. Whether they recover in a timely
    manner is another subject.

    What will be damaged are most unprotected electronic circuits: Consumer
    electronics, TVs, radios, cell phones, iPods, Blackberries, hand-held
    video games, home computers, etc. Even automobiles have so much
    electronic gear (computers, sensors) that they would be rendered
    useless after an EMP event. This is one [small] reason I keep a 1969
    Chevy truck -- no electronics.

    The key is the threshold energy: motors, generators, transformers,
    relays, power-grid components, vacuum tubes all operate in the range of
    10 milliJouls to >1 MegaJoules, while all consumer electronics
    (integrated circuits) have a threshold energy at or below 1 milliJoules
    (down to 100 nanoJoules and less). EMP pulses can produce 10
    milliJoules inside of electronic circuits, and 100 Joules outside of
    electronic enclosures.

    The majority of military electronic gear has protection circuits
    built-in so they would survive (at least they are designed and tested
    that way).
     
    tlbs101, Aug 14, 2006
    #3
  4. Guest

    almo wrote:

    > Michael - The EMP (electro-magnetic pulse) would not affect batteries.
    > In fact, it's really only a concern for IC's, especially
    > microprocessors. The big deal several years ago was that U.S. military
    > aircraft relied heavily on silicon ICs and microprocessors, but the
    > stone-age Soviet planes were still using vacuum tubes and the vacuum
    > tubes would be pretty much immune to a nuclear EMP. The EMP problem
    > goes back to Einstein, et. al. wherein a wave can also be an atomic
    > particle, which is true of course, and can, and does occasionally knock
    > out one bit of a memory cell, usually in spacecraft. However, the
    > caveat being that the nuclear blast causing the EMP doesn't evaporate
    > you and your battery cell, thereby leaving you no reason to worry abut
    > the EMP :)))


    Almo, you are confusing two very different things.

    EMP is not an atomic particle sort of wave, but instead is essentially
    a very powerful radio wave. It induces current in antennas -
    intentional ones, and also any conductor that it encounters. When it
    hits the huge antenna that is the electrical power grid, it can be
    powerful enough to fry "big" things like motors, but when it hits
    smaller conductors it can induce enough to fry sensitive things like
    IC's (which often are more electrically fragile than tubes). The power
    of the pulse-induced current does the primary damage, though there
    could perhaps be some secondary effects.

    But you've mixed it up with the effect of individual charged particles,
    such as from radioactive decay or cosmic sources, on very small
    structures in IC's. That's an entirely different matter - it cuases
    erroneous operation and flips flip flops, but it usually
    non-destructive, unless it triggers self-distructive current flow from
    the ordinary power supply by putting an IC into latch-up.
     
    , Aug 14, 2006
    #4
  5. Eeyore Guest

    wrote:

    > almo wrote:
    >
    > > Michael - The EMP (electro-magnetic pulse) would not affect batteries.
    > > In fact, it's really only a concern for IC's, especially
    > > microprocessors. The big deal several years ago was that U.S. military
    > > aircraft relied heavily on silicon ICs and microprocessors, but the
    > > stone-age Soviet planes were still using vacuum tubes and the vacuum
    > > tubes would be pretty much immune to a nuclear EMP. The EMP problem
    > > goes back to Einstein, et. al. wherein a wave can also be an atomic
    > > particle, which is true of course, and can, and does occasionally knock
    > > out one bit of a memory cell, usually in spacecraft. However, the
    > > caveat being that the nuclear blast causing the EMP doesn't evaporate
    > > you and your battery cell, thereby leaving you no reason to worry abut
    > > the EMP :)))

    >
    > Almo, you are confusing two very different things.
    >
    > EMP is not an atomic particle sort of wave, but instead is essentially
    > a very powerful radio wave.


    Spot on.


    > It induces current in antennas -
    > intentional ones, and also any conductor that it encounters. When it
    > hits the huge antenna that is the electrical power grid, it can be
    > powerful enough to fry "big" things like motors, but when it hits
    > smaller conductors it can induce enough to fry sensitive things like
    > IC's (which often are more electrically fragile than tubes). The power
    > of the pulse-induced current does the primary damage, though there
    > could perhaps be some secondary effects.
    >
    > But you've mixed it up with the effect of individual charged particles,
    > such as from radioactive decay or cosmic sources, on very small
    > structures in IC's. That's an entirely different matter - it cuases
    > erroneous operation and flips flip flops, but it usually
    > non-destructive, unless it triggers self-distructive current flow from
    > the ordinary power supply by putting an IC into latch-up.


    A US test once knocked out street lighting in Hawaii !

    http://www.fas.org/nuke/intro/nuke/emp.htm
    http://www.sonic.net/~doretk/Issues/00-03-SPR/theblack.html
    http://www.lewrockwell.com/wanniski/wanniski15.html
    http://www.unitedstatesaction.com/emp-terror.htm

    Graham
     
    Eeyore, Aug 14, 2006
    #5
  6. Guest

    tlbs101 wrote:
    > wrote:
    > > I've heard that if an EMP weapon were used, *nothing* in the blast area
    > > that relies on electricity would work.
    > >
    > > Is this really true?
    > >
    > > If you had an alkaline battery, it would still put out a voltage,
    > > correct?
    > >
    > > Failing that, one could still take a roll of paper towels, immerse the
    > > towels in a salt solution (table salt should do), place alternating
    > > plates of copper and zinc (or any two dissimilar metals), and obtain a
    > > current... right?
    > >
    > > Would motors still work, or would their windings be guaranteed
    > > destroyed in an EMP blast?
    > >
    > > Thanks,
    > >
    > > Michael

    >
    > After an EMP event, batteries will still hold their chemical charge,
    > electrical motors will still function (except, perhaps, for the
    > smallest micro-motors), relays will still function, as would
    > electron-tubes. The power grids will see a major overload, and
    > protection circuits will "kick" in. Whether they recover in a timely
    > manner is another subject.
    >
    > What will be damaged are most unprotected electronic circuits: Consumer
    > electronics, TVs, radios, cell phones, iPods, Blackberries, hand-held
    > video games, home computers, etc. Even automobiles have so much
    > electronic gear (computers, sensors) that they would be rendered
    > useless after an EMP event. This is one [small] reason I keep a 1969
    > Chevy truck -- no electronics.
    >
    > The key is the threshold energy: motors, generators, transformers,
    > relays, power-grid components, vacuum tubes all operate in the range of
    > 10 milliJouls to >1 MegaJoules, while all consumer electronics
    > (integrated circuits) have a threshold energy at or below 1 milliJoules
    > (down to 100 nanoJoules and less). EMP pulses can produce 10
    > milliJoules inside of electronic circuits, and 100 Joules outside of
    > electronic enclosures.
    >
    > The majority of military electronic gear has protection circuits
    > built-in so they would survive (at least they are designed and tested
    > that way).



    So vacuum tubes (and diesel generators) should still work... and here I
    thought we'd have to go into hydraulic gates (some researcher in MIT
    was working on these, I can't find the link at the moment) in the event
    an EMP went off...

    Thanks,

    Michael
     
    , Aug 14, 2006
    #6
  7. Eeyore Guest

    Eeyore wrote:

    > wrote:
    >
    > > almo wrote:
    > >
    > > > Michael - The EMP (electro-magnetic pulse) would not affect batteries.
    > > > In fact, it's really only a concern for IC's, especially
    > > > microprocessors. The big deal several years ago was that U.S. military
    > > > aircraft relied heavily on silicon ICs and microprocessors, but the
    > > > stone-age Soviet planes were still using vacuum tubes and the vacuum
    > > > tubes would be pretty much immune to a nuclear EMP. The EMP problem
    > > > goes back to Einstein, et. al. wherein a wave can also be an atomic
    > > > particle, which is true of course, and can, and does occasionally knock
    > > > out one bit of a memory cell, usually in spacecraft. However, the
    > > > caveat being that the nuclear blast causing the EMP doesn't evaporate
    > > > you and your battery cell, thereby leaving you no reason to worry abut
    > > > the EMP :)))

    > >
    > > Almo, you are confusing two very different things.
    > >
    > > EMP is not an atomic particle sort of wave, but instead is essentially
    > > a very powerful radio wave.

    >
    > Spot on.
    >
    > > It induces current in antennas -
    > > intentional ones, and also any conductor that it encounters. When it
    > > hits the huge antenna that is the electrical power grid, it can be
    > > powerful enough to fry "big" things like motors, but when it hits
    > > smaller conductors it can induce enough to fry sensitive things like
    > > IC's (which often are more electrically fragile than tubes). The power
    > > of the pulse-induced current does the primary damage, though there
    > > could perhaps be some secondary effects.
    > >
    > > But you've mixed it up with the effect of individual charged particles,
    > > such as from radioactive decay or cosmic sources, on very small
    > > structures in IC's. That's an entirely different matter - it cuases
    > > erroneous operation and flips flip flops, but it usually
    > > non-destructive, unless it triggers self-distructive current flow from
    > > the ordinary power supply by putting an IC into latch-up.

    >
    > A US test once knocked out street lighting in Hawaii !
    >
    > http://www.fas.org/nuke/intro/nuke/emp.htm
    > http://www.sonic.net/~doretk/Issues/00-03-SPR/theblack.html
    > http://www.lewrockwell.com/wanniski/wanniski15.html
    > http://www.unitedstatesaction.com/emp-terror.htm


    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

    Scrub that last link. There's loony stuff later on written by right wing
    nitwits.

    Graham
     
    Eeyore, Aug 14, 2006
    #7
  8. AndyS Guest

    wrote:
    > I've heard that if an EMP weapon were used, *nothing* in the blast area
    > that relies on electricity would work.
    >
    > Is this really true?
    >


    Andy comments:

    After reading the replies to your question, I am afraid that
    they have missed the point.

    The answer is , NO, you would not be able to download
    porn until you bought a new computer.......

    Sorry, ;.... but that's the fog of war.....

    Andy in Eureka, Texas
     
    AndyS, Aug 14, 2006
    #8
  9. Guest

    AndyS wrote:
    > wrote:
    > > I've heard that if an EMP weapon were used, *nothing* in the blast area
    > > that relies on electricity would work.
    > >
    > > Is this really true?
    > >

    >
    > Andy comments:
    >
    > After reading the replies to your question, I am afraid that
    > they have missed the point.
    >
    > The answer is , NO, you would not be able to download
    > porn until you bought a new computer.......
    >
    > Sorry, ;.... but that's the fog of war.....
    >
    > Andy in Eureka, Texas



    Porn, ha ha... they can use the analog solution: magazines.

    I was more concerned with the future wars our administration will get
    us into, but that's a whole 'nother story. In that case, the supply
    chain involved with "buying a new computer" may not exist...

    Cheers,

    Michael
     
    , Aug 14, 2006
    #9
  10. Guest

    wrote:
    > I've heard that if an EMP weapon were used, *nothing* in the blast area
    > that relies on electricity would work.
    >
    > Is this really true?
    >
    > If you had an alkaline battery, it would still put out a voltage,
    > correct?
    >
    > Failing that, one could still take a roll of paper towels, immerse the
    > towels in a salt solution (table salt should do), place alternating
    > plates of copper and zinc (or any two dissimilar metals), and obtain a
    > current... right?
    >
    > Would motors still work, or would their windings be guaranteed
    > destroyed in an EMP blast?
    >
    > Thanks,
    >
    > Michael


    As you suspect, the statement that after a detonation of an "EMP
    weapon", "nothing with 2 asterisks" in the "blast area" that "relies"
    on electricity would work is a bit inaccurate and/or misleading. Much
    electrical and electronic equipment already in existence would be
    destroyed or damaged. Some would not. This undamaged equipment would
    work fine after the pulse had gone by. Yes of course an alkaline
    battery would still put out a voltage. If it was in a circuit it might
    have got fried first. Of course if you made a voltaic pile out of wet
    tissues and dissimilar metals it would work. An EMP device does not
    abolish electric currents for ever within the blast area.

    If by an "EMP weapon", you mean a nuclear device optimized for EMP (all
    nuclear weapons produce EMP to some extent), they work by sending out
    an electromagnetic pulse which would induce more or less heavy currents
    in conductors. This could damage electronic equipment and electric
    power lines, generating stations and substations.

    The resistance to EMP by device is listed below, from most to least
    vulnerable:

    1. Integrated circuits (ICs), CPUs, silicon chips
    2. Transistors
    3. Vacuum Tubes (also known as thermionic valves)
    4. Inductors, motors

    Transistor technology is likely to fail and old vacuum equipment
    survive. However it must be considered, that different types of
    transistors and ICs show different sensitivity to EM: bipolar ICs and
    transistors are much less sensitive than FETs and especially MOSFETs.

    To protect sensitive electronics, a Faraday cage must be produced
    around the item. This can be done by wrapping the item, such as a radio
    in foil (any external connections should not touch foil) without any
    holes. This will shield the item from EM fields.

    So you can see that motors are fairly low down the list of vulnerable
    equipment.

    A strike *guaranteed* to burn out the windings in an electric motor
    would most likely destroy the building it is housed in by blast or heat
    anyway.

    When a defecting (for money) Soviet pilot landed a MiG fighter in japan
    towards the end of the Cold war, and US techs stripped it down, they
    laughed at how "backward" the Soviets were, still using vacuum tubes in
    the 1980s. Such dinky little tubes as well. Then they stopped laughing
    when they noticed a couple more features and realised they were looking
    at a practically EMP proof plane.
     
    , Aug 14, 2006
    #10
  11. On 14 Aug 2006 10:20:14 -0700, in sci.electronics.design "AndyS"
    <> wrote:

    >
    > wrote:
    >> I've heard that if an EMP weapon were used, *nothing* in the blast area
    >> that relies on electricity would work.
    >>
    >> Is this really true?
    >>

    >
    >Andy comments:
    >
    > After reading the replies to your question, I am afraid that
    >they have missed the point.
    >
    > The answer is , NO, you would not be able to download
    >porn until you bought a new computer.......
    >

    and it would put this guy out of business
    http://tinyurl.com/l4buy


    martin
     
    martin griffith, Aug 14, 2006
    #11
  12. In message <>, dated
    Mon, 14 Aug 2006, writes
    >Porn, ha ha... they can use the analog solution: magazines.


    Hard copy.
    --
    OOO - Own Opinions Only. Try www.jmwa.demon.co.uk and www.isce.org.uk
    2006 is YMMVI- Your mileage may vary immensely.

    John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK
     
    John Woodgate, Aug 14, 2006
    #12
  13. John Woodgate wrote:
    >
    > In message <>, dated
    > Mon, 14 Aug 2006, writes
    > >Porn, ha ha... they can use the analog solution: magazines.

    >
    > Hard copy.



    Before, or after?


    --
    Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
    prove it.
    Member of DAV #85.

    Michael A. Terrell
    Central Florida
     
    Michael A. Terrell, Aug 14, 2006
    #13
  14. In message <>, dated Mon, 14 Aug 2006,
    Michael A. Terrell <> writes
    >John Woodgate wrote:
    >>
    >> In message <>, dated
    >> Mon, 14 Aug 2006, writes
    >> >Porn, ha ha... they can use the analog solution: magazines.

    >>
    >> Hard copy.

    >
    >
    > Before, or after?


    During.
    --
    OOO - Own Opinions Only. Try www.jmwa.demon.co.uk and www.isce.org.uk
    2006 is YMMVI- Your mileage may vary immensely.

    John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK
     
    John Woodgate, Aug 14, 2006
    #14
  15. Genome Guest

    "John Woodgate" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > In message <>, dated
    > Mon, 14 Aug 2006, writes
    >>Porn, ha ha... they can use the analog solution: magazines.

    >
    > Hard copy.
    > --
    > OOO - Own Opinions Only. Try www.jmwa.demon.co.uk and www.isce.org.uk
    > 2006 is YMMVI- Your mileage may vary immensely.
    >
    > John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK


    Oh, so that is why they are advertising for Manhattan Supply Chain
    Consultants

    DNA


    'Porn, ha ha... they can use the analog solution: magazines.

    I was more concerned with the future wars our administration will get
    us into, but that's a whole 'nother story. In that case, the supply
    chain involved with "buying a new computer" may not exist...'
     
    Genome, Aug 14, 2006
    #15
  16. Sjouke Burry Guest

    wrote:
    > I've heard that if an EMP weapon were used, *nothing* in the blast area
    > that relies on electricity would work.
    >
    > Is this really true?
    >
    > If you had an alkaline battery, it would still put out a voltage,
    > correct?
    >
    > Failing that, one could still take a roll of paper towels, immerse the
    > towels in a salt solution (table salt should do), place alternating
    > plates of copper and zinc (or any two dissimilar metals), and obtain a
    > current... right?
    >
    > Would motors still work, or would their windings be guaranteed
    > destroyed in an EMP blast?
    >
    > Thanks,
    >
    > Michael
    >

    Wat would you think happens if 10000+ volts is induced
    in every meter of wire? Suddenly like with lightning,
    every computer,tv etc being blitzed, power lines evaporating,
    and all technical installations going to their last reward.
    All done by exploding a nuclear device just above the atmosphere.
    Some such damage seems to have occurred ,with a test explosion
    from th USA,frying the electric net on an island in the pacific.
    What happens is,atoms get separated from their electrons,causing
    the transportation of a huge amount of charge(like in lightning)
    only much worse,and it works best,if the radiation front hits the
    atmosfere from above.
    So yes, your battery keeps working, but your radioantenna
    or your headphone wire picks up enough to blow your radio.
    Isolation on the wiring in motors is the first to go,unless
    the motor is not connected to anything.
     
    Sjouke Burry, Aug 14, 2006
    #16
  17. Genome Guest

    <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > I've heard that if an EMP weapon were used, *nothing* in the blast area
    > that relies on electricity would work.
    >
    > Is this really true?
    >
    > If you had an alkaline battery, it would still put out a voltage,
    > correct?
    >
    > Failing that, one could still take a roll of paper towels, immerse the
    > towels in a salt solution (table salt should do), place alternating
    > plates of copper and zinc (or any two dissimilar metals), and obtain a
    > current... right?
    >
    > Would motors still work, or would their windings be guaranteed
    > destroyed in an EMP blast?
    >
    > Thanks,
    >
    > Michael
    >


    I just saw one of those programs on the telly where lotz of americans get
    killed by a tornado then get saved buy the fire department and there were
    some really good shots of the electricity stuff blowing up and the bloke in
    charge said he knew there were people dieing out there when he saw that.

    Anyway, I wondered why he didn't phone up the electricity company and ask
    them to switch it off before it got there. Then all of the electricity stuff
    wouldn't have blown up and all those americans would not have died.

    DNA
     
    Genome, Aug 14, 2006
    #17
  18. almo Guest

    wrote:
    > almo wrote:
    >
    > > Michael - The EMP (electro-magnetic pulse) would not affect batteries.
    > > In fact, it's really only a concern for IC's, especially
    > > microprocessors. The big deal several years ago was that U.S. military
    > > aircraft relied heavily on silicon ICs and microprocessors, but the
    > > stone-age Soviet planes were still using vacuum tubes and the vacuum
    > > tubes would be pretty much immune to a nuclear EMP. The EMP problem
    > > goes back to Einstein, et. al. wherein a wave can also be an atomic
    > > particle, which is true of course, and can, and does occasionally knock
    > > out one bit of a memory cell, usually in spacecraft. However, the
    > > caveat being that the nuclear blast causing the EMP doesn't evaporate
    > > you and your battery cell, thereby leaving you no reason to worry abut
    > > the EMP :)))

    >
    > Almo, you are confusing two very different things.
    >
    > EMP is not an atomic particle sort of wave, but instead is essentially
    > a very powerful radio wave. It induces current in antennas -
    > intentional ones, and also any conductor that it encounters. When it
    > hits the huge antenna that is the electrical power grid, it can be
    > powerful enough to fry "big" things like motors, but when it hits
    > smaller conductors it can induce enough to fry sensitive things like
    > IC's (which often are more electrically fragile than tubes). The power
    > of the pulse-induced current does the primary damage, though there
    > could perhaps be some secondary effects.
    >
    > But you've mixed it up with the effect of individual charged particles,
    > such as from radioactive decay or cosmic sources, on very small
    > structures in IC's. That's an entirely different matter - it cuases
    > erroneous operation and flips flip flops, but it usually
    > non-destructive, unless it triggers self-distructive current flow from
    > the ordinary power supply by putting an IC into latch-up.


    I thought I went out of my way to point out the "confusion" part.
    Although, true, it has been a matter of debate for a long time,
    nonetheless; is light a wave or a particle? Is light considered
    electro-magnetic energy?

    Reference Wikipedia -
    "In physics, wave-particle duality holds that light and matter exhibit
    properties of both waves and of particles. It is a central concept of
    quantum mechanics. The idea is rooted in a debate over the nature of
    light and matter dating back to the 1600s, when competing theories of
    light were proposed by Christiaan Huygens and Isaac Newton. Through the
    work of Albert Einstein, Louis de Broglie and many others, it is now
    established that all objects have both wave and particle nature (though
    this phenomenon is only detectable on small scales, such as with
    atoms), and that quantum mechanics provides the over-arching theory
    resolving this paradox."

    Almo
     
    almo, Aug 14, 2006
    #18
  19. w_tom Guest

    Sjouke Burry wrote:
    > Wat would you think happens if 10000+ volts is induced
    > in every meter of wire? Suddenly like with lightning,
    > every computer,tv etc being blitzed, power lines evaporating,
    > and all technical installations going to their last reward.


    Well, I just zapped a door handle with 18,000 volts. Not even a mark
    on the door handle. Somehow you are confusing volts with energy.
    There is very little relationship. How often do you blow your hand off
    due to static electric discharge? Voltage without other parameters
    tells us nothing - but can be used to hype junk science claims on the
    naive and those who blindly believe Rush Limbaugh.

    Having asked questions such as why, then that 10000+ volts induced
    one meter of wire means nothing. I discharged 18,000 volts in only
    0.003 meters - much more intense electric field - and I am still here
    to talk about it.
     
    w_tom, Aug 14, 2006
    #19
  20. Tim Williams Guest

    "almo" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > The EMP problem
    > goes back to Einstein, et. al. wherein a wave can also be an atomic
    > particle


    Eh? EM radiation is ONLY a photon. Not only that, those released from an
    EMP have very, very low energy (even the very light you're reading took only
    a few volts to create, and that has a frequency in the exahertz range).

    "Atomic" particles (presumably, those with mass which the world is built
    from) have a quantum mechanics wavefunction. They do NOT necessarily
    interact as EM waves do, because they aren't the same damned particle!

    And BTW, Einstein hated quantum physics, and it was DeBroglie besides.

    Tim
    --
    Deep Fryer: a very philosophical monk.
    Website: http://webpages.charter.net/dawill/tmoranwms
     
    Tim Williams, Aug 14, 2006
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. dudeguy

    what would happen if...

    dudeguy, Oct 17, 2005, in forum: Electronic Basics
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    253
    ehsjr
    Oct 17, 2005
  2. Joscelin

    what would happen if I.....

    Joscelin, May 27, 2004, in forum: Electronic Repair
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    230
    Sporkman
    Jun 2, 2004
  3. Shannell Sugrue
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    247
    Franc Zabkar
    Jul 30, 2004
  4. Michael C

    Really really really light power pack

    Michael C, Jul 1, 2005, in forum: Hobby Electronics
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    253
  5. Replies:
    1
    Views:
    442
    Jasen Betts
    Apr 3, 2009
Loading...

Share This Page