Re: [Vo]:More on UVC & Covid
In reply to Jonathan Berry's message of Sat, 25 Apr 2020 17:40:28 +1200: Hi, [snip] >This needs public pressure behind it! > >Makes a LOT more sense than shutting everything down, might take a little >while to ramp up production but this should be top priority! > >Please, pass this on to people! I think Donald is lurker. ;) Regards, Robin van Spaandonk local asymmetry = temporary success
Re: [Vo]:More on UVC & Covid
This needs public pressure behind it! Makes a LOT more sense than shutting everything down, might take a little while to ramp up production but this should be top priority! Please, pass this on to people! On Sat, 25 Apr 2020 at 16:03, Ron Wormus wrote: > Source: > https://news.columbia.edu/ultraviolet-technology-virus-covid-19-UV-light#/ > > *Could a New Ultraviolet Technology Fight the Spread of Coronavirus?* > > Columbia researcher David Brenner believes far-UVC light—safe for humans, > but lethal for viruses— could be a ‘game changer.’ > > By Carla Cantor > April 21, 2020 > Image: > https://news.columbia.edu/sites/default/files/styles/cu_crop/public/content/airport-ultraviolet-lamp-covid-large.jpg?itok=aJpNEIFJ > The researchers say far-UVC lighting could be deployed in hospitals, > schools, airplanes, airports and other transportation hubs —anywhere where > people congregate. > Photo: Columbia Center for Radiological Research > > A technique that zaps airborne viruses with a narrow-wavelength band of UV > light shows promise for curtailing the person-to-person spread of COVID-19 > in indoor public places. > > The technology, developed by Columbia University's Center for Radiological > Research (https://www.crr.columbia.edu/), uses lamps that emit > continuous, low doses of a particular wavelength of ultraviolent light, > known as far-UVC, which can kill viruses and bacteria without harming human > skin, eyes and other tissues, as is the problem with conventional UV light. > > “Far-UVC light has the potential to be a ‘game changer,’” said David > Brenner, professor of radiation biophysics and director of the center. “It > can be safely used in occupied public spaces, and it kills pathogens in the > air before we can breathe them in.” > > The research team’s experiments have shown far-UVC effective in > eradicating two types of airborne seasonal coronaviruses (the ones that > cause coughs and colds). The researchers are now testing the light against > the SARS-CoV-2 virus at Columbia in a biosafety laboratory, with > encouraging results, Brenner said. > > The team previously found the method effective in inactivating the > airborne H1N1 influenza virus, as well as drug-resistant bacteria. And > multiple, long-term studies on animals and humans have confirmed that > exposure to far-UVC does not cause damage to the skin or eyes. > > "Our system is a low-cost, safe solution to eradicating airborne viruses > minutes after they've been breathed, coughed or sneezed into the air." > > > > If widely used in occupied public places, far-UVC technology has the > potential to provide a powerful check on future epidemics and pandemics, > Brenner said. He added that even when researchers develop a vaccine against > the virus that causes COVID, it will not protect against the next novel > virus. > > “Our system is a low-cost, safe solution to eradicating airborne viruses > minutes after they've been breathed, coughed or sneezed into the air,” > Brenner said. “Not only does it have the potential to prevent the global > spread of the virus that causes COVID-19, but also future novel viruses, as > well as more familiar viruses like influenza and measles.” > > Brenner envisions the use of safe overhead far-UVC lamps in a wide range > of indoor public spaces. The technology, which can be easily retrofitted > into existing light fixtures, he said, could be deployed in hospitals and > doctors’ offices as well as schools, shelters, airports, airplanes and > other transportation hubs. > > Scientists have known for decades that broad-spectrum, germicidal UV light > has the capacity to kill microbes. Hospitals and laboratories often use UV > light to sterilize tools and other equipment. But conventional ultraviolet > light is highly penetrating and can cause skin cancer and eye problems. > > In contrast, far-UVC, which has a very short wavelength, cannot reach or > damage living human cells. But the narrow band wavelength can still > penetrate and kill very small viruses and bacteria floating in the air or > on surfaces. > > Far-UVC lamps are now in production by several companies, although ramping > up to large-scale production, as well as approval by the Food and Drug > Administration and Environmental Protection Agency, will take several > months. At between $500 and $1000 per lamp, the lamps are relatively > inexpensive, and once they are mass produced the prices would likely fall, > Brenner said. > > “Far-UVC takes a fundamentally different tactic in the war against > COVID-19,” Brenner said. “Most approaches focus on fighting the virus once > it has gotten into the body. Far-UVC is one of the very few approaches that > has the potential to prevent the spread of viruses before they enter the > body.” >
[Vo]:More on UVC & Covid
Source: https://news.columbia.edu/ultraviolet-technology-virus-covid-19-UV- light#/ *Could a New Ultraviolet Technology Fight the Spread of Coronavirus?* Columbia researcher David Brenner believes far-UVC lightsafe for humans, but lethal for viruses could be a game changer. By Carla Cantor April 21, 2020 Image: https://news.columbia.edu/sites/default/files/styles/cu_crop/public/content/airport- ultraviolet-lamp-covid-large.jpg?itok=aJpNEIFJ The researchers say far-UVC lighting could be deployed in hospitals, schools, airplanes, airports and other transportation hubs anywhere where people congregate. Photo: Columbia Center for Radiological Research A technique that zaps airborne viruses with a narrow-wavelength band of UV light shows promise for curtailing the person-to-person spread of COVID-19 in indoor public places. The technology, developed by Columbia University's Center for Radiological Research (https://www.crr.columbia.edu/), uses lamps that emit continuous, low doses of a particular wavelength of ultraviolent light, known as far-UVC, which can kill viruses and bacteria without harming human skin, eyes and other tissues, as is the problem with conventional UV light. Far-UVC light has the potential to be a game changer, said David Brenner, professor of radiation biophysics and director of the center. It can be safely used in occupied public spaces, and it kills pathogens in the air before we can breathe them in. The research teams experiments have shown far-UVC effective in eradicating two types of airborne seasonal coronaviruses (the ones that cause coughs and colds). The researchers are now testing the light against the SARS-CoV-2 virus at Columbia in a biosafety laboratory, with encouraging results, Brenner said. The team previously found the method effective in inactivating the airborne H1N1 influenza virus, as well as drug-resistant bacteria. And multiple, long-term studies on animals and humans have confirmed that exposure to far-UVC does not cause damage to the skin or eyes. "Our system is a low-cost, safe solution to eradicating airborne viruses minutes after they've been breathed, coughed or sneezed into the air." If widely used in occupied public places, far-UVC technology has the potential to provide a powerful check on future epidemics and pandemics, Brenner said. He added that even when researchers develop a vaccine against the virus that causes COVID, it will not protect against the next novel virus. Our system is a low-cost, safe solution to eradicating airborne viruses minutes after they've been breathed, coughed or sneezed into the air, Brenner said. Not only does it have the potential to prevent the global spread of the virus that causes COVID-19, but also future novel viruses, as well as more familiar viruses like influenza and measles. Brenner envisions the use of safe overhead far-UVC lamps in a wide range of indoor public spaces. The technology, which can be easily retrofitted into existing light fixtures, he said, could be deployed in hospitals and doctors offices as well as schools, shelters, airports, airplanes and other transportation hubs. Scientists have known for decades that broad-spectrum, germicidal UV light has the capacity to kill microbes. Hospitals and laboratories often use UV light to sterilize tools and other equipment. But conventional ultraviolet light is highly penetrating and can cause skin cancer and eye problems. In contrast, far-UVC, which has a very short wavelength, cannot reach or damage living human cells. But the narrow band wavelength can still penetrate and kill very small viruses and bacteria floating in the air or on surfaces. Far-UVC lamps are now in production by several companies, although ramping up to large-scale production, as well as approval by the Food and Drug Administration and Environmental Protection Agency, will take several months. At between $500 and $1000 per lamp, the lamps are relatively inexpensive, and once they are mass produced the prices would likely fall, Brenner said. Far-UVC takes a fundamentally different tactic in the war against COVID-19, Brenner said. Most approaches focus on fighting the virus once it has gotten into the body. Far-UVC is one of the very few approaches that has the potential to prevent the spread of viruses before they enter the body.
Re: [Vo]:Re: CONCEPTS OF TIME--
Making no assumptions as to the existence or nature of time and space, we can reduce their defining properties to more fundamental propositions: • there are information processors (us) • thus there is, implicitly, 'information', the actual substance and format of which is determined by our form of processing For example 1 and 0 are the 'stuff' of information relative to a digital IC, and the dimensions of their potential relations are also 'binary', in that that they're sequential, and / or parallel. So for instance, going a little deeper into that analogy, the basic building blocks of digital processing - logic gates, and their associated truth tables - are mapped to the finite (and thus, again, 'implicit') range of first-order permutations of basic spatiotemporal relations; ie. "if A=1 when B=1 then C=1" gives us an 'And' logical operation.. ..Likewise, if one's on when the other's off, we get 'Or' or perhaps 'Nor', and so on and so forth. You get the point; The spatiotemporal dichotomy is inherent to the nature of 'information' itself. An inevitable prerequisite for 'processing'. Whether we consider serial or 'parallel' processing. Yet it is not 'time and space' that are intrinsically invoked here, but something even more fundamental: simultaneity and sequentiality. A logic gate's truth table refers to an instant of time - it's essentially timeless - describing conditions between coextant states, such that, say, C=1 only when A=1 within a threshold period determined by an onboard clock. Similarly, processing information necessitates some form of basic 'memory' in which values can be stored, retrieved and incremented. IOW, processing depends upon two informational dimensions - one field in which all the information is coextant, and another in which it is not. That is to say, processing - and information itself - is intrinsically serial and parallel. Written or spoken, a given word is the same information with different spatiotemporal distributions, but each has a foot in both domains. So a spatiotemporal dichotomy is inherent, and built into the nature and very existence of both 'information', and 'processors' (with no particular regard to the animate). Yet we also know from relativity that there's actually no such thing as true 'simultaneity' - rather, what we may reduce to 'temporal integration windows' (TIW's) are improvised or coalesced on the fly; in the case of a typical IC, by a quartz timing crystal, but likewise in our own physiology, TIW's are built into every level of processing, from primary receptors all the way up to cortex; every 'now' composed of a myriad flux of smaller 'nows' with progressively shorter TIW's. 'Attention span' is the executive-level TIW, and at the base levels are, for instance, the shortest intervals we can detect between stimuli - such as the threshold between a click-train and a 'buzzing sound', or visual flicker detection; where a series of distinct events merge into one continuous event. Our own data-timing clocks use relative, rather than constant time. The key timing relation that binds all the information we process together is factor-of-two symmetry, in both time and space. This is why we experience 'octave equivalence' between frequencies in that particular relationship in the spatial domain, and likewise, 'rhythm entrainment' in the temporal domain. By definition, 'C2' and 'C4', say, are not 'the same note', they're not 'double or half' one another's frequency, and their ineffably-paradoxical sensation of equivalence actually pertains to the bandwidth of their frequency interval being the simplest-possible relationship, resolving to the shortest-possible (ie. most energy efficient) TIW, resolving every cycle of the fundamental (the lower freq). Whereas, the next most consonant interval, the 'fifth' resolves every other cycle (a factor of three relationship), thus a slightly larger TIW and slightly more work. The harmonic series follows the integer number line of relative factors of a given fundamental. Thus what we regard as 'harmonic consonance' is actually just this same weird 'equivalence' we perceive in octaves; there's only degrees of 'inequivalence' / difference, where progressively longer frequency resolutions requires longer TIW's and more energy, sounding more and more 'dissonant' (but really, just 'less equivalent'). You see that this anomalous perceptual parity forms a kind of 'zero' for whatever form of processing we're using for metadata - that is, equivalence / difference is a kind of analogue 'bit', in that it can have a zero or variable value, such that we regard C1 and C4 as somehow 'the same' note; but where 'pitch class' is a higher-order manifestation of this phenomenon (and likewise rhythm entrainment in the temporal domain), these information-binding principles are more fundamental that the modality of audition itself, since it is non-auditory, abstract information that we, as processors, ascribe to the
