Maybe those proponents of all round screening of bedrooms have a point then Vic? it would be very expensive if it turned not to work- but I'd like to know if anyone has tried this... My Hum is not so intrusive, generally to warrant this work- but many posters would benefit if it works even half well. This would also clarify the amount of breakthrough radiation in the average home- assuming it has mains power installed.
On Monday, 16 April 2012 00:49:32 UTC+1, Vic wrote: > > Inverse square law doesn't apply when your problem is in your home > wiring - Now does it? > > Harmonics in power lines have always been there - Now there are some > more, only these are high-power harmonics - 128 or 256X > > It's piggy backed alright - Ripped from the power lines by BPL > emissions and into your matress springs..... > > On Apr 15, 5:28 pm, Trev <[email protected]> wrote: > > OK- Lets bring up another issue- Inverse square law. > > All the spurious output generated at UHF is radiated from a point > source. > > Each discrete you would claim to be synchronous by virtue of the > harmonic > > progressions inherent in the fundamental driver source- the power lines > > and associated piggy back carriers at UHF. > > It seems too much to think that, at ever increasing loss by attenuation, > > waves could penetrate human tissue and pass underground at significant > > levels to cause harm or hum, other than realy close by. > > What I suggest is needed, apart from technical assertions, is power > level > > spectrum densities that pin down the culprit you highlight actually in > the > > vicinity of effects. > > I'm not saying you're wrong Vic, anywhere- just a plug at keeping the > > science tied to real events that a court of law would expect to see. I > > think Josh came from this angle also. > > 'They're' not going to admit to anything without 'prima face' evidence. > > Yes, I admit the technical depth of your paper is over my head which is > why > > I take a man on the street approach -with a wider view to push for, as > I'd > > like to see you win on this.. > > > > > > > > On Friday, 13 April 2012 05:08:24 UTC+1, Vic wrote: > > > > > Another young guy dropped dead tonight on a sports field near London, > > > UK. He was 22 years old. > > > > > I sent both of my documents to his parents and to the sports club. > > > > > Anyone in the UK send anything? I doubt it. > > > > > The information is there to kill this "thing". Why isn't anyone doing > > > anything? > > > > > There are a lot of groups of people taking out legal complaints over > > > in the States now that they know what "it" is. Others who were going > > > after stopping the so-called "smart" meters have swung BPL info into > > > their litigation too. > > > > > C'mon everybody. On Monday, 16 April 2012 00:49:32 UTC+1, Vic wrote: > > Inverse square law doesn't apply when your problem is in your home > wiring - Now does it? > > Harmonics in power lines have always been there - Now there are some > more, only these are high-power harmonics - 128 or 256X > > It's piggy backed alright - Ripped from the power lines by BPL > emissions and into your matress springs..... > > On Apr 15, 5:28 pm, Trev <[email protected]> wrote: > > OK- Lets bring up another issue- Inverse square law. > > All the spurious output generated at UHF is radiated from a point > source. > > Each discrete you would claim to be synchronous by virtue of the > harmonic > > progressions inherent in the fundamental driver source- the power lines > > and associated piggy back carriers at UHF. > > It seems too much to think that, at ever increasing loss by attenuation, > > waves could penetrate human tissue and pass underground at significant > > levels to cause harm or hum, other than realy close by. > > What I suggest is needed, apart from technical assertions, is power > level > > spectrum densities that pin down the culprit you highlight actually in > the > > vicinity of effects. > > I'm not saying you're wrong Vic, anywhere- just a plug at keeping the > > science tied to real events that a court of law would expect to see. I > > think Josh came from this angle also. > > 'They're' not going to admit to anything without 'prima face' evidence. > > Yes, I admit the technical depth of your paper is over my head which is > why > > I take a man on the street approach -with a wider view to push for, as > I'd > > like to see you win on this.. > > > > > > > > On Friday, 13 April 2012 05:08:24 UTC+1, Vic wrote: > > > > > Another young guy dropped dead tonight on a sports field near London, > > > UK. He was 22 years old. > > > > > I sent both of my documents to his parents and to the sports club. > > > > > Anyone in the UK send anything? I doubt it. > > > > > The information is there to kill this "thing". Why isn't anyone doing > > > anything? > > > > > There are a lot of groups of people taking out legal complaints over > > > in the States now that they know what "it" is. Others who were going > > > after stopping the so-called "smart" meters have swung BPL info into > > > their litigation too. > > > > > C'mon everybody. On Monday, 16 April 2012 00:49:32 UTC+1, Vic wrote: > > Inverse square law doesn't apply when your problem is in your home > wiring - Now does it? > > Harmonics in power lines have always been there - Now there are some > more, only these are high-power harmonics - 128 or 256X > > It's piggy backed alright - Ripped from the power lines by BPL > emissions and into your matress springs..... > > On Apr 15, 5:28 pm, Trev <[email protected]> wrote: > > OK- Lets bring up another issue- Inverse square law. > > All the spurious output generated at UHF is radiated from a point > source. > > Each discrete you would claim to be synchronous by virtue of the > harmonic > > progressions inherent in the fundamental driver source- the power lines > > and associated piggy back carriers at UHF. > > It seems too much to think that, at ever increasing loss by attenuation, > > waves could penetrate human tissue and pass underground at significant > > levels to cause harm or hum, other than realy close by. > > What I suggest is needed, apart from technical assertions, is power > level > > spectrum densities that pin down the culprit you highlight actually in > the > > vicinity of effects. > > I'm not saying you're wrong Vic, anywhere- just a plug at keeping the > > science tied to real events that a court of law would expect to see. I > > think Josh came from this angle also. > > 'They're' not going to admit to anything without 'prima face' evidence. > > Yes, I admit the technical depth of your paper is over my head which is > why > > I take a man on the street approach -with a wider view to push for, as > I'd > > like to see you win on this.. > > > > > > > > On Friday, 13 April 2012 05:08:24 UTC+1, Vic wrote: > > > > > Another young guy dropped dead tonight on a sports field near London, > > > UK. He was 22 years old. > > > > > I sent both of my documents to his parents and to the sports club. > > > > > Anyone in the UK send anything? I doubt it. > > > > > The information is there to kill this "thing". Why isn't anyone doing > > > anything? > > > > > There are a lot of groups of people taking out legal complaints over > > > in the States now that they know what "it" is. Others who were going > > > after stopping the so-called "smart" meters have swung BPL info into > > > their litigation too. > > > > > C'mon everybody. On Monday, 16 April 2012 00:49:32 UTC+1, Vic wrote: > > Inverse square law doesn't apply when your problem is in your home > wiring - Now does it? > > Harmonics in power lines have always been there - Now there are some > more, only these are high-power harmonics - 128 or 256X > > It's piggy backed alright - Ripped from the power lines by BPL > emissions and into your matress springs..... > > On Apr 15, 5:28 pm, Trev <[email protected]> wrote: > > OK- Lets bring up another issue- Inverse square law. > > All the spurious output generated at UHF is radiated from a point > source. > > Each discrete you would claim to be synchronous by virtue of the > harmonic > > progressions inherent in the fundamental driver source- the power lines > > and associated piggy back carriers at UHF. > > It seems too much to think that, at ever increasing loss by attenuation, > > waves could penetrate human tissue and pass underground at significant > > levels to cause harm or hum, other than realy close by. > > What I suggest is needed, apart from technical assertions, is power > level > > spectrum densities that pin down the culprit you highlight actually in > the > > vicinity of effects. > > I'm not saying you're wrong Vic, anywhere- just a plug at keeping the > > science tied to real events that a court of law would expect to see. I > > think Josh came from this angle also. > > 'They're' not going to admit to anything without 'prima face' evidence. > > Yes, I admit the technical depth of your paper is over my head which is > why > > I take a man on the street approach -with a wider view to push for, as > I'd > > like to see you win on this.. > > > > > > > > On Friday, 13 April 2012 05:08:24 UTC+1, Vic wrote: > > > > > Another young guy dropped dead tonight on a sports field near London, > > > UK. He was 22 years old. > > > > > I sent both of my documents to his parents and to the sports club. > > > > > Anyone in the UK send anything? I doubt it. > > > > > The information is there to kill this "thing". Why isn't anyone doing > > > anything? > > > > > There are a lot of groups of people taking out legal complaints over > > > in the States now that they know what "it" is. Others who were going > > > after stopping the so-called "smart" meters have swung BPL info into > > > their litigation too. > > > > > C'mon everybody. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Hum Sufferers" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/hum-sufferers/-/M4hTSgiCfJwJ. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hum-sufferers?hl=en.
