Dave, Then stop talking since you have done no research on correlations of marine life disease and human disease linked to EM radiation, which is understandable since you have spent your career generating EM radiation and you feel compelled to justify
http://www.ibtimes.com/international-scientists-warn-against-em-radiation-emitted-electronic-gadgets-1920862 Peak Pulsed power hitting surface of ocean reflecting off an aircraft 2000 ft overhead from a high gain radar is much higher than a low gain cell signal. Of course you RF guys average in the time the radar is off between pulses to make it sound low average power Ducting events are just as high power as reflecting events as the beam is bent into the ground I showed you a simulation calculating actual electrical current density in the saltwater. Conductivity of saltwater is relativity constant at given salinity and temp. and is ~ 1000 times better than soil. http://www.fondriest.com/environmental-measurements/parameters/water-quality/conductivity-salinity-tds/ Where do you think that induced electrical current goes Dave?? Back into thin air? Complete the energy balance. Electrical currents seek ground via the path of least resistance. A shallow reef is a good spot to go to ground with lots of dissolved ions in the seawater I showed you a few hundred thousand dead fish over 3 years and shocked manatee clustered around microwave radars with a P-value <0.01 as well diseased marine life with fins decayed off and fish turning black. I realize there is nothing that will convince you RF guys which is why we have the problem in the first place. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21716201 http://darkmattersalot.com/2014/11/01/wow/ http://darkmattersalot.com/2015/05/21/just-for-the-hell-of-it-i-threw-in-the-microwave-relay-stations/ Talk with you later. Stewart On Tue, Jul 7, 2015 at 7:45 PM, David Roberson <dlrober...@aol.com> wrote: > Stewart, > > I have already suggested that this discussion be terminated due to its > interference with the main issues. But, you clearly need good theoretical > backing for your concepts. > > The reflections from a low flying aircraft that you think as large are not > significant at all when you consider the actual number of watts being > directed to the water below. Far more power density would enter the > water from a person walking along the beach with a cellular phone in their > hand. And, keep in mind that the extremely close plane fly by would be > rare when compared to the normal RF sweep where none are typically close > by. This is a non issue. > > Again, the ducting events represent a trivial amount of power density > impacting the water. Do the calculations and you will realize. > > And, the reason that the RF does not penetrate deeply into the salt water > is for exactly the reason you mention(high conductivity). That protects > the reefs below form any serious RF levels. > > What is the conductivity of the salt water for the positive portion of the > waveform? And then you should answer the same question for the negative > portion. Saying so does not make it true. > > Why do you think I question that electrical currents appear on the ocean > surface due to ship antennas? This is exactly what is expected. The vast > majority of those currents are within the RF frequency region. They are > the physical phenomena that result in reflections from the ocean and it > would be strange indeed if they were not present. Did I need to read about > that theory again? > > I have not seen anything new or revolutionary about your posts except for > the assumptions that are not valid. Is it really unusual to you that > conductive salt water can be influenced by changing magnetic fields? > Perhaps you should study Eddie current braking if that seems strange. Any > time a current is inducted within a material by a changing magnetic field a > force is generated that can cause the material to react. I admit that I > have never looked into driving salt water in this manner, but it should be > possible. > > So far I have seen no strong evidence for your assumptions. I realize > that you are convinced about what you are stating, but you would be wise to > consider what some of us are saying. And, using flawed statistics to > prove a point can get you into a lot of trouble. > > Dave > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: ChemE Stewart <cheme...@gmail.com> > To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com> > Sent: Tue, Jul 7, 2015 7:08 pm > Subject: Re: [Vo]:Possible cause for coral reefs dying... > > What about low flying aircraft overhead reflecting a strong signal back > to ground? > > What about ducting events and high refraction off the atmosphere > during storms? > > Salt water is 1000 times better conductor than soil and well grounded. > > The radars are pulsing at very LOW frequencies and yes, the saltwater is > seeing the swing in EM fields. > > Overlapping beam widths are covering thousands of sq ft at 1/2 mile > away. Just like your Doppler weather radar > > I already showed you a model of electrical currents on ocean surface > around ships antennas. You probably never looked > > The evidence is strongly on my side. > > You can even stir saltwater using Lorentz forces in a strong pulsing EM > field > > Stewart > > On Tuesday, July 7, 2015, David Roberson < dlrober...@aol.com> wrote: > >> Rectification of the signal can cause small DC currents as you suggest. >> Any non linear behavior that treats both the positive and negative RF >> swings equally can not result in DC generation but instead causes harmonic >> generation of the RF carrier. Do you consider salt water as capable of >> behaving differently to the positive versus negative instantaneous RF >> voltage and current waveforms? Where is a reference to this behavior? >> >> The high frequency RF signal itself can not penetrate the water to any >> significant degree due to reflections from the surface. Also, keep in mind >> that radar signals are aimed to keep their energy toward targets that are >> above the water surface in general, especially close by. And the beam >> widths are so narrow that only a small portion of the radiated RF impacts >> the water near the antenna. >> >> Dave >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Hoyt A. Stearns Jr. < hoyt-stea...@cox.net> >> To: vortex-l < vortex-l@eskimo.com> >> Sent: Tue, Jul 7, 2015 5:50 pm >> Subject: RE: [Vo]:Possible cause for coral reefs dying... >> >> Any non-linearity in a medium like salt water will cause baseband >> currents. >> >> >> *From:* David Roberson [mailto:dlrober...@aol.com] >> *Sent:* Tuesday, July 7, 2015 2:45 PM >> *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com >> *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Possible cause for coral reefs dying... >> >> You are kidding right? >> >> Any signal that shows up is merely being translated in frequency from its >> original location down to the baseband. The only signal received is very >> close in frequency to the carrier wave. The modulation signal at the low >> Hertz rate is visible at the receiver output, but it was not radiated by >> the transmitter. >> >> Dave >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: ChemE Stewart <cheme...@gmail.com> >> To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com> >> Sent: Tue, Jul 7, 2015 2:22 pm >> Subject: Re: [Vo]:Possible cause for coral reefs dying... >> David, >> >> Of course the low frequency square pulses show up on receivers, that >> is how pulsed doppler works! >> >> >> http://www.rfcafe.com/references/articles/images/Signal-Analysis-Modern-Radar-R-S-6.jpg >> >> When it is on (every pulse) a weather radar puts out ~1,000,000 WATTS, >> (32 billion watts EIRP) >> >> Stewart >> >> >> On Tue, Jul 7, 2015 at 2:10 PM, David Roberson <dlrober...@aol.com> >> wrote: >> Come on now Stewart. If you take the time to analyze the spectrum of a >> pulsed radar signal, you will find that all of the energy is contained in a >> location surrounding the carrier frequency. Also, how well do you think a >> dish radar antenna being feed by a bandwidth limited waveguide is going to >> radiate those 200 to 1000 Hz signals? If you can show me where any >> significant amount of that low frequency is radiated I will assume that you >> are knowledgeable in RF design. >> >> It is easy to convince people that know nothing about radio and radar >> systems to be concerned about unimportant issues. And, as everyone knows, >> statistics can prove just about anything that you wish to prove based upon >> the restrictions that are placed upon the data that is analyzed. >> >> The same type of reasoning is used to keep kids from being vaccinated or >> cellular antenna locations from being located in the ideal places. We need >> real science instead of variable statistics to settle these issues >> properly. >> >> Dave >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: ChemE Stewart <cheme...@gmail.com> >> To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com> >> Sent: Tue, Jul 7, 2015 1:53 pm >> Subject: Re: [Vo]:Possible cause for coral reefs dying... >> Dave, the pulse train is a square wave, with the "on" amplitude approx >> 900' long or longer depending upon duty cycle, bouncing between >> clouds/planes and the suface of the ocean >> >> Just one weather radar has an EIRP of 32 billion watts of power, which >> gets ducted and scattered by planes and the atmosphere, more during storms. >> >> Mildly shocking biology with every pulse, depending upon impedence >> >> Electricity can kill you in a nanosecond, each radar pulse is 1000 >> times longer that that in duration. >> >> Admit it, you sparkies screwed up :) >> >> Stewart >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Tuesday, July 7, 2015, David Roberson < dlrober...@aol.com> wrote: >> The radar pulse rate does not effect the penetration into the water. >> In other words, the 200 to 1000 Hz rate is applied to the carrier and does >> not independently appear anywhere else. >> >> Dave >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: ChemE Stewart < cheme...@gmail.com> >> To: vortex-l < vortex-l@eskimo.com> >> Sent: Tue, Jul 7, 2015 8:12 am >> Subject: Re: [Vo]:Possible cause for coral reefs dying... >> VLF <https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Very_low_frequency> radio waves >> (3–30 kHz <https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hertz>) can penetrate >> seawater to a depth of approximately 20 meters. Hence a submarine at >> shallow depth can use these frequencies. >> >> Most of the radars pulse at 200-1000 Hz. >> >> Most of the coral disease is in shallow water <20 meters >> >> On Tuesday, July 7, 2015, ChemE Stewart < cheme...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Except low pulsed frequencies >> >> On Tuesday, July 7, 2015, James Bowery < jabow...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> On Tue, Jul 7, 2015 at 1:42 AM, MarkI-ZeroPoint <zeropo...@charter.net> >> wrote: >> This is primarily meant for fellow Vort, ChemEng (Stewart), but some >> others may have an interest… >> >> Stewart, I think I may have a cause for your hypothesis re: a link >> between our modern radar systems and the dying of coral reefs… >> >> ... >> Time to break out the tin-foil hats??? >> >> >> No need. Salt water shields against EM penetration. >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> <https://www.avast.com/antivirus> >> This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus >> <https://www.avast.com/antivirus> protection is active. >> >>
