- Joined Jul 14, 2008
How would you stop electron/charge flow in a DC unshielded wire? Obvious answers will not be repied to, e.g., like turning of the power, cutting the wire, etc., etc.
BTW, alot of brain teasers do get posted on these forums.. How am I supposed to know if this falls into that category, or if its something you're pondering, or if you're just trying to look smart & patriotic with a bunch of physics terms..Since a flux capacitor is not the goal here (haha) and you are being arrogantly ignorant you need no further reply. Think about it!
Yes you need a circuit with enough Electrical radiation in that will only target the Iraquis. However the problem may be if they are mixed with iranians, but I guess that is ok. You definitely got it, You should go an buy all the parts right away. Also go ask your local Radio Shack to see if you can get the suit of "Magneto" from the Xmem and then you can go help your american friends.. Make sure your parents don't know this or you will be in trouble.I'm looking to further enhance the multiple capabilties, but in the electromagnetic far field region from a point source within about 300 to 500 meters, using much higher engery levels and a direct pathway, to stop a command detonated Improvised Explosive Device (IED), which are being used by insurgents to kill Americans' and Iraqis', by stopping (Jamming) direct current (DC) electron/charge flow in a insulated but non-shielded wire or circuit. May sound like Sci-Fi but it is not.
A lot of work and more resources than this group has available has gone into EMP's. If it was easy to do, it would already have been done.A EMP pulse would work and they can easily be generated without a nuclear explosion....
Why DC pulses? Why not alternating pulses? Ever hear of hardening sites or missiles/bombs to be invulerable to EMP'S?What about a series of overlapping DC pulses emitted by different point sources? As one field is ending/collapsing another is expanding.
Yes, what about it? Can anyone do it at a distance through shielding.What about resonanting the molecular structure of the copper alloy? What would happen?
You mean increase the unit charge, which has been shown to be quantitized at a particular value? That would be a violation of a basic principle of particle physics.How would you increase the positive charge on protons to attract more electons and therein reducing the number of free electrons? How could you reduce the number of free electrons?
Show us the way by giving us some reference material that illustrates how those ideas are feasible. Also we don't want to reinvent the wheel by repeating something that proved to be not feasible.Stop ridiculing and do something worth while.
Before expending time and resources, we want to see some feasiblility studies. Note the time and resources expended on perpetual motion machines, and the rightful ridicule and distain heaped upon those who spent that effort.When people have no ideas and don't care to explore a subject, they ridicule disdainfully to make themselves look good.
Compared to the number of people who wasted their time, not many. It does not do any good to harangue us unless you can point us in the right direction with something more than hand waving. RatchHow many brillant people have been put down by people like you, when only to find out later that the person with the question/idea was correct?
Edison tried hundreds of materials before tungsten. According to you, it was a waste of time. Or, do only successful endeavors meet you criteria for "worth doing"!Quantaphoton,
A lot of work and more resources than this group has available has gone into EMP's. If it was easy to do, it would already have been done.
http://www.amazing1.com/emp.htm there are many other references.
Why DC pulses? Why not alternating pulses? Ever hear of hardening sites or missiles/bombs to be invulerable to EMP'S?
As most have, hardening your electronics or using screen rooms will help protect against EMP - even using vacuum tubes.
Yes, what about it? Can anyone do it at a distance through shielding.
I'm not asking about a shielded wire.
Compared to the number of people who wasted their time, not many. It does not do any good to harangue us unless you can point us in the right direction with something more than hand waving. Ratch
No they didn't. You have to admit, Sadamn looked pretty good on the end of a rope, didn't he? And the US gave the Iraqis the opportunity to govern themselves.It is a waste of american lifes they all died in vain in Iraq just like in Vietnam.
In the first place, the US did not attack the people of Iraq. They attacked the leadership and armed forces of Iraq. Great pains were taken to minimum civilian casualities. By the way, if the people were so peaceful, then why did they attack each other so fiercely when the invasion gave them the opportunity to do so. The US attacked because they thought Sadamn was building and about to use weapons of mass destruction. Although that did not prove to be imminent, he did have a weapons program that he hid and dispersed, hoping to reactivate it when the heat was off. And remember, he did attack his own people with gas, so there was some worry that Sadamn had the willingess to exploit any weapon system he could obtain.You need to study a lot harder and ask yourself why in the first place your government attacked the peacefull peope of Iraq.
Do you mean loaning money? I know of no country that gives money to the US, do you?Now you should be very gratefull to the Japanise government who is practically keeping you alive since Germany is not giving money to the US any longer.
I wasn't. I have heard that story before. Got evidence?Do you actually know that President Bush Senior TOLD Sadam to attack Kuwait in 1991? You were probably in kindergarten at that time.
I would not call your disagreement with Quantaphoton "evidence".I am sorry I am getting out of the subject but there are so many ignorant people and that is why as crazy as it looks the American government (which is mandated by the military industries and rich corporations) use and abuse people like Mr. Quantaphoton and here is the evidence.
How so?Your worse enemy right now is American channels TV.
Er, what did they do?There is no way that USA could recover from what they have done.
Could you give some examples? Nothing stays the same, especially if effort is put into changing the status quo. RatchThey also have fallen behind in many technologies compared to Japan and Europe and they are too far back, if the USA advance so will the other potencies but they have the advantage of being way ahead. The future is not good for them.
Your link proves what I said before. It's hard to break through the hardening and shielding if you go with the EMP technology.
I am not talking about only a shielded wire, although that might be effective at times.I'm not asking about a shielded wire.
I never said that. Tungsten is tough, and Edison recognized that quickly in his search. The problem was working it into a filament. Actually, I believe it was one of his assistants who finally did it. The assistant was quoted as saying that if he know then what he knew now about how difficult it was to work tungsten, he would have given up. RatchEdison tried hundreds of materials before tungsten. According to you, it was a waste of time. Or, do only successful endeavors meet you criteria for "worth doing"!
|Thread starter||Similar threads||Forum||Replies||Date|
|S||Knowledge on Electron Tube Technology||General Electronics Chat||27|
|N||Conventional flow or electron flow||General Electronics Chat||7|
|J||Lost electron looking for ground...||General Electronics Chat||1|
|Stay in your lane - quantum electron behavior||General Science, Physics & Math||4|
|E||Conventional vs Electron flow||General Electronics Chat||383|
by Jake Hertz