Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : The New Qualcomm - write what you like thread. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Richard Belanger who wrote (2091)	9/11/2000 9:18:06 PM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 12230

<font color=crimson>X + M = 2C continued...10rem and M? Science should do whatever they [scientists] are curious to do or they are paid to do. Since there is a lot of Luddite concern about flying phragmented photons frying brains and causing tumours, any self-respecting scientist should be happy to offer some causal investigations to see just what is going on. If people want to look for needles in haystacks, some clever scientist might as well swing a big electromagnetic over the stack [for a suitable fee]. Any self-respecting investor should promote their low radiation cellphone if that's what people want to buy when they buy a cellphone. A sales person should not lie to customers but neither should they try to tell them what values the customer should adopt. They should say "We really don't think that cellphones cause brain tumours - here are the graphs showing our and FCC/FDA investigations - but if you want a low radiation cellphone, this CDMA EarCell[TM] model is the lowest in the business, with a handy Bluetooth-linked box complete with million-pixel colour screen and 10 Megabit per second WWeb link so you can swoop around the Web while listening in high-fidelity stereophonic sound. It connects via Globalstar too, so you can use it nearly everywhere." Back to X + M = 2C If 10 rem is the lower limit of shown causal relationship, then I guess background radiation is higher than that, [since we know we get heaps of mutations from background radiation and presumably some brain tumours are one of the cancers which background radiation causes]. I don't recall chewing lead sinkers, but I used to boil lead [smelting it] and made a LOT of sinkers. I used to do it in a smallish garage [doors shut]. I had a chemistry set too used to get lead oxide all over the place! I recall my fater mixing read and white lead powder into paint [as a 4 year old] and him telling me to not breathe it in. He used to spray lead naphthenate onto apple trees to kill Codlin Moth. We used to drink water off [groan] a lead-painted corrugated iron roof. It shows that humans are somewhat resilient and mostly survive minor damage. Which doesn't mean the damage should be accepted if there's no countervailing benefit. I've seen X-ray blistering [skin all peeled off] on the neck of my oldest child after 40 Grays which I imagine is so much more than 10 rems that this discussion would seem wacky to some! I can tell you that I have near-zero worry about cellphone radiation [I guess you know that]. It's scientific and marketing purity which makes me pursue it. BS [not Bernie Schwartz of course] really offends me and Associated Octel who sold lead additives for fuels were a company for BS [by misquoting a sentence which I went and checked and found the context from which they'd taken it in a scientific study did NOT support what they were trying to show - they were lying!]. Also, I'm curious. A Nobel Prize will be fun too. People are rightfully very, very mistrustful of scientists and businesses. There should be no puzzlement that they remain suspicious of cellphone radiation when they see $100 billion for spectrum and read about polio vaccine research in Africa decades ago maybe being the vector for AIDS into humans. Thalidomide was safe for pregnant women too. The litany of 'scientific' blunders is long. Mqurice

To: Richard Belanger who wrote (2091)	9/22/2000 6:49:14 AM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 12230

<font color=blue>M + X = 2C 2GHz = <0.1% of bond-breaking energy [Moulder] 10 rem = no cellular, molecular, organism or population effects [Belanger] I don't see how there can be no 'molecular' effects with 10 rem. There must also be other molecular, organism and population effects at 10 rem. physics.isu.edu That link gives 360 mrem as being the total background and artificial radiation per adult per year. We know because there are mutations and evolution, all day, every day, that that the background level of radiation is enough to make DNA chains busted and rejoined and grown as long as a frog and human double helix. Nature has filtered out the petatrillions of mutations which didn't help us work a computer or go surfing, so we are left with those good ones. Unpleasant for those hordes of demised souls but I guess it's tough out there in the mutant world. Nature in all it's mutational glory has produced you, dear Reader, and me. For those inclined to think that their spouse is lacking in some genetic advantages, it's timely to remind you that you are as good as your spouse could get! So we know that 360 mrem does the doings. But you say that 10 rem does nothing. Therein lies my first problem. Can you explain that gap? Okay, here is the explanation: < Rem (roentgen equivalent man) The rem is a unit used to derive a quantity called equivalent dose. This relates the absorbed dose in human tissue to the effective biological damage of the radiation. Not all radiation has the same biological effect, even for the same amount of absorbed dose. Equivalent dose is often expressed in terms of thousandths of a rem, or mrem. To determine equivalent dose (rem), you multiply absorbed dose (rad) by a quality factor (Q) that is unique to the type of incident radiation.> Hang on! That doesn't explain it at all. A rem is a rem. We need to mess with the rad using the quality factor to get rem or mrem. Sort of like Einstein's gravitational constant. So, inserting a quality factor [Q] in the equation we get MQ + X = 2C That should do it. Damn. No it doesn't. Here is a rad <Rad (radiation absorbed dose) The rad is a unit used to measure a quantity called absorbed dose. This relates to the amount of energy actually absorbed in some material, and is used for any type of radiation and any material. One rad is defined as the absorption of 100 ergs per gram of material. The unit rad can be used for any type of radiation, but it does not't describe the biological effects of the different radiations. > Just a boring energy measure. What they are acknowledging is that to kick an electron out of circulation, it requires a certain energy level to move up a shell or ionize. If it doesn't get that energy, the wave won't be absorbed. If the M and X wave functions harmonize at the electron wave function, then if the combination exceeds the ionizing energy for that electron, then bingo, ionization and C [cancer for those who forgot]. If they don't reach the quantum energy required by the electron, then they just move on through and don't absorb at that electron. They would have to carry on looking for a weaker bond and less energy requirement. The quality factor is required to convert rads to rems because, for example, a microwave signal will not absorb into the electrons, even with watts of dose, so there won't be ionizing until thermal molecular cracking is caused. However, in the M + X case, the M does become a rem-type dose because of superposition [or harmony] of wave functions for some statistically significant number of M photons. What we need is the quality factor for M + X radiation. ....contd