[alancalverd]

Around the braai (barbecue) they spoke of all the great things SA had to offer.

Immediately after this post, our sponsors inserted an advertisement for mammary support underwear. Clearly targeted advertising which proves that Big Brother is reading my correspondence, though a cricket box or a moustache trimmer might have been more appropriate.

[evan_au]

Including Frey-like noise.

What noise is Frey like?
What noise isn't Frey-like?

I am sure that very few of the embassy staff would have heard of the Frey effect, so the only way they could report this is if someone prompted them.

They were living in a very tense environment. Probably a case of freyed nerves...

[CliveG]

It is just that the agents would be testing to get ...

And, of course, for security purposes, lots of embassy buildings aer faraday caged.

You missed my point that the attacks took place in the residences. Not the embassy buildings which are shielded for a variety of reasons - mostly electronic eavesdropping.

I agree that the attacks could not take place in the official buildings that were purpose built.

[CliveG]

Including Frey-like noise.

What noise is Frey like?
What noise isn't Frey-like?

I am sure that very few of the embassy staff would have heard of the Frey effect, so the only way they could report this is if someone prompted them.

They were living in a very tense environment. Probably a case of freyed nerves...

They did not report "Frey" noise. They described the noise. Frey noise consists of "click, buzz, hiss, knock, or chirp. ...Something  like  that  of  a  bee buzzing  on  a  window,  but  with,  perhaps,  more  high frequencies. ... or tinnitus.."

Note the temperature differential which is estimated to be 5 millionth of a degree Celsius. Note also that the area affected is the temporal lobe of the brain although the hearing is involved. And that brain size has an effect.

I would add that a round head acts like a lens I would think. The change in speed of the wave would cause this to happen so that although the power drops off with penetration it also increases due to the lensing effect.

Here is a good paper (2003). onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/bem.10163

The power threshold is extremely high, but all is takes is a single 50 usec pulse to get an effect.

One test was peaks of 70 usec at peak power of 90 mW/scm and average power 0.32 mW/sqcm and at repetition rate of 50 per sec and a MW frequency of 1.245 GHz to get a buzzing sound. This was done by Frey in 1977.

[Bored chemist]

If low heat pulsations can cause damage

And, if not...?

[CliveG]

If low heat pulsations can cause damage

And, if not...?

Then maybe the attacks would not have produced results.

Of course, this is only with regard to heat. The cellular damage due to molecular disruption would take place at much lower power, but could be devastating depending on the tolerance of the individual.

I have not forgotten that I must respond to a previous post once the legal pressure is off.

[Bored chemist]

Then maybe the attacks would not have produced results.

Which is consistent with the known facts.

Do you realise that you keep going back to begging the question?

[Bored chemist]

One test was peaks of 70 usec at peak power of 90 mW/scm and average power 0.32 mW/sqcm

Or roughly 10% of the power where everyone agrees that straightforward thermal damage is expected.
So, that's clearly enough to be easy to detect.

[Bored chemist]

I would add that a round head acts like a lens I would think.

Specifically, it acts like a lens made of black glass because brains are mainly water which absorbs strongly at those wavelengths.

[alancalverd]

One test was peaks of 70 usec at peak power of 90 mW/scm and average power 0.32 mW/sqcm and at repetition rate of 50 per sec and a MW frequency of 1.245 GHz to get a buzzing sound. This was done by Frey in 1977.

Interesting numbers. The "average power" is irrelevant: what matters to the auditory perception system (i.e. what we hear) is the peak power and prf.

A precise subharmonic of the peak absorption frequency for water, delivered at 180 times the statutory power limit for occupational exposure and with a repetition rate within the normal audible spectrum, produces an auditory phenomenon. One would be amazed if it didn't.

The auditory system responds to repetitive pressure changes (sound). Mostly these come from the outside air, but pulsed heating of the brain and vestibular lymph is indistinguishable from airborne pressure changes - indeed the system is more sensitive to internal pressure changes than external as there is no mechanical transmission loss. We use internal "bone conduction"  for some types of hearing aid where there is substantial damage or malformation to the extravestibular components of the ear.   

Since transient heating of the brain and/or cochlea pulses the sensory cells from the "wrong end", the sensation won't correspond to the normal perception of 50 Hz as a low hum: the mechanical spectral filter of the cochlea has been bypassed and the nerve impulses may be closer to white noise. 

Wholly predictable and apparently "as found". Here's the abstract of my next paper:

We punched 100 subjects in the face, using the closed fist of a professional boxer. 98 subjects reported a broken nose, 70 reported lost teeth. The "Calverd Effect" shows that touching can cause serious damage and should be prevented by law.

[CliveG]

Wholly predictable and apparently "as found". Here's the abstract of my next paper:

Quote

    We punched 100 subjects in the face, using the closed fist of a professional boxer. 98 subjects reported a broken nose, 70 reported lost teeth. The "Calverd Effect" shows that touching can cause serious damage and should be prevented by law.

Your can critique my comments using logical fallacies, but you have no problem using them. In this case, I presume you are being obviously facetious.

Appeal to Extremes

Description: Erroneously attempting to make a reasonable argument into an absurd one, by taking the argument to the extremes. Note that this is not a valid reductio ad absurdum.

Logical Form: If X is true, then Y must also be true (where Y is the extreme of X).

Example #1:
There is no way those Girl Scouts could have sold all those cases of cookies in one hour.  If they did, they would have to make $500 in one hour, which, based on an 8 hour day is over a million dollars a year.  That is more than most lawyers, doctors, and successful business people make!

Explanation: The Girl Scouts worked just for one hour -- not 40 per week for a year.  Suggesting the extreme leads to an absurd conclusion; that Girl Scouts are among the highest paid people in the world.   Not to mention, there is a whole troop of them doing the work, not just one girl.

[alancalverd]

A million dollars per year is certainly beyond the reach of legitimate businessmen but for the CEO of a bankrupt bank or a public service contractor with no staff (in the case of the UK, a shipping company with no ships, or a railway company that didn't even bid for the shipping contract)  it's small change!

As you say, my closing example was facetious, but the preceding biophysics is drawn from my regular lectures and interests. 

[evan_au]

oops! crossover with Alan & Clive...

One test was peaks of 70 usec at peak power of 90 mW/scm and average power 0.32 mW/sqcm and at repetition rate of 50 per sec and a MW frequency of 1.245 GHz to get a buzzing sound.

Yes, 50 pulses per second would produce a 50Hz buzz.

I have heard it claimed that the human ear can (just) detect sounds corresponding to an average air displacement the width of a hydrogen atom.

The average air displacement in the outer ear gets transformed into an average water displacement in the inner ear by means of a mechanical transformer (tiny bones), which matches the impedance of the air to the impedance of the water.

Since the impedance of water is much higher, the mechanical displacement of the water molecules will be much lower.

So what we are saying is that if you give someone large bursts of radiation with enough average power to give them 10% of a burn, they can hear the microscopic expansion and contraction of the fluid in their inner ear.
- I imagine that this could be very annoying and even frightening
- especially if you didn't know where it is coming from!

Now, the amount of power coming from the cell tower into your house is far lower than the close-to-dangerous levels that Frey was using.
- So it is highly unlikely that you will have any detectable effects
- Are you hearing any buzzing sounds? (apart from tinnitus)
- If the signal pickup levels from a cell tower were enough for us to hear a noise, then we wouldn't need to buy a $1000 cellphone!

I had an oldish (but still electronic) fixed-line phone that wasn't very well shielded. If you were using it when your mobile phone rang, you could hear a buzz in the fixed-line handset; it came in a distinctive pattern
- I assume that some rectifying component in the fixed phone was responding to the microwave energy from the cellphone, and amplifying it
- So I could identify the different buzzes that came from my mobile phone
- Just moving the mobile phone a couple of feet away from the fixed phone stopped the buzz in the fixed-line phone
- If the buzz were due to the cell tower, moving the mobile handset would not have stopped it 
- At no time did I get an audible buzzing in my ear when I wasn't using the fixed-line phone, and the cellphone rang

I conclude from these observations that:
- Most of the radio-frequency energy to which you are exposed comes from your own cellphone handset.
- Even this is at sufficiently low energy that it does not produce the Frey effect
- If you are hearing things, you should be able to describe the different sounds that you hear, at different phases of a telephone call. Please describe what you hear.

[Bored chemist]

That's a fairly long post and it makes  several points but I think two of them warrant being  repeated, lest they get lost in the noise.

If the signal pickup levels from a cell tower were enough for us to hear a noise, then we wouldn't need to buy a $1000 cellphone!

and

I had an oldish (but still electronic) fixed-line phone that wasn't very well shielded. If you were using it when your mobile phone rang, you could hear a buzz in the fixed-line handset; it came in a distinctive pattern

I conclude from these observations that:
- Most of the radio-frequency energy to which you are exposed comes from your own cellphone handset.

If the mast was generating a field strong enough to influence the land-line then you would know about it.
Your mobile phone does generate a field that is strong enough to affect the land-line.

So, it follows that your own mobile produces more (local) EM radiation than the mast.

So, why do people complain about masts?

[RD]

.. I had an oldish (but still electronic) fixed-line phone that wasn't very well shielded. If you were using it when your mobile phone rang, you could hear a buzz in the fixed-line handset; it came in a distinctive pattern...

Like this ? ... https://freesound.org/people/MrAuralization/sounds/157592/

[Bored chemist]

.. I had an oldish (but still electronic) fixed-line phone that wasn't very well shielded. If you were using it when your mobile phone rang, you could hear a buzz in the fixed-line handset; it came in a distinctive pattern...

Like this ? ... https://freesound.org/people/MrAuralization/sounds/157592/

Well, that's what mine sounds like (also via the speakers on my PC)

[CliveG]

I would add that a round head acts like a lens I would think.

Specifically, it acts like a lens made of black glass because brains are mainly water which absorbs strongly at those wavelengths.

No. Black glass stops absorption in a couple of millimeters. A better analogy is grayed glass. The rays that do penetrate will concentrate. It means that one cannot just rely on absorption to reduce the radiation.

We know that it MW penetrates about 50 millimeters (it cooks food throughout).

[CliveG]

oops! crossover with Alan & Clive...

One test was peaks of 70 usec at peak power of 90 mW/scm and average power 0.32 mW/sqcm and at repetition rate of 50 per sec and a MW frequency of 1.245 GHz to get a buzzing sound.

[snip]
I conclude from these observations that:
- Most of the radio-frequency energy to which you are exposed comes from your own cellphone handset.
- Even this is at sufficiently low energy that it does not produce the Frey effect
- If you are hearing things, you should be able to describe the different sounds that you hear, at different phases of a telephone call. Please describe what you hear.

I accept that the Frey effect as tested in the labs requires very high powered pulses.

I am not sure whether tower pulsations can give problems with hearing that are due to constant (bit low power) thermoelastic effects or cellular disruption or both.

My wife and I have not experienced the Frey effect in terms of clicks or buzzing.

Our problem with tinnitus and hearing loss only happened after the tower had been powered up for at least a month. Both of those effects are caused by damage to tiny "hairs" used to hear. My wife went on vacation for 3 weeks. She said her tinnitus almost disappeared during that time (as did mine I think when away) and has returned now that she is back in the house. The tinnitus does seem to have some added noise at times that seems to be a digital modulation of the continuous whine going up and down in volume mostly at short intervals.

My wife says that she experiences a "vibration" in her head and sometimes in her chest in the house. Only with the tower powered on. The opposite neighbour said much the same. I presume that it might be hearing related because both also say it feels like the bed is moving (vibrating). I have not had that.

I have hardly used a cell phone and when we had our DECT (hands-free) phone I insisted on using the wired phone. When I do use my cell phone now, I keep my conversations short and use speaker phone after propping the phone on an object. All Wifi in our house is off until we use it briefly. My phone is always off data so it does not update or transmit (except perhaps a short response to a tower checking on who is in the area) now and then. I save time and battery power.

Before I learned of the dangers of cell MW I just felt uneasy about radiation next to my head.

[CliveG]

That's a fairly long post and it makes  several points but I think two of them warrant being  repeated, lest they get lost in the noise.

If the signal pickup levels from a cell tower were enough for us to hear a noise, then we wouldn't need to buy a $1000 cellphone!

and

I had an oldish (but still electronic) fixed-line phone that wasn't very well shielded. If you were using it when your mobile phone rang, you could hear a buzz in the fixed-line handset; it came in a distinctive pattern

I conclude from these observations that:
- Most of the radio-frequency energy to which you are exposed comes from your own cellphone handset.

If the mast was generating a field strong enough to influence the land-line then you would know about it.
Your mobile phone does generate a field that is strong enough to affect the land-line.

So, it follows that your own mobile produces more (local) EM radiation than the mast.

So, why do people complain about masts?

You miss the point about the type of radiation and the power patterns. Most people do not have their phone stuck to their head 24 hours a day and talking the whole time. When not talking or updating the phone is not transmitting. Even when transmitting it is only doing so one-eight of the time. If it did, the medical problems would be pouring into the hospitals. As people use their phones more, and more towers go up, the problems are likely to increase. It is also likely that cell MW will not be blamed for a number of years.

BTW - The cell companies love to use this argument - wrong as it is. The reason is that you can control your phone usage but not the tower next door.

[Bored chemist]

The rays that do penetrate will concentrate.

A good lens will focus radiation down to a spot that is about the same size as the wavelength of the radiation.
At 1.25GHz thats...
about the size of your head.
So, no it simply will not "concentrate" it.
You need to stop making up dross like that