Jeff Liebermann wrote:

Ok. That's closer than most of the off topic rubbish the pollutes
most newsgroups. I can see you logic. After reading some of the
postings in this newsgroup, I too might suspect that exposure to RF
and antennas might produce insanity, illogic, political conservatism,
and delusions of omniscience. . .

The effect seems to peak at about 75 meter wavelength, with a minor peak
at about 2 meters. The cautious and same amateur will avoid exposure to
those wavelengths.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL

Roy Lewallen wrote:

The effect seems to peak at about 75 meter wavelength, with a minor peak
at about 2 meters. The cautious and same amateur will avoid exposure to
those wavelengths.

I of course meant "sane" and not "same". My apology for the typo.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL

"Roy Lewallen" wrote in message
line...
Roy Lewallen wrote:

The effect seems to peak at about 75 meter wavelength, with a minor peak
at about 2 meters. The cautious and same amateur will avoid exposure to
those wavelengths.

I of course meant "sane" and not "same". My apology for the typo.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL


Of course, it is a given that the only truly sane band is six meters.

Ed, AJ4PJ

On Tue, 19 May 2009 10:30:44 -0700, Roy Lewallen
wrote:

Jeff Liebermann wrote:

Ok. That's closer than most of the off topic rubbish the pollutes
most newsgroups. I can see you logic. After reading some of the
postings in this newsgroup, I too might suspect that exposure to RF
and antennas might produce insanity, illogic, political conservatism,
and delusions of omniscience. . .

The effect seems to peak at about 75 meter wavelength, with a minor peak
at about 2 meters. The cautious and same amateur will avoid exposure to
those wavelengths.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL

Ham radio has its very own industry specific cancer called "cancer of
the vocabulary". Upon over-exposure to RF, a fairly normal individual
will soon develop symptoms which include ultra-long monologs,
inserting "ahhhhh" between sentences, foaming at the mouth, phonetic
alphabet creativity, and an apparently irresistible urge to eat
microphones. An early indication of impending trouble is a tendency
to identify oneself with a call sign after leaving a voicemail
message. Advanced cases exhibit additional symptoms of language
aberrations, political conservatism, compulsive knob twiddling, an
insatiable desire to listen for intelligence in random white noise, a
preference toward high wire acrobatics, and strangely coded speech.
After several decades of RF exposure, the victim may show symptoms of
pontification, pomposity, self-authority, and ossification of the
technology. While not fatal, cancer of the vocabulary has been known
to cause divorce, impoverishment, and curmudgeonificiation.
Unfortunately, the symptoms are not reversible, even when the victim
has withdrawn from ham radio for extended periods, such as to raise a
family.

Despite almost a century of historical data, little effort has been
made to correlate RF exposure with cancer of the vocabulary. I
suspect this may be due to the efforts of the ARRL to block such
research. While it is obvious that different frequencies had
different effects, it would be both interesting and useful if the
connection were properly researched and documented. For example, it's
apparent that exposure to low frequency (HF) waves causes a marked
preference for noisy environments, the exact opposite effect is found
after exposure to high frequencies (VHF), where signal clarity is
preferred. This phenomenon and others should be investigated.

--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

Jeff Liebermann wrote:
connection were properly researched and documented. For example, it's
apparent that exposure to low frequency (HF) waves causes a marked
preference for noisy environments, the exact opposite effect is found
after exposure to high frequencies (VHF), where signal clarity is
preferred. This phenomenon and others should be investigated.


Obviously you've never been interested in weak signal V/U/SHF or EME.
These tend to lead to shack environmental noise levels approximating
WWII destroyer engine rooms. Another side effect is hearing CW in wind
noise when driving at over 60mph.

tom
K0TAR

On Wed, 20 May 2009 13:01:07 -0500, Tom Ring
wrote:

Jeff Liebermann wrote:
connection were properly researched and documented. For example, it's
apparent that exposure to low frequency (HF) waves causes a marked
preference for noisy environments, the exact opposite effect is found
after exposure to high frequencies (VHF), where signal clarity is
preferred. This phenomenon and others should be investigated.

Obviously you've never been interested in weak signal V/U/SHF or EME.
These tend to lead to shack environmental noise levels approximating
WWII destroyer engine rooms. Another side effect is hearing CW in wind
noise when driving at over 60mph.

tom
K0TAR

I've done a little of that at VHF frequencies using various digital
modes. I was considering organizing a new certificate for "Worked all
Digital Modes", but every time I add a new mode to my computah,
someone invents yet another digital mode.
http://www.kb9ukd.com/digital/
http://www.wb8nut.com/digital.html
With weak signal digital modes, there's no way to actually hear the
signal as it's well below the noise floor. Waterfall displays work
nicely for copying extremely slow CW. It's a little like modern
astronomy. Most astronomers never look through the eyepiece of a
telescope these days.

Although I'm not a CW operator, when I was into Field Day, it took
several days for me to NOT listen for weak signals under the noise of
conversation, traffic, AM/FM radio noises, etc.

--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

Jeff Liebermann wrote:

I've done a little of that at VHF frequencies using various digital
modes. I was considering organizing a new certificate for "Worked all
Digital Modes", but every time I add a new mode to my computah,
someone invents yet another digital mode.
http://www.kb9ukd.com/digital/
http://www.wb8nut.com/digital.html
With weak signal digital modes, there's no way to actually hear the
signal as it's well below the noise floor. Waterfall displays work
nicely for copying extremely slow CW. It's a little like modern
astronomy. Most astronomers never look through the eyepiece of a
telescope these days.

Well, the June VHF QSO Party is in about 3 weeks. Try some non-digital
weak signal. It's fun! I'll be the primary op on our 6m station
running under the club call W0AUS from EN34. No high power this year
since we'll be within LOS of the Twin Cities metro at maybe 300 feet
above local average terrain. We'll be multimulti 6 through 10G,
probably all bands.

I've done some of the digital modes. High speed meteor burst, MFSK, and
PSK31 - really weak stuff with power as low as 50mW back when almost no
one was on it. My personal favorite is Hellschreiber, it's the oldest
(as far as I know) and sounds so cool.


Although I'm not a CW operator, when I was into Field Day, it took
several days for me to NOT listen for weak signals under the noise of
conversation, traffic, AM/FM radio noises, etc.

Yup, after 24 to 40 hours of noise with embedded weak or even not weak
CW and SSB and almost no sleep, you start to hear lots of things.

tom
K0TAR

On May 19, 12:30*pm, Roy Lewallen wrote:
Jeff Liebermann wrote:

Ok. *That's closer than most of the off topic rubbish the pollutes
most newsgroups. *I can see you logic. *After reading some of the
postings in this newsgroup, I too might suspect that exposure to RF
and antennas might produce insanity, illogic, political conservatism,
and delusions of omniscience. . .

The effect seems to peak at about 75 meter wavelength, with a minor peak
at about 2 meters. The cautious and same amateur will avoid exposure to
those wavelengths.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL

Some will probably be skeptical, but I've actually felt the effects
of
RF when operating on the HF bands. I forgot what band it was, but
it was one of the lower ones, "80 or 40", and I was working CW from
my mobile. "parked"
It took a QSO or two before I realized the RF was effecting me.
But I noticed I was starting to feel funny. It's hard to describe the
effects. But I noticed I didn't feel quite right, and it was an
uneasy
queasy type of feeling. Then I started to notice that the feeling
would
subside when I quit transmitting and was listening to the other
station.
When I would go back to transmit, I would slowly start to feel weird
again. I then kind of decided it was the RF hitting me from the rear
of the car, through the window. That particular car was a monte carlo,
and the antenna was on the trunk, with the loading coil fairly low.
So a lot of RF was beaming into the back of my head due to the
location of the antenna. I was running the usual 100w.
So anyway, I don't know about any cancer dilemma, but I know
in some cases, it's possible to feel RF on the HF bands.
Or at least I seemed to..
I didn't like the feeling of it at all. Was not a burning or anything,
it made you feel real nervous and uneasy. Pretty weird.. :/

wrote:
I didn't like the feeling of it at all.

At Texas A&M in the 50's, we had a radar in the
EE building with the antenna on the roof. Once,
someone was working on the antenna when someone
else turned the radar on. They rushed the guy
on the roof to the hospital in an ambulance. I
don't recall the rest of the story.
--
73, Cecil, IEEE, OOTC, http://www.w5dxp.com

Cecil, W5DXP wrote:
"They rushed the guy on the toof to the hospital in an ambulance."

I`ve always thought the only effect if RF on humans to be heat and
burns from my personal experience of extreme exposure throughout my long
life. I`ve spent years with a megawatt all around me. Recently i`ve read
the defense department has a nonlethal highpower pulsed micrlwave weapon
which incapacitates anyone in its beam. It is also said the military has
little interest in nonlethal weapons.

Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI