Hi,

We know that during the emission of a radiotelescope (rare, for tests or to
send SETI msg, Hi!), the radiation can sterilize people working in the dish.
Has someone some idea of the power require to produce such a effect or any
generic graph (from IEEE standards ?) showing the risk vs frequency or
emitting power ? I have one,
http://www.astrosurf.com/lombry/Radi...ower-field.gif but I would like
to get a better idea of the power require (in W, Jy, etc).
If I had an idea of the require dBi and W , I could compute the EIRP and all
concerned values.

Thanks in advance

Thierry, ON4SKY
http://www.astrosurf.com/lombry

Thierry wrote:
We know...

Do we ?

...that during the emission of a
radiotelescope (rare, for tests or to
send SETI msg, Hi!), the radiation can
sterilize people working in the dish.

rolls eyes

Try tin foil pants to match the tin foil hat.

Has someone some idea of the power require
to produce such a effect or any generic
graph (from IEEE standards ?) showing the
risk vs frequency or emitting power ?

Health Canada's Safety Code 6.

Hint - it's not a dish issue with huge dishes. It might be a feed issue
in the worst case. The bigger the dish, the less the issue (the feed
being further away).

Likely, the 600mW cell phone is worse. And the 5w hand held W/T is
even worse than that.

If you own a strong magnet and an electric stove, hold the magnet in
your hand and turn on one stove top electric burner element to max.
Bring the magnet close to the element and feel the very strong
vibrations. (Don't burn your hand.)

Thierry wrote:
We know that during the emission of a radiotelescope (rare, for tests
or to send SETI msg, Hi!), the radiation can sterilize people working
in the dish.

Nonsense - we know nothing of the sort.


--
73 from Ian G3SEK 'In Practice' columnist for RadCom (RSGB)
http://www.ifwtech.co.uk/g3sek

Thierry wrote:
We know that during the emission of a radiotelescope (rare, for tests
or to send SETI msg, Hi!), the radiation can sterilize people working
in the dish.

Nonsense - we know nothing of the sort.


--
73 from Ian G3SEK 'In Practice' columnist for RadCom (RSGB)

No-nonsense, it is sense. RF exposure causes temporary sterility, kinda birth
control. Too much RF can cook us.

Yuri, K3BU.us

"Yuri Blanarovich" wrote in message
...

Thierry wrote:
We know that during the emission of a radiotelescope (rare, for tests
or to send SETI msg, Hi!), the radiation can sterilize people working
in the dish.

Nonsense - we know nothing of the sort.


--
73 from Ian G3SEK 'In Practice' columnist for RadCom (RSGB)

No-nonsense, it is sense. RF exposure causes temporary sterility, kinda
birth
control. Too much RF can cook us.

Yuri, K3BU.us


Yuri
Depends on the fequency.
The fact that you're still here confirms it's not too bad.
73

Yuri Blanarovich wrote:

Thierry wrote:

We know that during the emission of a radiotelescope (rare, for tests
or to send SETI msg, Hi!), the radiation can sterilize people working
in the dish.

Nonsense - we know nothing of the sort.


--
73 from Ian G3SEK 'In Practice' columnist for RadCom (RSGB)


No-nonsense, it is sense. RF exposure causes temporary sterility, kinda birth
control. Too much RF can cook us.

Yuri, K3BU.us


I wouldn't depend on it, Yuri. You'd have better luck with the
rhythm method.
73,
Tom Donaly, KA6RUH

"Yuri Blanarovich" wrote in message
...

Thierry wrote:
We know that during the emission of a radiotelescope (rare, for tests
or to send SETI msg, Hi!), the radiation can sterilize people working
in the dish.

Nonsense - we know nothing of the sort.


--
73 from Ian G3SEK 'In Practice' columnist for RadCom (RSGB)

No-nonsense, it is sense. RF exposure causes temporary sterility, kinda
birth
control. Too much RF can cook us.

Yuri, K3BU.us


First, let's agree on nomenclature; a radio telescope is a receiving device
only, it is not an emitter. Feel free to coin a new term for a highly
directional, high power emitter used for astronomical research.

RF exposure can cause many things, from nothing sensible to boiling to
carbonization to vaporization. It all depends on the RF power, the
absorption and the time of exposure. Absorption is dependent on frequency
and conductivity of the sample. Heating is dependent on the power, the
absorption and the ability to transfer heat from the sample.

For instance, 14 GHz exposure will result in most radiation reflecting off a
human body; move the exposure to 2.4 GHz, and the effective depth of heating
will be several inches into the tissues. Move down to 960 MHz, and you will
get even deeper heating. (Consider why industrial microwave ovens are at 960
MHz.)

Some body tissues are more exposed to RF, and, having only modest blood
circulation, have a poor ability to transfer heat. Assuming you are male,
those tissues at risk would include your earlobes, fingertips, nose,
corneas, elbows, penis, scrotum, testicles and toes. Your earlobes, nose,
fingers and scrotum have good circulation, so the blood cooling helps to
protect them. Your toes are usually electrically close to the ground, and in
a region of lower power density. Your penis is also well cooled and poorly
exposed, unless RF exposure gives you a woodie. And who cares what happens
to your elbows? So that leaves your corneas and testicles as the most
vulnerable tissues.

Canadian Safety Code 6 is a well-written document that will also teach you a
lot about RF emissions, RF measurement and biological effects. It's limits
are based on old ANSI C95.3-1991 work, which has been codified as IEEE STD
C95.1-1999. The USA FCC also uses the IEEE standard. Both the IEEE and ANSI
want to charge you for access, but Industry Canada courteously provides a
free download at:

http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/hecs-sesc/ccrpb/pdf/99ehd237.pdf

Thanks, Canada!

So we see that RF can do essentially nothing, it can sterilize, it can cook,
it can kill, and it can destroy. It's all a matter of power, frequency,
target and time.

Ed
wb6wsn

Yuri Blanarovich wrote:

Thierry wrote:
We know that during the emission of a radiotelescope (rare, for tests
or to send SETI msg, Hi!), the radiation can sterilize people working
in the dish.

Nonsense - we know nothing of the sort.


--
73 from Ian G3SEK 'In Practice' columnist for RadCom (RSGB)

No-nonsense, it is sense. RF exposure causes temporary sterility, kinda birth
control. Too much RF can cook us.

TOO MUCH certainly can, and of course there are many documented cases.

It's Thierry's use of "we know" that bugs me. Does anyone actually
*know* of any case whe

People have been working in (inside) a radiotelescope dish
AND
The transmitter has been on (most radiotelescopes don't even have one)
AND
They have become sterile?

No, I thought not. That's because it's pure techno-folklore.


--
73 from Ian G3SEK 'In Practice' columnist for RadCom (RSGB)
http://www.ifwtech.co.uk/g3sek

"Ian White, G3SEK" wrote in message
...
Yuri Blanarovich wrote:

...
It's Thierry's use of "we know" that bugs me. Does anyone actually
*know* of any case whe

People have been working in (inside) a radiotelescope dish
AND
The transmitter has been on (most radiotelescopes don't even have one)
AND
They have become sterile?

No, I thought not. That's because it's pure techno-folklore.


Where is the problem ? Folkore ? Non sense.
You never work with maths ?, you know, these kind of relaiton useless... on
the air.
but without which there hadn't had antennas either.

Why are you all so off-subject ? Is this so hard to answer a question.
It is more simple maybe to be involved in controversy... pfff


--
73 from Ian G3SEK 'In Practice' columnist for RadCom (RSGB)
http://www.ifwtech.co.uk/g3sek

A radio telescope is a receive-only device. It is incapable of rendering
anything sterile.

A radar telescope--using a dish--can be dangerous and the EIRP can be
megawatts. In this case, a number of health dangers apply. Fortunately those
most likely to be exposed are the best informed, and I am not familiar with a
single case of dangerous exposure.

SETI has nothing to do with this.

73,
Chip N1IR