|
On Mon, 11 Aug 2003 13:31:14 +0100, "Ian White, G3SEK"
wrote: As Homer would insist: "Get it right - it's noocular, noocular." Is that where George W learned the pronunciation? |
I would agree except for RF. RF can punch a hole through tissue, leaving a burn through the path. If your vital organ is in the path it gets cauterized. If you hit a key spot, like the AV node of the heart or along the Bundle of His, you are in trouble. Howard Henry Schlunder ) wrote: : "K Wind" wrote in message : .. . : Would 1,500VDC with 6mA capability flowing through one arm and out the : other : be considered lethal? At one time, I knew how much current was considered : lethal, but have forgotten. : : No. It is actually quite hard to kill yourself with electrical shocks. : There are tons easier and more likely things to die from in everyday life. : : 60Hz AC is most dangerous in the range of 100 to 300 mA. Current in that : range sometimes causes ventricular fibrillation, whereas currents above that : usually cause the heart to temporarily contract and protect itself. Very : high currents, however, can dissipate lots of power in your organs and cook : them, leading to a painful death if nothing stops the electrocution for : several minutes. High frequency AC (like many kilohertz and beyond) should : be less dangerous since it will be bound by "skin effect" and not penetrate : as far into your chest cavity. DC is considerably safer than 60Hz AC, and : I've read some estimates saying you need 4 times as much current to die from : DC shocks. I don't know if I believe that though; I suspect there are too : few cases to draw significant statistical conclusions. As I understand it : (and I may be wrong here), DC is safer than AC because it doesn't cause : ventricular fibrillation, so death by these shocks occur from organ damage : and falling off ladders and things. : : Howard Henry Schlunder : : : : : -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =----- : http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! : -----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =----- |
I would agree except for RF. RF can punch a hole through tissue, leaving a burn through the path. If your vital organ is in the path it gets cauterized. If you hit a key spot, like the AV node of the heart or along the Bundle of His, you are in trouble. Howard Henry Schlunder ) wrote: : "K Wind" wrote in message : .. . : Would 1,500VDC with 6mA capability flowing through one arm and out the : other : be considered lethal? At one time, I knew how much current was considered : lethal, but have forgotten. : : No. It is actually quite hard to kill yourself with electrical shocks. : There are tons easier and more likely things to die from in everyday life. : : 60Hz AC is most dangerous in the range of 100 to 300 mA. Current in that : range sometimes causes ventricular fibrillation, whereas currents above that : usually cause the heart to temporarily contract and protect itself. Very : high currents, however, can dissipate lots of power in your organs and cook : them, leading to a painful death if nothing stops the electrocution for : several minutes. High frequency AC (like many kilohertz and beyond) should : be less dangerous since it will be bound by "skin effect" and not penetrate : as far into your chest cavity. DC is considerably safer than 60Hz AC, and : I've read some estimates saying you need 4 times as much current to die from : DC shocks. I don't know if I believe that though; I suspect there are too : few cases to draw significant statistical conclusions. As I understand it : (and I may be wrong here), DC is safer than AC because it doesn't cause : ventricular fibrillation, so death by these shocks occur from organ damage : and falling off ladders and things. : : Howard Henry Schlunder : : : : : -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =----- : http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! : -----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =----- |
"Andrew R Mitz" wrote in message ... Twice: 1) Working on a portable battery-operated 120vac source. (My own design). Got each hand on the 120vac while wearing the device. Could not breath; could not yell for help. Saved myself by intentionally falling onto the battery pack and luckly broke the pack apart. 2) Working on the HV of a 1KW transmitter. Power was off, but caught the 4KV from the filter capacitors. Threw me across the room. Guess my heart was healthy enough to recover a normal beat. AC is more dangerous for two reasons. It causes muscle to contract and not release, so you cannot let go, and at 50 or 60Hz it is likely to fibrilate the heart. A single jolt of DC, if it does not damage too much tissue, will tend to leave the heart in a (properly) synchronized state so it can resume a normal beat. Twisting the thread a little: I worked with an engineer who was very proud of his floating high-voltage AC plasma display sustainer drive circuit. Since it was floating, you could touch any part and not get a shock (or upset the display, either). He showed my by touching the cases of a few of the power transistors in turn. Then he jerked his hand back and let out a yell. Instant second-degree-burn blister. |
"Andrew R Mitz" wrote in message ... Twice: 1) Working on a portable battery-operated 120vac source. (My own design). Got each hand on the 120vac while wearing the device. Could not breath; could not yell for help. Saved myself by intentionally falling onto the battery pack and luckly broke the pack apart. 2) Working on the HV of a 1KW transmitter. Power was off, but caught the 4KV from the filter capacitors. Threw me across the room. Guess my heart was healthy enough to recover a normal beat. AC is more dangerous for two reasons. It causes muscle to contract and not release, so you cannot let go, and at 50 or 60Hz it is likely to fibrilate the heart. A single jolt of DC, if it does not damage too much tissue, will tend to leave the heart in a (properly) synchronized state so it can resume a normal beat. Twisting the thread a little: I worked with an engineer who was very proud of his floating high-voltage AC plasma display sustainer drive circuit. Since it was floating, you could touch any part and not get a shock (or upset the display, either). He showed my by touching the cases of a few of the power transistors in turn. Then he jerked his hand back and let out a yell. Instant second-degree-burn blister. |
Paul Burridge wrote in message . ..
The question seems daft, but bear with me, gentlemen. Has anyone ever had an electric shock that they feel lucky to have survived? p. I'm holding 'L' on UK mains right now and I can't feel a thing. Cheers Robin |
Paul Burridge wrote in message . ..
The question seems daft, but bear with me, gentlemen. Has anyone ever had an electric shock that they feel lucky to have survived? p. I'm holding 'L' on UK mains right now and I can't feel a thing. Cheers Robin |
I know you are you standing in dry wellies on a rubber mat? Ok what about
with your other hand? You've got the choice of N or E ;-) wrote in message om... Paul Burridge wrote in message . .. The question seems daft, but bear with me, gentlemen. Has anyone ever had an electric shock that they feel lucky to have survived? p. I'm holding 'L' on UK mains right now and I can't feel a thing. Cheers Robin |
I know you are you standing in dry wellies on a rubber mat? Ok what about
with your other hand? You've got the choice of N or E ;-) wrote in message om... Paul Burridge wrote in message . .. The question seems daft, but bear with me, gentlemen. Has anyone ever had an electric shock that they feel lucky to have survived? p. I'm holding 'L' on UK mains right now and I can't feel a thing. Cheers Robin |
scharkalvin wrote: Some of these stories are hair rasing... and I'm too much of a weenie to stick my tongue on a 9V battery... That's how we tested batteries when I was a kid. 'Course there was the dufus that tried it with a 90v B battery! Better make that dufuses (dufusi?). When I was a kid I was tinkering with a radio and unplugges the B battery connector to do something - needing another hand I stuck it in my mouth. It was an 'interesting' experience to say the least! Dave |
scharkalvin wrote: Some of these stories are hair rasing... and I'm too much of a weenie to stick my tongue on a 9V battery... That's how we tested batteries when I was a kid. 'Course there was the dufus that tried it with a 90v B battery! Better make that dufuses (dufusi?). When I was a kid I was tinkering with a radio and unplugges the B battery connector to do something - needing another hand I stuck it in my mouth. It was an 'interesting' experience to say the least! Dave |
UK's System is NOT a system that has a "Ground" Over Out Sparks W4EAS
|
UK's System is NOT a system that has a "Ground" Over Out Sparks W4EAS
|
"Wade Hassler" wrote in message om... Paul Burridge wrote in message . .. The question seems daft, but bear with me, gentlemen. Has anyone ever had an electric shock that they feel lucky to have survived? p. 480 volt compost turner was activated while I had my hands inside. Threw me into a pile of (mostly) chicken manure. Wade H A fate WORSE than death? |
"Wade Hassler" wrote in message om... Paul Burridge wrote in message . .. The question seems daft, but bear with me, gentlemen. Has anyone ever had an electric shock that they feel lucky to have survived? p. 480 volt compost turner was activated while I had my hands inside. Threw me into a pile of (mostly) chicken manure. Wade H A fate WORSE than death? |
Mike Andrews wrote:
Lee Leduc wrote: Sorry for the slow response but the Internet connection to the "other side" is soooooooo slow! Yes, I have had a a fatal electric shock in the past. *SPLORFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF* Now *where*, I ask you, _WHERE_ was the C&C on that? Wrong newsgroup. :) -- All relevant people are pertinent. All rude people are impertinent. Therefore, no rude people are relevant. -- Solomon W. Golomb |
Mike Andrews wrote:
Lee Leduc wrote: Sorry for the slow response but the Internet connection to the "other side" is soooooooo slow! Yes, I have had a a fatal electric shock in the past. *SPLORFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF* Now *where*, I ask you, _WHERE_ was the C&C on that? Wrong newsgroup. :) -- All relevant people are pertinent. All rude people are impertinent. Therefore, no rude people are relevant. -- Solomon W. Golomb |
On Wed, 13 Aug 2003 12:59:45 -0700, Sparks
wrote: UK's System is NOT a system that has a "Ground" Over Out Sparks W4EAS Eh? Is this humour? UK household mains is 240V ac (235V ac now but the tolerance band includes 240V so it many places is stayed the same AFAIK). The lines are E (Earth, Green/yellow), Neutral (blue), Live (brown, fused). E and N are at same potential, as is metalwork in the house. L is 235V ac. So if you are holding L and it is on your house is wired wrong, or you are Mr Rubber man. FYI (non UK'ers) the common arrangement is called PME, Protective Multiple Earth. The N line is bonded to earth (via the underground cabling AFAIR). N is thus at low potential near earth. At the company incoming fuse box the N line is split to E and N. The customer gets E, N, and L wires. The E terminal is bonded to all metal work, baths, plumbing etc. Hence you cannot get a shock from N to E. Switches tend to be single pole in the L as switching L and N would be dangerous if just N failed. You do get double pole so they must have a fail safe scheme for those. Fusing is only in the L for the same reason. -- ....malcolm Malcolm Reeves BSc CEng MIEE MIRSE, Full Circuit Ltd, Chippenham, UK , or ). Design Service for Analogue/Digital H/W & S/W Railway Signalling and Power electronics. More details plus freeware, Win95/98 DUN and Pspice tips, see: http://www.fullcircuit.com or http://www.fullcircuit.co.uk NEW - Desktop ToDo/Reminder program (free) |
On Wed, 13 Aug 2003 12:59:45 -0700, Sparks
wrote: UK's System is NOT a system that has a "Ground" Over Out Sparks W4EAS Eh? Is this humour? UK household mains is 240V ac (235V ac now but the tolerance band includes 240V so it many places is stayed the same AFAIK). The lines are E (Earth, Green/yellow), Neutral (blue), Live (brown, fused). E and N are at same potential, as is metalwork in the house. L is 235V ac. So if you are holding L and it is on your house is wired wrong, or you are Mr Rubber man. FYI (non UK'ers) the common arrangement is called PME, Protective Multiple Earth. The N line is bonded to earth (via the underground cabling AFAIR). N is thus at low potential near earth. At the company incoming fuse box the N line is split to E and N. The customer gets E, N, and L wires. The E terminal is bonded to all metal work, baths, plumbing etc. Hence you cannot get a shock from N to E. Switches tend to be single pole in the L as switching L and N would be dangerous if just N failed. You do get double pole so they must have a fail safe scheme for those. Fusing is only in the L for the same reason. -- ....malcolm Malcolm Reeves BSc CEng MIEE MIRSE, Full Circuit Ltd, Chippenham, UK , or ). Design Service for Analogue/Digital H/W & S/W Railway Signalling and Power electronics. More details plus freeware, Win95/98 DUN and Pspice tips, see: http://www.fullcircuit.com or http://www.fullcircuit.co.uk NEW - Desktop ToDo/Reminder program (free) |
Paul Burridge wrote in message . ..
The question seems daft, but bear with me, gentlemen. Has anyone ever had an electric shock that they feel lucky to have survived? p. When I was 14 I used to open an old tube TV, then I put one hand on the high-voltage tube that goes to the anode of the TV screen. There are a few thousand volts here, and I remember perfectly the two inches spark that went to my hand before I actually touch the tube. Fortunately the power is low, and the maximal current shoud be roughly one mA, or else I wouldn't write it now ! |
Paul Burridge wrote in message . ..
The question seems daft, but bear with me, gentlemen. Has anyone ever had an electric shock that they feel lucky to have survived? p. When I was 14 I used to open an old tube TV, then I put one hand on the high-voltage tube that goes to the anode of the TV screen. There are a few thousand volts here, and I remember perfectly the two inches spark that went to my hand before I actually touch the tube. Fortunately the power is low, and the maximal current shoud be roughly one mA, or else I wouldn't write it now ! |
I've survived a few nasty ones, one that caused me to rip half the flesh of
one finger to get loose, when some idiot electrician had reversed live and neutral in a audio/video studio installation that I was working on. Obviously none were fatal...... Lukas The question seems daft, but bear with me, gentlemen. Has anyone ever had an electric shock that they feel lucky to have survived? |
I've survived a few nasty ones, one that caused me to rip half the flesh of
one finger to get loose, when some idiot electrician had reversed live and neutral in a audio/video studio installation that I was working on. Obviously none were fatal...... Lukas The question seems daft, but bear with me, gentlemen. Has anyone ever had an electric shock that they feel lucky to have survived? |
Paul Burridge wrote:
On Fri, 08 Aug 2003 03:29:47 GMT, Eric Immel wrote: Paul, are you asking if anyone has been killed, then revived? That's pretty close to what I'm getting at. What I *am* actually get at is that theoretical physicists are coming around to the rather extraordinary view that one cannot from one's own perspective be killed by any sudden and dramatic life event. No matter how bad the shock, you will always 'come around' to find that you've survived. The tricky bit is that you'll probably have found yourself in a different reality to the one you left. In the one you've left, observers will see your cold, dead, smoking body lying sparko on the ground. Your relatives will grieve, your obituary will be written. But *you* won't know anything of that. You'll just believe you've had a lucky escape; you'll go home and tell your friends and family all about it and years later maybe you'll tell others via the Internet. Sounds nuts? Incredible as it may seem, the majority of physicists currently working in this field now believe this to be the case! And we're talking world-class theoreticians here, not just the kooks who post to alt.sci.theories. For further info, try Googling for the following: Many Worlds theory Max Tegel Quantum suicide experiment Quantum Theory of Imortality David Deutsche Schroedinger's Cat -- "I believe history will be kind to me, since I intend to write it." - Winston Churchill Does this mean that I died on the operating table during my open heart surgery last year, and awoke in a different reality where I am still living? |
Paul Burridge wrote:
On Fri, 08 Aug 2003 03:29:47 GMT, Eric Immel wrote: Paul, are you asking if anyone has been killed, then revived? That's pretty close to what I'm getting at. What I *am* actually get at is that theoretical physicists are coming around to the rather extraordinary view that one cannot from one's own perspective be killed by any sudden and dramatic life event. No matter how bad the shock, you will always 'come around' to find that you've survived. The tricky bit is that you'll probably have found yourself in a different reality to the one you left. In the one you've left, observers will see your cold, dead, smoking body lying sparko on the ground. Your relatives will grieve, your obituary will be written. But *you* won't know anything of that. You'll just believe you've had a lucky escape; you'll go home and tell your friends and family all about it and years later maybe you'll tell others via the Internet. Sounds nuts? Incredible as it may seem, the majority of physicists currently working in this field now believe this to be the case! And we're talking world-class theoreticians here, not just the kooks who post to alt.sci.theories. For further info, try Googling for the following: Many Worlds theory Max Tegel Quantum suicide experiment Quantum Theory of Imortality David Deutsche Schroedinger's Cat -- "I believe history will be kind to me, since I intend to write it." - Winston Churchill Does this mean that I died on the operating table during my open heart surgery last year, and awoke in a different reality where I am still living? |
In article , scharkalvin wrote:
Malcolm Reeves wrote: On Sun, 10 Aug 2003 Roy Lewallen wrote: I've also read that Edison created and promoted the electric chair, which was run from AC, to dramatize the danger of AC over DC. He had a big investment in DC distribution systems and equipment, while Westinghouse was promoting AC power distribution. Didn't Edison try to get execution by electric chair "Westinghousing" too, or is that a rumour. Early electric chairs WERE AC, but they tended to fry you rather than electrocute. Electric chairs, early and semi-modern and modern, use/used AC because AC electrocutes more than DC does (at least if the AC frequency is in the power-line, lower-audio or upper-"subsonic" frequency range). (AC frequencies of radio frequencies or high audio frequencies were safer.) This business of electric chairs frying rather than electrocuting has a grain of truth - electric chairs often have enough voltage and current to cook vital organs in case "more-true electrocution" does not occur. Electrocution in a typical case is most likely with AC (secondarily pulsating DC) of power line or lower-audio or nearly-audio-subaudio frequency and with shock path involving the head or a limb so as to involve the brain or the heart or both. Worst case usually involves ventricular fibrillation, a deadly disturbance in heart rhythm where electrical cause is "typically" 100-1,000 mA of low frequency AC or pulsating DC through the torso. Electrocution is unreliable enough that electric chairs require "backup" mechanisms of killing. As in either cooking vital organs or paralyzing breating long enough to deprive the brain of oxygen long enough to disable restarting of breathing when the shock is stopped. I insist that survival of shocks that are not far from bad-case is equally unreliable! Tesla used to demonstrate passing a million volts through his body to light gas tubes, but he used high frequency current (in the khz range) to do it. Tesla-related AC survival involved high frequencies that are not as bad as either lower frequency AC or unsteady DC! High enough frequency AC is less-electrocuting than DC can be given even slowest accidental application/removal rates! Horror stories by horrifically-burned high-voltage-DC survivors come mainly from those who lived to tell a horrific tale rather than had a closed-casket funeral because the current was DC rather than power-line-frequency AC. - Don Klipstein ) |
In article , scharkalvin wrote:
Malcolm Reeves wrote: On Sun, 10 Aug 2003 Roy Lewallen wrote: I've also read that Edison created and promoted the electric chair, which was run from AC, to dramatize the danger of AC over DC. He had a big investment in DC distribution systems and equipment, while Westinghouse was promoting AC power distribution. Didn't Edison try to get execution by electric chair "Westinghousing" too, or is that a rumour. Early electric chairs WERE AC, but they tended to fry you rather than electrocute. Electric chairs, early and semi-modern and modern, use/used AC because AC electrocutes more than DC does (at least if the AC frequency is in the power-line, lower-audio or upper-"subsonic" frequency range). (AC frequencies of radio frequencies or high audio frequencies were safer.) This business of electric chairs frying rather than electrocuting has a grain of truth - electric chairs often have enough voltage and current to cook vital organs in case "more-true electrocution" does not occur. Electrocution in a typical case is most likely with AC (secondarily pulsating DC) of power line or lower-audio or nearly-audio-subaudio frequency and with shock path involving the head or a limb so as to involve the brain or the heart or both. Worst case usually involves ventricular fibrillation, a deadly disturbance in heart rhythm where electrical cause is "typically" 100-1,000 mA of low frequency AC or pulsating DC through the torso. Electrocution is unreliable enough that electric chairs require "backup" mechanisms of killing. As in either cooking vital organs or paralyzing breating long enough to deprive the brain of oxygen long enough to disable restarting of breathing when the shock is stopped. I insist that survival of shocks that are not far from bad-case is equally unreliable! Tesla used to demonstrate passing a million volts through his body to light gas tubes, but he used high frequency current (in the khz range) to do it. Tesla-related AC survival involved high frequencies that are not as bad as either lower frequency AC or unsteady DC! High enough frequency AC is less-electrocuting than DC can be given even slowest accidental application/removal rates! Horror stories by horrifically-burned high-voltage-DC survivors come mainly from those who lived to tell a horrific tale rather than had a closed-casket funeral because the current was DC rather than power-line-frequency AC. - Don Klipstein ) |
Oh ok, that's where that annoying hair came from. Chick's don't seem
to like it. :-) |
Oh ok, that's where that annoying hair came from. Chick's don't seem
to like it. :-) |
On Fri, 15 Aug 2003 20:57:23 -0400, scharkalvin
wrote: Does this mean that I died on the operating table during my open heart surgery last year, and awoke in a different reality where I am still living? Did the surgeons tell you they'd lost you for a while there? If so, you might have been revived in that same reality in the usual way, or else if such efforts failed, you'd then 'come round' in one of the other remaining universes in which you didn't die, in an example the so-called 'weak anthropic principle.' -- "I believe history will be kind to me, since I intend to write it." - Winston Churchill |
On Fri, 15 Aug 2003 20:57:23 -0400, scharkalvin
wrote: Does this mean that I died on the operating table during my open heart surgery last year, and awoke in a different reality where I am still living? Did the surgeons tell you they'd lost you for a while there? If so, you might have been revived in that same reality in the usual way, or else if such efforts failed, you'd then 'come round' in one of the other remaining universes in which you didn't die, in an example the so-called 'weak anthropic principle.' -- "I believe history will be kind to me, since I intend to write it." - Winston Churchill |
Paul Burridge wrote:
On Fri, 15 Aug 2003 20:57:23 -0400, scharkalvin wrote: Does this mean that I died on the operating table during my open heart surgery last year, and awoke in a different reality where I am still living? Did the surgeons tell you they'd lost you for a while there? If so, you might have been revived in that same reality in the usual way, or else if such efforts failed, you'd then 'come round' in one of the other remaining universes in which you didn't die, in an example the so-called 'weak anthropic principle.' -- "I believe history will be kind to me, since I intend to write it." - Winston Churchill My surgery was actually 'text book', but my recovery was a little rocky. My lungs filled with fluid and I was moved back into intensive care a day after being put in a normal recovery room after the surgery. I was on 100% O2 for a day or so, after they inserted a needle in my back and drained the fluid (about a liter or two) I was much better. I was seeing things because of the drugs I was on though. When ever I closed my eyes I felt like I was floating in a crypt and I saw gargoyles on the walls with red eyes. They gave me something to help me relax and then the vision changed....I was now floating in a toy work shop (north pole?) surrounded by dolls and wooden toys and model trains. The visions disappeared when I was taken off the O2. |
Paul Burridge wrote:
On Fri, 15 Aug 2003 20:57:23 -0400, scharkalvin wrote: Does this mean that I died on the operating table during my open heart surgery last year, and awoke in a different reality where I am still living? Did the surgeons tell you they'd lost you for a while there? If so, you might have been revived in that same reality in the usual way, or else if such efforts failed, you'd then 'come round' in one of the other remaining universes in which you didn't die, in an example the so-called 'weak anthropic principle.' -- "I believe history will be kind to me, since I intend to write it." - Winston Churchill My surgery was actually 'text book', but my recovery was a little rocky. My lungs filled with fluid and I was moved back into intensive care a day after being put in a normal recovery room after the surgery. I was on 100% O2 for a day or so, after they inserted a needle in my back and drained the fluid (about a liter or two) I was much better. I was seeing things because of the drugs I was on though. When ever I closed my eyes I felt like I was floating in a crypt and I saw gargoyles on the walls with red eyes. They gave me something to help me relax and then the vision changed....I was now floating in a toy work shop (north pole?) surrounded by dolls and wooden toys and model trains. The visions disappeared when I was taken off the O2. |
On Sat, 16 Aug 2003 22:22:56 -0400, scharkalvin
wrote: My surgery was actually 'text book', but my recovery was a little rocky. My lungs filled with fluid and I was moved back into intensive care a day after being put in a normal recovery room after the surgery. I was on 100% O2 for a day or so, after they inserted a needle in my back and drained the fluid (about a liter or two) I was much better. I was seeing things because of the drugs I was on though. When ever I closed my eyes I felt like I was floating in a crypt and I saw gargoyles on the walls with red eyes. They gave me something to help me relax and then the vision changed....I was now floating in a toy work shop (north pole?) surrounded by dolls and wooden toys and model trains. The visions disappeared when I was taken off the O2. Interesting. Most people who undergo NDEs report a heavenly experience that often changes their outlook on life everafter. However, there are a *small* proportion of NDEs where the subjects report a truly hellish experience very much worse than you have described. Anyway, that's not what I was getting at, of course. I should also point out that the theoretical physicists have not thus far extended the Quantum Theory of Immortality to encompass anything beyond *instant* death; the orginal example by Tegal in his Quantum Suicide Experiment was that of being shot in the head. I don't see any reason why it should not be so extended to more protracted deaths, and thinking among those involved in formulating this line of argument is heading that way, but I'm no quantum pysicist so anyone curious should follow up the leads I gave earlier in the thread and read up for themselves. -- "I believe history will be kind to me, since I intend to write it." - Winston Churchill |
On Sat, 16 Aug 2003 22:22:56 -0400, scharkalvin
wrote: My surgery was actually 'text book', but my recovery was a little rocky. My lungs filled with fluid and I was moved back into intensive care a day after being put in a normal recovery room after the surgery. I was on 100% O2 for a day or so, after they inserted a needle in my back and drained the fluid (about a liter or two) I was much better. I was seeing things because of the drugs I was on though. When ever I closed my eyes I felt like I was floating in a crypt and I saw gargoyles on the walls with red eyes. They gave me something to help me relax and then the vision changed....I was now floating in a toy work shop (north pole?) surrounded by dolls and wooden toys and model trains. The visions disappeared when I was taken off the O2. Interesting. Most people who undergo NDEs report a heavenly experience that often changes their outlook on life everafter. However, there are a *small* proportion of NDEs where the subjects report a truly hellish experience very much worse than you have described. Anyway, that's not what I was getting at, of course. I should also point out that the theoretical physicists have not thus far extended the Quantum Theory of Immortality to encompass anything beyond *instant* death; the orginal example by Tegal in his Quantum Suicide Experiment was that of being shot in the head. I don't see any reason why it should not be so extended to more protracted deaths, and thinking among those involved in formulating this line of argument is heading that way, but I'm no quantum pysicist so anyone curious should follow up the leads I gave earlier in the thread and read up for themselves. -- "I believe history will be kind to me, since I intend to write it." - Winston Churchill |
Paul Burridge wrote:
Interesting. Most people who undergo NDEs report a heavenly experience that often changes their outlook on life everafter. However, there are a *small* proportion of NDEs where the subjects report a truly hellish experience very much worse than you have described. . . Harris poll results reported in the July/August issue of _Skeptical Inquirer_ reveal that 84% of Americans believe in survival of the soul after death. 82% believe there's a heaven, and 63% expect to go there. But while 69% believe in hell, only 1% expect to go there. Wonder if the "small" proportion happens to be about 1%. . . and wonder if it's the same ones. Roy Lewallen, W7EL |
Paul Burridge wrote:
Interesting. Most people who undergo NDEs report a heavenly experience that often changes their outlook on life everafter. However, there are a *small* proportion of NDEs where the subjects report a truly hellish experience very much worse than you have described. . . Harris poll results reported in the July/August issue of _Skeptical Inquirer_ reveal that 84% of Americans believe in survival of the soul after death. 82% believe there's a heaven, and 63% expect to go there. But while 69% believe in hell, only 1% expect to go there. Wonder if the "small" proportion happens to be about 1%. . . and wonder if it's the same ones. Roy Lewallen, W7EL |
Harris poll results reported in the July/August issue of _Skeptical Inquirer_ reveal that 84% of Americans believe in survival of the soul after death. 82% believe there's a heaven, and 63% expect to go there. But while 69% believe in hell, only 1% expect to go there. Wonder if the "small" proportion happens to be about 1%. . . and wonder if it's the same ones. Tell you one thing, I hope for every ones sake, we don't exist in one form or another 'forever'. I can't think of a worse nightmare than to always exist with no reprieve ! ... in the end, you'd wish for nothing else but to be allowed to rest in peace. Clive |
Harris poll results reported in the July/August issue of _Skeptical Inquirer_ reveal that 84% of Americans believe in survival of the soul after death. 82% believe there's a heaven, and 63% expect to go there. But while 69% believe in hell, only 1% expect to go there. Wonder if the "small" proportion happens to be about 1%. . . and wonder if it's the same ones. Tell you one thing, I hope for every ones sake, we don't exist in one form or another 'forever'. I can't think of a worse nightmare than to always exist with no reprieve ! ... in the end, you'd wish for nothing else but to be allowed to rest in peace. Clive |
On Wed, 20 Aug 2003 22:19:45 +0200, Lasse SM5GLC wrote:
Roy, If I remember correctly my physics teacher showed that based on what is written in the Bible, heaven have a much higher temperature than hell..... We are wandering way off-topic here so I'm a bit reluctant to post this on r.r.a.h Ah! what the hell!, it's only a few KB of text.... The following is an actual question given on a University of Washington chemistry mid-term. The answer by one student was so "profound" that the professor shared it with colleagues, via the Internet, which is, of course, why we now have the pleasure of enjoying it as well. Bonus Question: Is Hell exothermic (gives off heat) or endothermic (absorbs heat)? Most of the students wrote proofs of their beliefs using Boyle's Law (gas cool when it expands and heats when it is compressed) or some variant. One student, however, wrote the following: "First, we need to know how the mass of Hell is changing in time. So we need to know the rate at which souls are moving into Hell and the rate at which they are leaving. I think that we can safely assume that once a soul gets to Hell, it will not leave. Therefore, no souls are leaving. As for how many souls are entering Hell, let's look at the different religions that exist in the world today. Most of these religions state that if you are not a member of their religion, you will go to Hell. Since there is more than one of these religions and since people do not belong to more than one religion, we can project that all souls go to Hell. With birth and death rates as they are, we can expect the number of souls in Hell to increase exponentially. Now, we look at the rate of change of the volume in Hell because Boyle's Law states that in order for the temperature and pressure in Hell to stay the same, the volume of Hell has to expand proportionately as souls are added. This gives two possibilities: 1) If Hell is expanding at a slower rate than the rate at which souls enter Hell, then the temperature and pressure in Hell will increase until all Hell breaks loose. 2) If Hell is expanding at a rate faster than the increase of souls in Hell, then the temperature and pressure will drop until Hell freezes over. So which is it? If we accept the postulate given to me by Teresa during my Freshman year that, "...it will be a cold day in Hell before I sleep with you," and take into account the fact that I still have not succeeded in having an affair with her, then #2 above cannot be true, and thus I am sure that Hell is exothermic and will not freeze over." THIS STUDENT RECEIVED THE ONLY "A". 73, Ed, EI9GQ. -- Remove 'X' to reply by e-mail http://homepage.eircom.net/~ei9gq Linux 2.4.21 |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:09 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com