Slashdot Mirror


Statically Charged Man Ignites Office

Call Me Black Cloud writes "And you think your coworker with BO is annoying? In this story carried by Reuters, a man wearing a nylon jacket over a wool shirt built up such a static charge that he left a trail of scorched carpet and melted plastic in his wake. After he melted plastic in his car he sought help from firefighters called to the scene, who measured his static field at 40,000 volts." Obviously, despite the fact that this is carried by Reuters, you should take some of the 'facts' presented here with some NaCl.

391 comments

  1. SHC by mfh · · Score: 4, Funny

    Obviously, despite the fact that this is carried by Reuters, you should take some of the 'facts' presented here with some NaCl.

    He lit up his office with a 40k static field. What the hell is salt going to do with that? Let's find out. Talk about putting salt in his wounds.

    The article says this level of current is just shy of spontaneous combustion. Maybe spontaneous human combustion is a misnomer? How many people actually have scientifically studied people who have combusted, spontaneously, before? I'm thinking that since it appears to be caused by a prolonged rubbing effect, from wool sweaters rubbing against nylon jackets, and charged by static from carpets, there is nothing spontaneous about it at all, and perhaps SHC is therefore no longer a mystery?

    Did we find bigfoot?

    Wikipedia has a cool page about spontaneous human combustion.

    --
    The dangers of knowledge trigger emotional distress in human beings.
    1. Re:SHC by AndroidCat · · Score: 2, Funny

      Perhaps he'd been watching some BlipVerts? (Mind you, 20 minutes into the future is like so last millenium!)

      --
      One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
    2. Re:SHC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We didn't find anything. This whole story is a joke. Anybody who has so much as taken a highschool physics class will have no problem at all finding a number of blatant errors all throughout the article.

    3. Re:SHC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful
      What the hell is salt going to do with that?
      I dunno, though a few grains of it might help when reading that story...
    4. Re:SHC by fejikso · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What the hell is salt going to do with that?

      Dude, he meant to take a story with a grain of salt, despite Reuters being a very reputable source of news.

    5. Re:SHC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A static field? That could explain it.

      But maybe it was just because the boss took away his stapler.

    6. Re:SHC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      I'm thinking that since it appears to be caused by a prolonged rubbing effect ...

      more than 70% of Slashdot is in grave danger of undergoing spontaneous human combustion.

    7. Re:SHC by mcgroarty · · Score: 1, Funny
      "despite Reuters being a very reputable source of news"

      We're talking about the only news bureau that requires a creative writing degree. We're talking about the news bureau that sends economic reporting back to rewrite when it lacks sufficient emotional content. We're talking about the "I don't care if it's slanted left or slanted right, just so long as it's slanted!" bureau. We're talking al-Reuters.

    8. Re:SHC by E8086 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      "perhaps SHC is therefore no longer a mystery?"

      The Discovery Channel or TLC had at least a show on this, the most common was the 'wick effect.' It's normal combustion that is limited to the body, usually happens when someone is knocked unconscious or dies while holding a cigarette or candle. I don't think this case would be considered spontaneous combustion since the build up of static electricity is an ignition source, then it's normal combustion once the fuel reaches its flash point.

      --
      F7 doesn't work, ignore spelling and grammar
    9. Re:SHC by vishbar · · Score: 1

      Dude, he was making a joke.

      --
      Ride the skies
    10. Re:SHC by vacuum_tuber · · Score: 4, Informative

      See the show. The researchers reproduced SHC with a rather large pig, possibly making it SPC (Spontaneous Porcine Combustion) or RIPC (Researcher Induced Porcine Combustion). Pigs don't normally wear clothes but this one was draped for the occasion. Only parts of the body burn because only parts are covered with a wick (cloth). It burns without damaging nearby objects because it burns with a very low flame. Convection disperses the heat throughout the room. If you look at reports of SHC you'll find that there is always a source of combustion involved but it's always dismissed because the whole place didn't burn down. The experiment even resulted in bones that powdered at a touch, another characteristic of SHC. As it happens, horse shit has nothing whatsoever to do with it.

      --
      Look at the bright side: there's always seppuku.
    11. Re:SHC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The joke's on him for buying the fucking slashdot ID.

    12. Re:SHC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I believe the reason it (the clothes) was called a wick was because as the fat melted it would be wicked through the cloth to the flame. In this manner, the entire body would be burned very slowly.

      This does not, however, cover the "Spontaneous" part of Spontaneous Combustion, which I thought was a rather large oversight.

    13. Re:SHC by eosp · · Score: 0

      Wool causes fires! We must ban it.

    14. Re:SHC by GreyPoopon · · Score: 3, Informative
      I don't think this case would be considered spontaneous combustion since the build up of static electricity is an ignition source, then it's normal combustion once the fuel reaches its flash point.

      Even in cases of unexplained Spontaneous Combustion, it's probably not really spontaneous. It's just that nobody really knows what the ignition source is, and Spontaneous Human Combustion just sounds so much cooler than Human Combustion by Unknown Ignition Source.

      --

      GreyPoopon
      --
      Why is it I can write insightful comments but can't come up with a clever signature?

    15. Re:SHC by scbysnx · · Score: 1

      hey atleast they're bi partisan

    16. Re:SHC by diodesign · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Really? I wanted to get into Reuters and chatting to one of their senior London subeditors. To get in, you need to know more than one language (preferably something other than French and German, as that's common now), pass standard journalism tests and hold any degree. Hell, I have an engineering degree. Think about it. Reuters sells news around the world to media outlets and companies. It's, commercially speaking, not in their interest to sell slanted news - because if they're biased, they'll drive away people who are sympathetic to whichever cause is being bashed.

    17. Re:SHC by Ruis · · Score: 1

      What kind of equipment do firefighters have that can measure the voltage in a static field?

    18. Re:SHC by vacuum_tuber · · Score: 1
      This does not, however, cover the "Spontaneous" part of Spontaneous Combustion, which I thought was a rather large oversight.

      But that was covered in the piece for TV. On examination of the facts of the cases there was a source of ignition in each case. A cigarette in one, a candle in another, etc. Traditionally the sources of ignition have been discounted because they would normally be expected to cause a traditional fire. In the older accounts such as in the "Fact Stranger than Fiction" paperbacks of years ago the likely sources of ignition simply weren't mentioned. Falling over dead while carrying a candle isn't common but apparently it has happened now and again. Smoking in bed is well known as a cause of fire. In some rare cases of death or disablement in the presence of a source of ignition, if the fire gets started in the clothing instead of the bedding or other surroundings and proceeds just right and the person can't wake up for one reason or another the wick effect can come into play and result in an apparent case of SHC.

      --
      Look at the bright side: there's always seppuku.
    19. Re:SHC by kd5ujz · · Score: 1

      Static meters, you can get them quite cheap(less than $400). Firefighters, and industrial saftey personel will use them to insure the absense of ignition sorces, especialy when using air motors, which are not as prone to cause ignition when pumping flammable fluids, but if not properly grounded, they will generate static electricity.

      --
      -William
      God is everything science has yet to explain.
    20. Re:SHC by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      we're ok, we can just put yellow sticky-note above our screens that say "WARNING - masturbating to computer pornography with wool mittens while wearing latex condom may result in fiery self-immolation and/or static damage to MOS-FET based components of PC"

    21. Re:SHC by Tuxinatorium · · Score: 0

      The cop says "We tested his clothes with a static electricity field meter and measured a current of 40,000 volts, which is one step shy of spontaneous combustion, where his clothes would have self-ignited," Barton said."
      He obviously knows nothing about physics.
      The article writer apparently is also oblivious to the fact that volts measure charge, not current.

    22. Re:SHC by arose · · Score: 1

      You would think that Alien Space Soucer sounds cooler then Unidentified Flying Object, but few believers seem to use the former...

      --
      Analogies don't equal equalities, they are merely somewhat analogous.
    23. Re:SHC by StikyPad · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty sure he was joking.

      "Never attribute to ignorance that which can adequately be explained by sarcasm."
      -Me (Just Now)

    24. Re:SHC by StikyPad · · Score: 1

      I think CSI "borrowed" from that documentary in one of their episodes as well. Too bad they introduce enough pseudo-science to offset any actual educational benefits of the show.

    25. Re:SHC by eggplantpasta · · Score: 1

      I heard the national radio (ABC News Radio) science reporter interview the guy and it seems like a legitimate story. Here's more info .

      --
      "Don't forget the prunes." L. Francis Herreshoff
    26. Re:SHC by I_M_Noman · · Score: 1
      I wanted to get into Reuters and chatting to one of their senior London subeditors.
      With mangled grammar like that, you're surprised you weren't hired?
    27. Re:SHC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Crossing Jordan also likes to play fast and loose with reality. So it's not just limited to one network.

      I'd almost classify Crossing Jordan as a sci-fi show that just happens to be based in a medical examiner's office. Especially after watching Nigel pull another one of his "tech saves the plot" stunts.

    28. Re:SHC by diodesign · · Score: 1

      Actually, it's a typo, and a case of not previewing the comment. I didn't take my application further because my grasp of foreign languages wasn't strong enough.

  2. zaaaaap by k31bang · · Score: 5, Funny

    Its electrifying stories like this that keep me reading slashdot.

    --
    -+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+ *** http://www.mountainfort.com *** +-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-
    1. Re:zaaaaap by Jozer99 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Isn't the idea of static discharge that it discharges? Shouldn't lighting up the carpet deplete his jacket, or at least touching his desk, keyboard, door knob, or car? The average static shock is like 10,000v. 40,000 would be painful, but not something you would remember THAT long.

    2. Re:zaaaaap by DigitalHammer · · Score: 3, Funny

      Shocking, isn't it? :)

    3. Re:zaaaaap by Dracophile · · Score: 5, Funny

      Its electrifying stories like this that keep me reading slashdot.

      Awww! I know it's the current joke, but that's revolting!

      --
      Athy, athier, athiest.
    4. Re:zaaaaap by Koushiro · · Score: 5, Funny
      Its electrifying stories like this that keep me reading slashdot.
      Awww! I know it's the current joke, but that's revolting!
      I realize your capacitance for electrical puns may be low, but there's no need for such resistance! Admittedly, they are worse in series...
      --
      Karma: Oldschool
    5. Re:zaaaaap by Babbster · · Score: 1

      I got a charge out of it, too.

    6. Re:zaaaaap by dattaway · · Score: 4, Interesting

      40,000 would be painful, but not something you would remember THAT long.

      You won't feel the voltage, but the current. The voltage is what makes it happen. You won't get an amp of current flowing through your skin at 10 volts, but you will if 10,000 volts is sustained. Once the voltage is applied, current will have to wait a fraction of a second to overcome inductance, then it would have an open highway. Once the path of current has been established, its likely the source of energy has been dishcarged and dropping the voltage down to an insignificant amount. Its the milliamps that will kill or start a fire.

      Unless of course you are discharging an infinite energy source such as a 14,440 volt power main off the neighborhood telephone pole, which the constant voltage source will supply the steady current needed to form conductive carbon trails that will burn themselves through the body, superheat tissues, and cause limbs and organs to explode like sticks of dynamite.

    7. Re:zaaaaap by ZenShadow · · Score: 5, Funny

      Those jokes were terrible. You're all grounded.

      --S

      --
      -- sigs cause cancer.
    8. Re:zaaaaap by value_added · · Score: 1

      I realize your capacitance for electrical puns may be low, but there's no need for such resistance! Admittedly, they are worse in series...

      How to pay ohmage to someone with the potential to transform neutral words into a string of joules?

    9. Re:zaaaaap by IronicCheese · · Score: 2, Funny

      I charge you with sparking a potential pun war and it's having a polarizing effec out here in the field.

    10. Re:zaaaaap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Any more abysmal puns, and I will blow a fuse.

    11. Re:zaaaaap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      God, you're sexy.

    12. Re:zaaaaap by Glock27 · · Score: 5, Funny

      You're all being way too negative!

      --
      Galileo: "The Earth revolves around the Sun!"
      Score: -1 100% Flamebait
    13. Re:zaaaaap by Rhinobird · · Score: 2, Funny

      No need to be such an impedance to our fun.

      --
      If Mr. Edison had thought smarter he wouldn't sweat as much. --Nikola Tesla
    14. Re:zaaaaap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Yeah.

      After all, it is free of charge.

    15. Re:zaaaaap by t0rc · · Score: 1

      Watt are you talking about?? Give these guys sOhm credit!

    16. Re:zaaaaap by CardiganKiller · · Score: 1

      Reuters has no amperical evidence proving this story to be completely true. Wait, yeah they do.

    17. Re:zaaaaap by netringer · · Score: 1

      "Watt's wrong with you?
      Why did you get get insulate?"

      "I'm ohm, ain't I?"

      --
      Ever dream you could fly? Get up from the Flight Sim. I Fly
    18. Re:zaaaaap by buraianto · · Score: 1

      I'm positive I'm not too negative.

    19. Re:zaaaaap by Antique+Geekmeister · · Score: 1

      But their jokes are why we inducted them to Slashdot.

    20. Re:zaaaaap by InvalidError · · Score: 1

      Try putting your hands near a 5kV AC electric field... you should feel a slight tingle/tickle from the electric field (mostly from hairs being pulled/pushed) some time before getting zapped.

    21. Re:zaaaaap by mesach · · Score: 1

      If I remember correctly, it was "10,000 volts for every inch of spark."

      Now I could be wrong since I havent taken an electronics class in a long time. But I swear thats what the teacher said when we were playing with the Tesla Coil

      --
      moo.
    22. Re:zaaaaap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am postive you are all being way to negetive. With the way peoples attitudes change around here every 60 seconds(some are every 50)and always trying to alternate the currnet topic with an old joke, it does not take an Einstein or an Edison to figure out that the direct and current state of things is getting old.

    23. Re:zaaaaap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      Grounding is likely to increase the tension, so I will commute your sentence.
      Faced with a continuous series of bad puns, I have no alternative but to rectify the situation. I shall therefore supply a few more jokes, which may induce laughter, or make you recoil, depending on your susceptibility.
      You may find that my worst two jokes make a twisted pair. but with the right spin, I will make you switch your opinion.
      Given the high frequency of bad puns in the above paragraphs, and the broad spectrum of quality, it might be preferrable to filter out some of them. The remaining ones may resonate more with your taste and be more in phase with your expectations.

      - Anonycous Moward

    24. Re:zaaaaap by dj245 · · Score: 1

      You can build a device that gives people static-electricity-like shocks if you are lacking a supply of flannel, sweaters, and shag carpet. The article and circuit diagram I wrote is here

      --
      Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
    25. Re:zaaaaap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your reactance is way too high.

    26. Re:zaaaaap by sprior · · Score: 1

      I once had a cable guy at my house looking at a picture quality problem. He took one look and said it was a grounding problem - he shrugged and said it was a common problem. I asked him if he was trying to be funny, he didn't get the joke.

    27. Re:zaaaaap by CrankyOG · · Score: 1

      Basic electricity: Lesson 1-- Two atoms are walking down the street. They bump into one another. The first atom says, "Are you OK?" The second atom says, "No--I think I lost an electron." The first says,"Are you sure?" The second says, "Yeah, I'm positive!"

      --
      [ ]Clever sig [X]Lame sig
    28. Re:zaaaaap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, get an alternative point of view!

    29. Re:zaaaaap by ThePromenader · · Score: 1

      Almost: you're an ohm-boy.

      Any more voltage-induced cantankerisms?

      --

      No, no sig. Really.

      ThePromenader
    30. Re:zaaaaap by unexpected · · Score: 2, Funny

      Enough already! You are a shameless example of what we do not represent here and are hereby dishonorably discharged.

    31. Re:zaaaaap by bbrack · · Score: 1

      40kV isn't that high a static potential to have on your skin, though - IIRC, average potential on someone's skin is in the 1kV range, and you can easily increase the potential to the 250kV range with no ill effects (van de graff generator or something similar) - also, the man wouldn't leave "a trail of scorched carpet and melted plastic" - the first time he got within 1-2cm of a path to ground (doorknob, car door, just about anything would probably work) he would get small shock and all the charge that had been on his body would be discharged.

      (just got ESD re-certified at work a couple of weeks ago, didn't expect it to come in handy)

    32. Re:zaaaaap by mjeppsen · · Score: 1

      I'm firing all of you.

      Matthew Jeppsen
      www.FresHDV.com

    33. Re:zaaaaap by Jozer99 · · Score: 1

      Power off telephone polls is not 14,440 volts unless you live next to raised wires. The average power line before a transformer to 115v is around 1200v. Raised high tension wires can be up to 150,000v.

    34. Re:zaaaaap by nudnikmeow · · Score: 3, Funny

      Don't you think you all are getting too polarized over this issue?

    35. Re:zaaaaap by Jozer99 · · Score: 1

      Well, anyway, if he did have a static charge of 40,000v, which is unlikely but possible (obviously), he would discharge once in a very uncomfortable and possibly fatal arc (although, the static would not run through his heart, but through his hand or whatever he touched, so at worst there would be skin burns. He would not, however light everything in his path on fire, as the static charge would completely disapate after one arc.

    36. Re:zaaaaap by A_Non_Moose · · Score: 1

      You're all being way too negative!

      True, but it is fun watching opposing batteries of slashdot'ers.

      Naturally, with this story there's (Transformers!!!) more that meets the eye.

      Good thing the guy didn't shuffle his mortal coil.

      --
      Have you read the moderator guidelines? Well, have you, PUNK? (and I want a Karma: Gnarly option)
    37. Re:zaaaaap by rhsatrhs · · Score: 1

      Well, I know that I'm safe in my office. I work at ohm.

    38. Re:zaaaaap by killercoder · · Score: 1

      This flow of bad puns is inducing me to change my current. Keep it coming and that electrical course I took in college will finally be useful.

      Resistance is futile, you don't have the capacity to resist.

    39. Re:zaaaaap by Jace+of+Fuse! · · Score: 1

      Since you're probably a guy, I'll pass.

      --

      "Everything you know is wrong. (And stupid.)"

      Moderation Totals: Wrong=2, Stupid=3, Total=5.
    40. Re:zaaaaap by Jambon · · Score: 1

      I agree, this one truly shocked me.

    41. Re:zaaaaap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      wow.. that sparked my interest.....

    42. Re:zaaaaap by PAjamian · · Score: 1

      an excellent source for an electric field this high is a monitor which has voltages internally of 15-20,000 volts (a standard rule of thumb is 1,000 volts per diagonal inch). You often times will feel the hairs being pulled from your hand when it is close to the monitor. On a rather interesting related note, I used to have an anti-glare filter over my monitor and the glass would accumulate the static charge from the monitor and give me a nasty shock whenever I touched it. I suppose that not being grounded the filter would accumulate the static charge and not have an outlet for it until the screen was touched.

      --
      Windows is a bonfire, Linux is the sun. Linux only looks smaller if you lack perspective.
    43. Re:zaaaaap by flawedgeek · · Score: 1

      I agree.....it hertz too much

      --
      My other Sig is .40 caliber.
    44. Re:zaaaaap by Xyrus · · Score: 1

      There are always positives and negatives when dealing with charged issues.

      ~X~

      --
      ~X~
    45. Re:zaaaaap by geminidomino · · Score: 1

      This is the mains reason I hate pun cascades. After awhile it just hertz.

    46. Re:zaaaaap by mogwai7 · · Score: 1

      Who would have thought electrical terms have such a high potential for puns?

    47. Re:zaaaaap by Trogre · · Score: 1

      Truly yours is a comment without parallel.

      --
      "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
  3. electricity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    There's about 40,000 volts in my FR1ST Ps0T111 booyeahhhh!!!!!!!!!!!!! arrrrrrrr

    1. Re:electricity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ZAP!

  4. Shocking! by bpd1069 · · Score: 0

    News!

    --
    --
  5. Bean beans beans by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    I had something similar happen to me. Replace static electricity with gas, and scorch marks with skid marks.

    1. Re:Bean beans beans by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Gastrointestinally charged man ignites anus!

  6. discharged... by Maditude · · Score: 1

    Any authoritative debunkings yet? Seems like there wouldn't have been any static charge left after he'd already zapped the carpet...

    1. Re:discharged... by cperciva · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Any authoritative debunkings yet?

      The entire story is laughable, but the most obvious problem is this:

      Firefighters took possession of Clewer's jacket and stored it in the courtyard of the fire station, where it continued to give off a strong electrical current.

      How does a statically charged jacket "give off an electric current" -- and why would firefighters take possession of it anyway? All they'd need to do to discharge it is pour a bucket of water over it.

    2. Re:discharged... by planetoid · · Score: 2, Interesting

      In fact, I'm pretty sure I saw an episode of Mythbusters that covered a similar urban legend. They were able to generate a potentially injurous amount of electricity from static but the size of the apparatus they built had to be huge to pull it off.

      --
      Slashdot requires you to wait longer between hitting 'reply' and submitting a comment.
    3. Re:discharged... by morcego · · Score: 1

      Well, the current has to be conducted to go from point A to point B. So, if he zapped the carpet, there are 2 possible options:

      1) It went thought the air: highly unlikely, since that is not the path of less resistance.

      2) It went thought his body: If that was possible, it would never had built such a charge

      This whole story is against every physics known to men.

      --
      morcego
    4. Re:discharged... by jim_v2000 · · Score: 1

      Like you would even need an "authoritative debunking". Think about it for 5 seconds. Even if you could build such a charge up by rubbing nylon and wool, it would dissipate the moment he was grounded. And also, how the hell does a coat "store" a charge, like in TFA? What a bunch of crap.

      --
      Don't take life so seriously. No one makes it out alive.
    5. Re:discharged... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      I have a MSEE and feel like feeding the news trolls.

      I put more faith in the Loch Ness Monster than this crap. Shame to see it actually in the "real" news.

      1. Current is measured in amps, not volts.

      2. WTF is the FIRE department doing with a volt/amp meter? Most (cheap) volt meters don't measure past 1000 volts AC/DC.

      3. One or two squirts of water from a spray bottle would have completely discharged the jacket -- assuming somehow the natural humidity didn't!

      4. and of course the jacket could never have built up such powerful charges as to melt and burn materials...

      5. Seems unlikely that static electricity would be likely to flow *through* plastic, a *non-conductor*.

      6. For the jacket to "continue" to give off an electrical current, several things must be happening:
          a) There must be somewhere for it to go.
          b) There must be something actively ionizing the electronics in the jacket. This requires force, external electricity, etc.
          c) The "destination" of the current must also remain oppositely ionized. (Otherwise some current would flow and then things would be balanced). Maintaining the ionization of the "path to the destination" would also require external force, electricity, etc.

    6. Re:discharged... by Peyna · · Score: 3, Insightful

      2. WTF is the FIRE department doing with a volt/amp meter? Most (cheap) volt meters don't measure past 1000 volts AC/DC.

      I imagine they have to be prepared to deal with fires or other problems caused by downed powerlines, often before the electric company shows up 5 hours later.

      --
      What?
    7. Re:discharged... by MagikSlinger · · Score: 4, Insightful
      How does a statically charged jacket "give off an electric current" -- and why would firefighters take possession of it anyway? All they'd need to do to discharge it is pour a bucket of water over it.

      Statically charged jacket would not give off a current unless discharged. The reporter, if the story is true, was ignorantly referring to the electrical field strength (which was measured in volts in the article). Firefighters would have the meter for this because they sometimes have to find out if a downed wire is still live.

      Now for the story: it's begging a lot of questions. 1) How could the jacket hold its charge after being handled? 2) How could he re-build up such a charge after discharging into the carpet? 3) How could he not notice the massive jolts he'd get touching metal furnishings or even his computer? There's a strong whiff of bs from this story.

      --
      The bitter lessons of a veteran coder: http://bitterprogrammer.blogspot.com
    8. Re:discharged... by cornjchob · · Score: 1

      And also, how the hell does a coat "store" a charge, like in TFA? What a bunch of crap.

      The electrons rest on top of the fabric, just like the friction-released electrons on a comb after you run it through your hair on an arid day.

      --
      We now have confirmed reports from an informed Orange County minister that Ethel is still an active communist.
    9. Re:discharged... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's April 1st already?

      I played with one of those Van De Graaff doodads in high school. I was told it put off about 10kV. The longest arc length I observed between the metal ball on top and my hand was roughly an inch. So unless he's a wee fella, I doubt electricity arced from his jacket to the floor. Oh and you've got to love this quote:

      "Static electricity is a similar mechanism to lightning, where you have clouds rubbing together and then a spark generated by very dry air above them," said Gosden.

      If you haven't guessed, Gosden (if he even exists) is an electrical engineer, not a meteorologist. Maybe one of our slashdot chemical engineer should alert Reuters to the potentially lethal effects of dihydrogenmonoxide when inhaled.

    10. Re:discharged... by dhalgren · · Score: 1

      What do the women know that we don't?

    11. Re:discharged... by E8086 · · Score: 1

      I think your're refering to the "deadly" PBC pipe.
      the myth: someone was sand blasting the paint off a PBC pipe and lots of static built up on the pipe and he was killed by the discharge when he touched the pipe. Myth Busted, while PBC does hold a charge, it's very small and the sand in the air act as discharge points.

      --
      F7 doesn't work, ignore spelling and grammar
    12. Re:discharged... by RollingThunder · · Score: 1

      Minor nit, but it's PVC - polyvinyl chlorate.

    13. Re:discharged... by Eunuchswear · · Score: 1

      Minor nit, but it's polyvinyl chloride.

      --
      Watch this Heartland Institute video
    14. Re:discharged... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have a MSEE and feel like feeding the news trolls.

      I put more faith in the Loch Ness Monster than this crap. Shame to see it actually in the "real" news.


      Let's hope the script writers at "Mythbusters" read this story.

    15. Re:discharged... by ngg · · Score: 1
      The reporter, if the story is true, was ignorantly referring to the electrical field strength (which was measured in volts in the article).

      No, the reporter was ignorantly referring to the electric potential (which was measured in volts in the article). Electric field is a vector field and is typically measured in volts per meter.

      Of course, the above statement shouldn't be taken to mean that I think the reporter has the first clue about physics.

    16. Re:discharged... by RollingThunder · · Score: 1

      My apologies, you're correct. Had my compounds a little mixed. Certainly much closer than the GGP though.

    17. Re:discharged... by zoefff · · Score: 1

      1) Nylon is not a good conductor, so it will keep the charge, and only the surface you touch will interact, but not on a fatal manner.
      2) by keeping on moving. It's fairly easy to build up elec. charge this way. Like rubbing a cat. 10 or 20k is easy to achieve for a human with the right clothes. And he was wearing them...
      3) That is what I would like to know as well. You will not feel discharging of yourself when voltage lower than 3000 Volts, however. But with 40k, I probably don't want to be the doorknop :)

      here you learn more about ESD (those yellow stickers in the router room) Intel is very aware of this, as is any other semiconductor manufacturer. Don't we all want to look like this in the office :-)

    18. Re:discharged... by teaenay · · Score: 1
      Regardless of whether there are technical inaccuracies in the reporting on the story or in the conclusions reached about the cause, the story itself is fact. It was on the news on TV earlier today.

      The fire department, for whatever reason, did take the jacket. They showed it hanging up in the fire station next to a fireman discussing it and holding a volt meter.

      They showed the burnt carpet, plastic from the car and interviewed a number of witnesses.

    19. Re:discharged... by sbaker · · Score: 1

      Yeah this is bo-o-gus.

      Hardly one sentence of the story bears up under any kind of scientific scrutiny.

      Whilst you can get a spark from voltages as low as 500 to 1000 volts if the conditions are right, the amount of current that flows is microscopic.

      Once the guy's jacket had discharged once, he'd have to build up charge again over a long period.

      Sparks from static sources are too brief to heat things up to that degree...and if you tried to measure them with a conventional meter, the meter itself would discharge the source even faster than a spark would. There wouldn't be time to get a reading because the current would only flow for a microsecond or so.

      In the words of the masters: This myth is *busted*.

      --
      www.sjbaker.org
    20. Re:discharged... by Phronesis · · Score: 4, Informative
      WTF is the FIRE department doing with a volt/amp meter? Most (cheap) volt meters don't measure past 1000 volts AC/DC.

      Just to amplify your comment, most (cheap) volt meters have too low a resistance to measure potential on a tiny capacitor, such as a human body (~250 pF), because the voltmeter would discharge the capacitor before it could get a reading.

      Someone else replied about measuring downed power lines, but that would: (a) not require a voltmeter to read over 1000 volts and (b) not require an ultra-high-impedance static-charge electrometer.

      BTW, let's do the numbers: 40,000 volts across a 250 pF capacitor would have potential energy of 1/2 CV^2 = 0.2 Joules. If you think that 0.2 Joules is enough energy to melt macroscopic amounts of plastic or burn carpet, much less almost enough to incinerate a human body, I have a hot investment tip for you.

    21. Re:discharged... by GrungyLotG · · Score: 1

      If you are refering to the PVC pipe story, I believe it was proved false, since it could not hold enough of a charge to genorate a small shock.

    22. Re:discharged... by h4rm0ny · · Score: 1


      Must resist! Too... easy...

      --

      Aide-toi, le Ciel t'aidera - Jeanne D'Arc.
    23. Re:discharged... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, you mean the story is RAISING a lot of questions.

      Hope that helps. Have a nice day.

    24. Re:discharged... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Where did you get your MSEE? remind me not to go there.

      1. You got that one right

      2. There are electric FIELD meters that can measure volts/m^2. But I doubt the fire department has one.
      A fire department is very likely to have a volt meter.

      3. It's in Australia, seemingly very dry at times.

      4. You're probably right

      5. They obviously got current and voltage mixed up. They meant the jacket was still charged.

      It's all BS anyway. But you have an MS...

    25. Re:discharged... by dilvish_the_damned · · Score: 1

      I have it on strong authority that it was a Nike jacket with a semi-conductive logo. I hope that clears things up for you. The strange part was the logo bearing the material in question never caught flame. For this reason Nike is considering doing a nation wide recall in Japan pending further CDC testing.
      Are we a bunch of geese? Of course its bunk! What the hell were you thinking?
      What really happened was probably more like the dude caught himself on fire and destroyed some company parpet and then claimed "I dont know what happened, maybe electrostatic discharge? You know I noticed something funny on the way into work today" and then some fireman said "I dont mean to say nuthin but uhh it would take a sustained 40 jigawats like in Back to the Future Three for this to happen" and then the reporter thinks 'ok, 40 jigawatts it is'... Instead of the headline reading 'Some emplyee does something stupid involving shoes, firefighters respond, man OK and apharently wont be fired, drives beat up car'.

      --
      I think you underestimate just how much I just dont care.
    26. Re:discharged... by DavidTC · · Score: 1
      Um, if us men knew, then we would know it.

      However, as there are women here, you could just ask them.

      I'm reminded of the time on Star Trek where Kirk makes a captain's log that starts with 'unknown to us...'

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
    27. Re:discharged... by Tony+Hoyle · · Score: 1

      Note that this is a Reuters embellishment.

      The original story:

      http://the.standard.net.au/articles/2005/09/16/112 6750111141.html

      Did not confuse current and voltage.

      It still sounds like bullshit though.

    28. Re:discharged... by halltk1983 · · Score: 1

      Maybe it was the solar flare...

      --
      Watch for Penguins, they eat Apples and throw rocks at Windows.
    29. Re:discharged... by jim_v2000 · · Score: 1

      I was referring to in the context of the article. Somehow a coat manages to store a 40,000 volt charge even though people are handling it (thus being grounded).

      --
      Don't take life so seriously. No one makes it out alive.
    30. Re:discharged... by E8086 · · Score: 1

      "Minor nit, but it's PVC - polyvinyl chlorate"

      yes, PVC I wonder what was I thinking/typing, probably not much

      --
      F7 doesn't work, ignore spelling and grammar
    31. Re:discharged... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually all we do is sit around and wait for the electric company.

      You go play with the 14k volt line; I'll stand back and wait for the professional linemen to do their job, then I'll do mine.

    32. Re:discharged... by timrichardson · · Score: 1

      It's Australia: don't bank on natural humdity. But a woolen shirt and a nylon jacket. This guy was not so far away from some kind of Darwin Award for bad fashion.
      The town mentioned is in the heart of Merino country so maybe it's part of natural fibre viral marketing campaign.

    33. Re:discharged... by In-gin-eer · · Score: 1

      Firefighters do not (or aren't supposed to) do anything with live wires besides set up a perimeter and wait for our guys with bucket trucks. They wouldn't have a meter for that purpose. Even linemen with the utility I work for don't use their meters to test the voltage on a downed wire. It's just too dangerous, because if a downed wire is still energized, it can energize everything around it. Hell, not even all of our line crews have a High Voltage Meter on their truck, let alone one set up for multiple voltage classes (Distribution vrs Transmission have different meters). Rule of thumb for anyone, utility workers and fire fighters included, is stay at least 15 to 20 feet away from the wire until an open point is created or verified.

    34. Re:discharged... by dhalgren · · Score: 1
      Ah, yes, but remember Rumsfeld's simple explanation--helps me keep it straight.


      The Unknown
      As we know,
      There are known knowns.
      There are things we know we know.
      We also know
      There are known unknowns.
      That is to say
      We know there are some things
      We do not know.
      But there are also unknown unknowns,
      The ones we don't know
      We don't know.

      --Feb. 12, 2002, Department of Defense news briefing
    35. Re:discharged... by Scooter · · Score: 1

      Indeed - and (quoth the fireman from TFA): "...measured a current of 40,000 volts".

      Firefighter Barton - do *not*, I repeat do *not* ever attempt to do any wiring in your house - get professional help.

    36. Re:discharged... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He was wearing a woolen shirt.
      The jacket was well used (cleaner)with possibly polyester pants.Nylon against wool = high volts, low amperage.
      It was jumping through his shoe, which would be worn thinner at the discharge point on the sole - perhaps running down the steel last. Lastlty the carpet got yellow scorch marks the size of a nickel as if someone had rubbed a cigarete but in - there was no dripping plastic - just loud cracks. Guy said discharges went off in his car too.

    37. Re:discharged... by Savantissimo · · Score: 1

      Were they doing it at very low humidity? PVC adsorbs a thin layer of water which reduces its resistence, which is why you don't use it for van de Graff generators.

      --
      "Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery?" - Patrick Henry
    38. Re:discharged... by Savantissimo · · Score: 1

      The unhandled areas of the coat would keep the charge - it has a high surface resistence. The field meter would still register the same charge until the whole surface was discharged.

      --
      "Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery?" - Patrick Henry
    39. Re:discharged... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Um, wtf? How the hell does that follow?

      A man might know that women know what menstruation feels like. That does NOT mean he knows what it feels like.

      I know some people know calculus. Doesn't mean that I know it.

      Your ST quote is useless too. Knowing something at the time of logging doesn't mean that he would have known it at the time to which he was referring.

  7. Since when is Current measued in Volts ? by morcego · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Eletrical Current is measued in Amps, not Volts.
    That alone is enough to make me seriously doubt this whole business.

    --
    morcego
    1. Re:Since when is Current measued in Volts ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Electrical field is measured in Volts, and the description is correct. The potential difference between ground and the man's jacket was 40000V.

    2. Re:Since when is Current measued in Volts ? by njyoder · · Score: 1

      Excellent point, I didn't even notice that at first, my brain automatically corrected the wording so I didn't notice the mistake.

      Here's the relevent quote: "We tested his clothes with a static electricity field meter and measured a current of 40,000 volts, which is one step shy of spontaneous combustion, where his clothes would have self-ignited,"

      One also wonders:
      1. Why the fireman happened to have a "static electricity field meter."
      2. What exactly a "static electricity field meter" is. You can measure electric fields with an electric field meters, but that's something different.
      3. How they determined what the point of spontaneous combustion was and how a fireman happened to know that
      4. Why that charge was still lingering on the clothes afterwards.
      5. Why they weren't extremely alarmed to be handling clothes that could just explode at any moment.

    3. Re:Since when is Current measued in Volts ? by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1
      1. Why the fireman happened to have a "static electricity field meter."

      ...in Warnambool where the CFA is manned primarily by volunteers who might attend the occasional house fire at this time of year, but not much else.

    4. Re:Since when is Current measued in Volts ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They were measuring the electric "pressure" on the surface of the synthetic jacket. That is measured in volts. This is easily conceivable. They just exaggerated the number of burn marks.

    5. Re:Since when is Current measued in Volts ? by njyoder · · Score: 1

      That website doesn't mention anything about any kind of electrical measuring equipment nor firemen.

    6. Re:Since when is Current measued in Volts ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      A few other points:

      1. Clothes (or anything else for that matter) does not "spontaneously combust" because they are charged to a particular voltage. It's only the discharge (i.e. flow of current) that can ignite something (see #2).

      2. Combustion can occur from a spark (which can happen at nearly any voltage, but let's just say 1,000 volts as a reasonable minimum), but it would be highly unlikely to ignite ANYTHING except gas or other flammable fumes.

      I've passed multiple 50,000 volt simulated discharges through dry paper (yes, I was playing with a piece of test equipment meant to simulate static discharges at various voltages) and didn't get so much as a scorch mark. To say that conditions would have to be "perfect" is an understatement. Any material that you would find in an office building could not be ignited by static discharge from a human, there simply is not enough energy.

      BTW, people can discharge as much as 5,000 volts and not notice it. Discharging 40,000 will make you stand up and take notice, big time! 50,000 is quite painful.

    7. Re:Since when is Current measued in Volts ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Informative

      Bullshit. Electric field strength is measured in Newtons per Coulomb. One Volt is one Joule per Coulomb. Since a Newton is completely different from a Joule, you can't measure electric field strength in Volts. Anybody who tells you otherwise is wrong, and needs to go back to highschool.

    8. Re:Since when is Current measued in Volts ? by peawee03 · · Score: 1

      That website describes the town, which would give a very good level of the lack of complicated... anything... present in the town of Warrnambool, which according to TFA, is where this all went down.

      --
      I wish I could write clever and witty sigs.
    9. Re:Since when is Current measued in Volts ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A static discharge has very little current, certaily nowhere near enough to melt anything except a gullable mind!

      It takes hundreds of milliamps of curent to melt even a thin sheet of plastic, So I do not belive it!!
      Voltage does not melt or burn anything , power does ! and that requires current in which a static discharge has only at most microamps of current

    10. Re:Since when is Current measued in Volts ? by tepples · · Score: 1

      Eletrical Current is measued in Amps, not Volts.

      The expression "current of 40,000 volts" is overloaded to mean any current as long as the potential difference is 40,000 volts. But "amps" are still wrong, as static electricity isn't a current but merely a charge, measured in coulombs. Still, "charge of 40,000 volts" is overloaded in the same way.

    11. Re:Since when is Current measued in Volts ? by jimmypw · · Score: 0

      maby so but the electricity wasnt running through him but he was chaged at 40,000, Like a battery the ampage was probably 0.001.

    12. Re:Since when is Current measued in Volts ? by WoKKiee · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Electric field strength is measured in Newtons per Coulomb or Volts per metre. They are equivalent.

      Why yes, IAAEE. (I am an electrical engineer)

    13. Re:Since when is Current measued in Volts ? by amdotaku · · Score: 1

      Its much much worse than this. A static charge has a current of 0 ampere by definition. And 40kV is not that much for a static potential at all. Plus, "static field" is not a term I'm familiar with at all as an EE student, but I do know that any Electric Field is a function of volts over distance, which would give an electric field units of V/m!!! This article is just atrocious!

    14. Re:Since when is Current measued in Volts ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      They werent exaggerating the burn marks, I saw this on TV and they showed the burn marks. While this may not have happened exactly the way the article describes it its pretty close. In Australia it can get pretty dry and as long as he dident touch any conductive surfeces it is very possible for staic to build up like this, with his coat acting like a battery and his shoes insulationg him from discharge the static would have built up until it was strong enough to make it past the rubber in the shoe. Also I doubt this story is fake because when I saw it on TV they had fire dept, the man in question and his job interviewer there although its not like they could get a decent scientist to investigate at such short notice so some of there "facts" are probably wrong.

    15. Re:Since when is Current measued in Volts ? by cammoblammo · · Score: 1

      The CFA will also routinely deal with incidents involving downed power lines--car accidents, storm damage and so on--and thus (as others have pointed out) need to be able to determine if a line is live or not.

      --

      Cogito, ergo sig.

    16. Re:Since when is Current measued in Volts ? by cammoblammo · · Score: 1

      I should also point out that although the CFA staff are volunteers, they are quite well trained and professional in their approach to their jobs.

      I know Warrnambool quite well, and I can say that the CFA there are definitely better than the volnteers firefighters of Springfield, although I can't really speak for the rest of the town...

      --

      Cogito, ergo sig.

    17. Re:Since when is Current measued in Volts ? by TinyManCan · · Score: 1

      As little as 6 milliamps through your heart will kill you though. So he lucky he radiated that energy rather than piping it thought his trunk.

      Fact stolen from tonight's mythbusters.

    18. Re:Since when is Current measued in Volts ? by moonbender · · Score: 1

      Owned. :)

      And also: Google knows all.

      --
      Switch back to Slashdot's D1 system.
    19. Re:Since when is Current measued in Volts ? by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      I would expect such devices to be relatively low impedance volt meters. 10 meg ohm or so. You won't get a reading from something with a static charge with a device like that.

    20. Re:Since when is Current measued in Volts ? by Derek+Pomery · · Score: 1

      Well, at the very least, it might make for a moderately amusing Myth Busters episode as they try various ways to electrocute buster with Van De Graaf generators.

      --
      -- perl -e'print pack"H*","6e656d6f406d38792e6f7267"' /. ate my old sig. Bastards.
    21. Re:Since when is Current measued in Volts ? by elgatozorbas · · Score: 1
      "We tested his clothes with a static electricity field meter and measured a current of 40,000 volts... Firefighters took possession of Clewer's jacket and stored it in the courtyard of the fire station, where it continued to give off a strong electrical current.

      Indeed, they are mixing up units. There is NO WAY these clothes could deliver a strong current for a long time:
      - they are not highly conductive
      - they do not form a high capacitance so they could not store a really high charge (even if the voltage is high)
      - this supposedly high current in combination with the high voltage (40kV) would lead to an immense release of power which could never be present in the clothing.

    22. Re:Since when is Current measued in Volts ? by ishmaelflood · · Score: 1

      Nice theory but it's been raining off and on all week right across western Victoria, where Warnambool is.

    23. Re:Since when is Current measued in Volts ? by uler · · Score: 1

      Yeah, the just used the word current in the wrong place.

    24. Re:Since when is Current measued in Volts ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Look, the whole thing is ridiculous. You really think this guy's just walking around, setting fire to things, oblivious to it all?

    25. Re:Since when is Current measued in Volts ? by Tony+Hoyle · · Score: 3, Informative

      The Original article is much clearer. They called an electrician.

      Reuters just made some shit up and made the story look even more like bullshit than it already was.

    26. Re:Since when is Current measued in Volts ? by epee1221 · · Score: 1

      Electric field strength is measured in Newtons per Coulomb or Volts per metre. They are equivalent.
      That doesn't much matter. The field strength was given as 40,000 volts, not 40,000 V/m (and even then, that's just for a specific point, not the entire field).

      --
      "The use-mention distinction" is not "enforced here."
    27. Re:Since when is Current measued in Volts ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Since not everyone has had high school physics, 40,000 volts would be the strength of the field at a specific point. While 40,000 V/m would be used to 'characterize' the field allowed you to determine the field strength at any distance you wish from the point.

    28. Re:Since when is Current measued in Volts ? by MegaFur · · Score: 1

      I can't speak to the source of the burn marks, but several/various people on this site say 40,000 volts isn't enough to cause this kind of thing to happen. Even if it were, how could it *keep* happening? Even if he could somehow build up enough voltage to do this, once it zaps, that should be it, yeah? Discharge and gone. I don't get how he was able to zap multiple things multiple times, he would have had to have somehow been recharging the whole time.

      Also note a battery is drastically different from a capacitor.

      --
      Furry cows moo and decompress.
    29. Re:Since when is Current measued in Volts ? by kwoff · · Score: 1

      From the article you linked to:

      Mr Clewer was given overalls to wear as fire officers used a device to check static electricity on him and his belongings.
  8. Misread headline by Joey+Patterson · · Score: 0, Funny

    Statically Charged Man Ignites Office

    There goes one half of Microsoft's monopo-- Oh, wait a minute...

  9. It has to be done by OO7david · · Score: 1
    Obviously, despite the fact that this is carried by Reuters, you should take some of the 'facts' presented here with some NaCl

    Something online might not be true? Shocking!
    1. Re:It has to be done by JabberWokky · · Score: 1
      Actually, Reuters is one of the two largest feeds for print publications. While this may be online tonight, it will be in print tomorrow morning.

      --
      Evan

      --
      "$30 for the One True Ring. $10 each additional ring!" -- JRR "Bob" Tolkien
    2. Re:It has to be done by Cylix · · Score: 1

      Psst..

      News people think they are a joke too

      (however, it's affordable compared to the rest... a great deal use AP Wire... despite being "non-profit" is horribly expensive)

      --
      "You should always go to other people's funerals; otherwise, they won't come to yours." -- Yogi Berra
    3. Re:It has to be done by JabberWokky · · Score: 1
      Psst...

      I'm a news person. Been in the newspaper business for eight years now. I know they are a joke. I also know that they provide most of that nice text padding between the ads, so they are quite used.

      --
      Evan

      --
      "$30 for the One True Ring. $10 each additional ring!" -- JRR "Bob" Tolkien
    4. Re:It has to be done by Tony+Hoyle · · Score: 1

      They took the original article, embellished it, introduced some basic inconsistencies... ..and half the newspapers in the world will do the same to the reuters article tomorrow :(

      original: http://the.standard.net.au/articles/2005/09/16/112 6750111141.html

  10. A REAL Electrical Engineer by No+Salvation · · Score: 3, Funny

    This guy could get a pretty good job as a generator in New Orleans. I don't want to know where they put the plugs though.

    --
    I'm agneglectic, too lazy to care if there is a God.
    1. Re:A REAL Electrical Engineer by fbartho · · Score: 1

      I do.

      --
      Gravity Sucks
    2. Re:A REAL Electrical Engineer by No+Salvation · · Score: 1

      Well I guess I would like to think that he is a living Tesla Coil.

      --
      I'm agneglectic, too lazy to care if there is a God.
    3. Re:A REAL Electrical Engineer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's easy.. just follow the President's motorcade.

  11. I smell a by fandog · · Score: 5, Interesting

    future Mythbusters in the works...

    1. Re:I smell a by my_haz · · Score: 1

      It was the conclusion of what really starts gas pump fires, over the myth that cell phones do.

    2. Re:I smell a by magus_melchior · · Score: 2, Informative

      They did several variations on the static electricity theme already, the two most famous probably being the PVC pipe (in which Jamie built a van de Graaf generator) and the cell phone sparking a gas station fire myths.

      --
      "We are Microsoft. You shall be assimilated. Competition is futile."
    3. Re:I smell a by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mulder and Scully have been dispatched to the scene. Smells like the work of Cancer Man (Carl Rove).

    4. Re:I smell a by tekiegreg · · Score: 1

      I didn't get a chance to watch those episodes, I'm particularly curious as to the gas station fire myth, can you fill me in? Thanks!

      --
      ...in bed
    5. Re:I smell a by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My thoughts exactly.
      I wonder if Jamie and Adam has user accounts on slashdot?

    6. Re:I smell a by magus_melchior · · Score: 2, Informative

      At the risk of going offtopic (and spoiling most users)...

      The gas station fire myth (episode 2) was based on the myth that using a cellular phone at a gas station was dangerous because it could create a spark that would ignite the gasoline fumes. Jamie and Adam built a test rig that would test this and other potential ignition sources (among these a pantyhose-based charge generator and a lighter), but they found that using a spark to light gas fumes is easier said than done.

      The PVC pipe myth starts as follows: "A construction worker finds a length of PVC pipe, but there's some paint on it he'd like to remove. He sandblasts the pipe, but in the process the pipe collects a large enough charge to literally act as a lightning gun, shocking the hapless worker." After a few frustrating runs with the PVC pipe, Jamie built a van de Graaf generator out of a pipe and other items in his shop, while Adam tried to turn the PVC pipe into a giant capacitor.

      --
      "We are Microsoft. You shall be assimilated. Competition is futile."
    7. Re:I smell a by edunbar93 · · Score: 1

      That's funny, all I smell is ozone and burning plastic...

      --
      "No problem. I have the capacity to do infinite work so long as you don't mind that my quality approaches zero."-Dilbert
  12. It's the thought that counts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny
    "...wearing a nylon jacket over a wool shirt..."

    Now I know what to buy a number of family and friends for Xmas.

    1. Re:It's the thought that counts by vettemph · · Score: 1

      Someone call tha fashion police. Every one knows you don't wear nylon over wool.

      --
      The government which is strong enough to protect you from everything is strong enough to take everything from you.
    2. Re:It's the thought that counts by RFIDJAck · · Score: 1

      Guess its a gives a new meaning to the term "Fashion Victim"

  13. Oh come on... by CottonEyedJoe · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Minutes of Warnambool City Council meeting:
    1. Make up BS story about "static" man
    2. Put Warnambool on map.
    3. Tourism
    4. Profit

    If someone will travel to bumphuk, nowhere to see the virgin mary in someones month old pea soup, they might travel to Warnambool to meet "static man".

    1. Re:Oh come on... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Indeed. I always try to take my vacations in cities where people spontaneously combust (or come within one step of doing so). I'm going to have to pay a visit to this Warnambool!

    2. Re:Oh come on... by zoefff · · Score: 2, Funny

      Can I add something to the agenda for next time?

      3a. ????

    3. Re:Oh come on... by Jesus_666 · · Score: 1

      Wait a second... "Static Man"... I know that naming scheme.

      Someone notify Dr. Light, immediately! We need the Blue Bomber!

      --
      USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
    4. Re:Oh come on... by advb89 · · Score: 0

      I know, i was disappointed about the lack of:

      3.5) ???????

      --
      <overrated>Insert Sig Here</overrated>
    5. Re:Oh come on... by wxjones · · Score: 1

      Two words only needed. First one is bull.

      --
      My SIG is a P226
    6. Re:Oh come on... by StikyPad · · Score: 1

      3a. Produce custom clip-on "Static Man" cover for Stun Master.

  14. Microamp currents causing this kind of damage? by njyoder · · Score: 3, Informative

    40,000 volts is only enough to generate a few microamps over a small gap in the air. Air has a huge resistance. There's no way 40,000 volts could cause that much damage. From a quick internet search, it appears even a simple van de graff generator would create over 75,000 volts, and that's fairly harmless.

    The reports are also inconsistent. The AP is saying it was 30kV, Reuters is saying 40kV.

    1. Re:Microamp currents causing this kind of damage? by 21chrisp · · Score: 1

      Chances are a lot of that voltage was lost by discharging to the floor and such. So it was probably higher previously. That does mean that 30/40,000 is still well short of "spontaneous combustion" though..

    2. Re:Microamp currents causing this kind of damage? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It does not exactly work this way. First the potential difference between the person and the floor would have to be high enough to cause an electric breakdown in the air, then air may(I'm not sure, but I would assume) be an extremely good conductor. If there is no electric breakdown, air has zero resistance.

      Giving Van De Graff's highest voltage does not make sense, its voltage will increase indefinitely until it is discharged. If 75,000 volts is about where the air is assumed to have an electric breakdown (causing it to be dischanrged), then 40,000 volts probably can not break down air. And BTW, a Van de Graff *can* be extremely dangerous.

      If this article is true (e.g. firefighters actually think static started the fire), I really doubt they have it right. I've never tried, but I believe it's rather difficult to light a carpet on fire.

    3. Re:Microamp currents causing this kind of damage? by Sosetta · · Score: 1

      To arc through dry air, you need something like 12kV/inch. Van De Graff generators usually can get a few hundred kV. Enough to leap a foot or two, depending on the size of it.

    4. Re:Microamp currents causing this kind of damage? by edunbar93 · · Score: 1

      Yes of course, but when you have a news story that involves 40,000 of anything, it'll get published. Real knowledge be damned.

      --
      "No problem. I have the capacity to do infinite work so long as you don't mind that my quality approaches zero."-Dilbert
  15. Volts Vs. Amps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It is my understanding that something can have a charge of many thousands (or more) volts, and yet have little to no effect on anything if there is an extremely small ammount of amps.

  16. His wife by seabreezemm · · Score: 2, Funny

    doesn't need batteries anymore for her toys.

    --
    Karma: a simple way of silencing those with unpopular views regardless how correct or just that view might be.
  17. Why by gexen · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Just say salt, don't be so fucking pretentious.

    1. Re:Why by kerohazel · · Score: 5, Funny
      Just say salt, don't be so fucking pretentious.

      You need to calm down. Here, have a cool glass of Dihydrogen Monoxide.

      --
      Skype is too convoluted... Now I'm reverse-engineering the Kyoto Protocol.
    2. Re:Why by bar-agent · · Score: 2, Funny

      NO! Don't listen to parent poster! That stuff is deadly!

      --
      i'd hit it so hard, if you pulled me out you'd be the king of britain [bash.org]
    3. Re:Why by ari_j · · Score: 1

      Warning: Parent and grandparent comments suffer from cranial-rectal inversion.

    4. Re:Why by bar-agent · · Score: 3, Funny

      NO! Don't listen to parent poster, and whatever you do, don't drink Dihydrogen Monoxide!

      That stuff is deadly!

      --
      i'd hit it so hard, if you pulled me out you'd be the king of britain [bash.org]
    5. Re:Why by Alien+Being · · Score: 1

      Paw: Maw, what's pertenchous?

      Maw: Not sure, Paw. I reckon it must be city-talk for snooty.

    6. Re:Why by dcrawshaw · · Score: 1

      You seem to have mistaken nerd humour for pretentious.

      I would say nerd humour on a "news for nerds" web site is pretty reasonable.

      d

    7. Re:Why by kristopher · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      How about you give him some hydrogen, mix it with some chlorine and blast it with a stream of photons?

    8. Re:Why by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Saying "NaCl" in place of "salt" is funny?

      Please explain how this ("nerd") humour lacks any pretentiousness.

    9. Re:Why by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Dude, hopefully you're on NaCl peter so you can't reproduce.

    10. Re:Why by E8086 · · Score: 1

      water, water everywhere so let's go have a drink
      -Homer Simpson

      --
      F7 doesn't work, ignore spelling and grammar
    11. Re:Why by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Aww man. Not another anti-dihdrogen monoxide fanatic.

      I handle this stuff on a daily basis without ill effects. It's not that bad.

    12. Re:Why by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dihydrogen Monoxide in amounts of 100 liters is surely toxic!
      There has been people who died of this and there will be more of them...

    13. Re:Why by Deltaspectre · · Score: 0

      Truly it is! That's why we must banish it!

      --
      My UID is prime... is yours?
    14. Re:Why by Lefty2446 · · Score: 1

      That stuff is dangerous and should be destroyed on sight: see here:- http://www.dhmo.org/

  18. My bet... by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

    Is that yes: he did have a static charge, and did arc a bit. I used to drive a company car which did this to me all the time. Painful as hell.

    But the scorch marks could have been there for a long time. Perhaps this was the ideal opportunity to cover up for some office hijinks?

  19. superhero by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative
  20. Original story from the Warrnambool Standard by Namarrgon · · Score: 5, Informative
    More details here.

    If it's a hoax, it's fooled a lot of people.

    --
    Why would anyone engrave "Elbereth"?
    1. Re:Original story from the Warrnambool Standard by nmb3000 · · Score: 1

      If it's a hoax, it's fooled a lot of people.

      Bah. Most of these places just have an automated process that pulls from "authoritive" RSS feeds and adds it to their own website. There's not some guy at all these news sites that reads each thing and posts it.

      The Internet and RSS: Spreading "news" at the speed of BS.

      --
      "What do you despise? By this are you truly known." --Princess Irulan, Manual of Muad'Dib
      /)
    2. Re:Original story from the Warrnambool Standard by Vellmont · · Score: 4, Insightful


      If it's a hoax, it's fooled a lot of people.

      And sadly, that's quite easy. All you have to do to fool the news media is fool one semi-reputable source (in this case Reuters). Soon enough all the other newspapers will pick it up like you're living in an echo chamber.

      --
      AccountKiller
    3. Re:Original story from the Warrnambool Standard by rwise2112 · · Score: 1

      I like the last line in the original:

      "He said Mr Clewer's clothes were at no stage dangerous because they were low in amps which could be deadly."

      So they are "at no stage dangerous", but "could be deadly". Oh, before anybody points it out, I do not what he meant, but it is horribly written.

      --

      "For every expert, there is an equal and opposite expert"
    4. Re:Original story from the Warrnambool Standard by DavidTC · · Score: 1

      Is it too late to point out that electrical storage systems being 'low in amps' is sheer nonsense? Amps only mean anything with the movement of electricity.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
    5. Re:Original story from the Warrnambool Standard by Zoxed · · Score: 1

      > If it's a hoax, it's fooled a lot of people.

      Not as many as were fooled by that "There's WMDs in Iraq" story :-(

    6. Re:Original story from the Warrnambool Standard by Savantissimo · · Score: 1

      The ability of a capacitive storage system to provide current is determined by its charge, voltage, and internal resistence. Given the voltage and charge are below some number and the resistence is high, it is correct to say that the jacket has a low capability to provide current, which is the same as saying it is a low-amp source, which can be colloquially said with very little loss of accuracy to be "low in amps".

      --
      "Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery?" - Patrick Henry
    7. Re:Original story from the Warrnambool Standard by DavidTC · · Score: 1
      Well, yes, if that was what was going on.

      Of course, now we're talking as if the jacket was operating as a giant battery, which drained into the person, and when they touched something, they sparked, it drained them, and the jacket started charging them again. Which means, yes, that the jacket could provide low amperage, and 'trickle-charge' the person...

      And may be what the article was trying to imply, but is a very very silly concept. It would require a jacket that's electrically seperated into parts.

      Static electricity normally is over the whole 'system', and I don't know of any way for a non-electrical system to impart 'part' of a charge, and when that drains provide another part. The only way that works is if the jacket is capable of holding a much much much higer charge than the person, in which case, yes, the resistence could limit it from discharging at a touch, assuming the touch was short enough.

      Of course, considering how much charge a person can hold, to be unable to drain into him it would require some ungodly ammount of charge. We're way part normal static here, past 'hair standing on end' even.

      That still doesn't explain what the article was talking about, however, as the best way to neutralize the jacket would be for the guy to hold onto something grounded for five seconds or whatever.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
  21. It's a dupe! (No, really) by A+beautiful+mind · · Score: 1

    It's a dupe of the 25 year old 3M factory article which got pulled by one of the editors in the end. Only in that case someone in a factory "discovered a forcefield".

    --
    It takes a man to suffer ignorance and smile
    Be yourself no matter what they say
  22. pics or it didn't happen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    fucking associated press

  23. Disclosure by umoto · · Score: 1

    See, this is why immediate disclosure isn't a great idea. Now the terrorists have a new weapon. Run for your lives! And don't buy synthetic nylon and wool on the same day, or the feds will lock you up for terrorism!

  24. What the? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    From TFA: "There he found that a plastic bag used to protect his seat from water after surfing was badly charred beneath his feet."

    I am a surfer, but never ever have I put plastic bags on my feet after surfing to protect my feet from water. That makes no sence at all. Don't beleive the hype.

    1. Re:What the? by oRdchaos · · Score: 0, Troll

      Plastic bag on seat Only following surfing Later placed on floor

  25. Wow! by Frodo+Crockett · · Score: 1

    I'm sure this news comes as a shock to many of us here!

    --
    "The newly born animals are then whisked off for a quick run through a giant baking oven." --heard on Food Network
  26. 40kV. So? by ottffssent · · Score: 5, Informative

    40kV isn't hard to build up. In fact, you can safely play with hundreds of kV, and make some really nice sparks. The 'starting things on fire' number you're looking for is power. And energy. You need to be able to transfer enough energy into an object that it will reach its combustion temperature, and you need to be quick enough at it that the object doesn't shed the energy to nearby objects in the meantime. It takes a lot of energy (as compared to the energy content in your average static 'zap') to set carpet fibers aflame, or even melt them.

    Not to say that it didn't happen, of course. It's just not well-reported, and is clearly not terribly common.

  27. Help! by Y-Crate · · Score: 1

    Brand names....I need brand names people! Err...for science!

  28. FAA!!! by mayhemt · · Score: 1

    Would FAA ban wollen/nylon clothing on planes???

    1. Re:FAA!!! by Pollardito · · Score: 1

      it's nearly as dangerous as stripes and plaid

  29. Seriously... by miTcixelsyD · · Score: 1

    Did this really need to be /.ed? Is this to be taken tongue in cheek, or did some jackoff really think this warranted the front page? I don't see any emoticons so I can't tell if this is serious or not. SOMEONE ADD A SMILEY!!!!!!111one

    1. Re:Seriously... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "It's funny. Laugh."

  30. Where to start . . . by romec · · Score: 1

    First of all the article states that they measured a current of 40,000 volts. . . Second 40,000 volts isn't unreasonable, its current that kills. Lightning has a voltage 1-2 orders of magnitude higher, and people frequently survive lightning strikes. 3rd Ever done a demo with a Van de Graaf generator??? ~100,000 Volts. Watch out, hundreds of school children are in danger of spontaneously combusting!

    1. Re:Where to start . . . by NCraig · · Score: 1
      First of all the article states that they measured a current of 40,000 volts. . . Second 40,000 volts isn't unreasonable, its current that kills. Lightning has a voltage 1-2 orders of magnitude higher, and people frequently survive lightning strikes. 3rd Ever done a demo with a Van de Graaf generator??? ~100,000 Volts. Watch out, hundreds of school children are in danger of spontaneously combusting!


      Fourth, volts aren't a measure of current =/.
    2. Re:Where to start . . . by romec · · Score: 1

      Thats kind of what the ellipses were pointing out. . . I covered that with "First"

  31. Volts? by Vorondil28 · · Score: 2, Informative

    "We tested his clothes with a static electricity field meter and measured a current of 40,000 volts..."

    Last time I checked, the unit for current is Ampers, not Volts. Volts measure the potential for current, not current itself. Besides, a static feild has no current... because it's static.

    Anyway, it's too bad he doesn't work on computers, I'd love to see his anti-static bracelet. I think #00 gauge welding cable would handle it. ;)

    --
    This sig rocks the casbah.
  32. Renewable... by ms1234 · · Score: 1

    ...energy source. Maybe he could power his computer?

  33. Fire Dept? by Squawker · · Score: 0

    ... fireman carry voltmeters now?

  34. If no hoax.. where are pics? by plasmacutter · · Score: 1

    This is prime material for photography. melted burned destroyed stuff.. it's the ultimate ratings grab stupidity-fest! why are there no pictures? probably because it's not real.

    --
    VLC FOR MAC IS DYING! IF YOU DEVELOP, PLEASE SAVE IT!!
    1. Re:If no hoax.. where are pics? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Plenty of pics - just seen the news on local (Aussie TV) - scorch marks (like a cigarette burn) and all

  35. I Will become STATIC MAN by IT_MERC · · Score: 1

    Muahahhaaaahaaa

    1. Re:I Will become STATIC MAN by Farmer+Tim · · Score: 1

      So your super power is remaining totally motionless for long periods? Evil do-ers, fear the inertia!

      --
      Blank until /. makes another boneheaded UI decision.
  36. Different details by Devar · · Score: 1

    http://www.theadvertiser.news.com.au/common/story_ page/0,5936,16628269%255E1702,00.html

    This one has some differing details, ie 30kV as compared to 40kV.

    --
    It's a Bagel.
    1. Re:Different details by Tony+Hoyle · · Score: 1

      The original article has 30kv too.

      It looks like Reuters didn't think that was high enough, so added a fudge factor...

      By tomorrow all the newspapers will have it up to a couple of hundred kv I bet...

  37. Sounded like a firecracker? by The+Master+Control+P · · Score: 1

    I seriously doubt that the energy of two fabrics rubbing could ever make a sound approaching that of a firecracker. Although I will most certainly regret including this link, This makes a sound like a firecracker. Anyone whose clothes could hold enough charge at enough voltage to mimic that would be of great scientific interest...

  38. Static Electricity Field Meter? by PhotoGuy · · Score: 3, Insightful

    A static electricity field meter is something firefighters bring with them? That sounds awfully suspect.

    --
    Love many, trust a few, do harm to none.
    1. Re:Static Electricity Field Meter? by mikael · · Score: 2, Informative

      Do a google search for "electrostatic voltmeter". It's an optional mode for voltmeters to detect high voltages. There's at least one company which makes such a device Multi Function Digital Voltmeter which goes up to 500 KiloVolts.

      --
      Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
    2. Re:Static Electricity Field Meter? by Anml4ixoye · · Score: 1

      Same thing I thought. Especially being a former firefighter. But the device is real, and it isn't uncommon to have strange measuring devices on Haz-Mat units.

      I still think the whole thing isn't quite true.

  39. im tearing my rugs up right now by bxbaser · · Score: 1

    going to get rid of all my rugs in the house.

    I like my nylon jacket and wool shirts way to much.

  40. Volts != Current by romec · · Score: 1

    In other news NASA breathes a sigh of relief as someone has finally screwed up units in a more embarassing manner. When asked about mistaking current and voltage in the article, the news editor responded "Sorry I don't have time for questions, I have to drive to a town 3 gigabits over. It'll take me at least 5 ohms to make the trip"

    1. Re:Volts != Current by DavidTC · · Score: 1

      Bah, any idiot can do that run in two parsecs.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
  41. this stun gun will light an elephant on fire by bxbaser · · Score: 1

    This guy was just below the threshold at 40,000 volts.

    this 775,000 volt stun gun must turn a person to ash.
    http://www.safetygearhq.com/stunmaster775.htm

  42. a joke by muzik4machines · · Score: 0

    i think it is the report is vague and the possibility is so infinitesimal

  43. Even though it is Reuters... by azuroff · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'll still wait for the official Snopes lowdown on this one...

    (How could he have gone through his day like that without touching anything metal, like a doorknob or his car door?)

  44. It's on the internet, it has to be true! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "firefighters called to the scene, who measured his static field at 40,000 volts"

    Yes, firefighters carry around static field meters next to their o'scopes, cold fusion reactors, and other necessary gear.

  45. Nuclear power plant in a jacket? by dybdahl · · Score: 1

    Static electricity only appears in materials that cannot move electrons well, so even a high voltage (much energy per electron) does not mean a lot of energy that can be released.

    Also, the energy in rubbing can never exceed the force multiplied by the distance in the direction of the force. The amount of continuous heat that can be generated by static electricity from rubbing, is at the same level of the heat produced by walking in other types of clothes.

  46. Joy by Mark_MF-WN · · Score: 1
    I can't wait to see a news report about some hapless would-be-martyr who charges a Marine checkpoint wearing wool and nylon.

    Hey, it could happen. If "journalists" can post something like this, can we really expect better from jihadi? :P

  47. This sounds like a job for by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Mythbusters crew!

  48. Tangentially related question by antifoidulus · · Score: 1

    What could cause a person to get repeatedly shocked? I ask this from personal experience, my 2nd semester of college I was receiving well over 50 shocks(of various intensity) per WEEK. Didn't matter what I wore or were I was, I would get shcoked. On staircases, metal parts of chairs, the freezer in the cafeteria etc. It got so bad that I was constantly grounding myself with the back of my hand(hurts a lot less than the front of the hand). It got so bad my roomate could hear the cracking sound. I once even tried to beat it by touching the metal part of my pencil against a door, and that made an awesome blue spark. However, anything like that never happened before that semester or since.... What could have caused it?

    1. Re:Tangentially related question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Could be the climate. I lived in Monterrey, Mexico, for a few months... And every morning my car would zap me.

      Very dry conditions tend to insulate static charges better. Furthermore, it could have something to do with the clothes you were wearing or the conductive properties of your skin... Although that's pure speculation.

    2. Re:Tangentially related question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you were attending ENEL 475:Applications of Electromagnetism that semester.

    3. Re:Tangentially related question by E8086 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Building heating systems produce lots of warm dry air creating a static friendly environment.
      I had a similar experience back in HS, the letter sweaters were made of 100% acrylic, I don't know why they were, but they were. At the end of every day it was go down to the locker room and take the sweater off, the popping sound was very audible, and discharge by grabing the door or hit some random freshman walking by.

      --
      F7 doesn't work, ignore spelling and grammar
    4. Re:Tangentially related question by Incadenza · · Score: 1
      I was constantly grounding myself with the back of my hand(hurts a lot less than the front of the hand).

      That sounds familiar! I used to have a client in the Groot Handelsgebouw in Rotterdam. Every time I visited them I got zapped on opening the hallway door. Sometimes strong enough to draw visible sparks - after I while got used to routinely performing the gesture you describe.
      It is probably a combination of: Airco (dry air) Carpet (builds up charge) Soles of your shoes (do not release charge)

      I kept opening that door cautiously even after they changed the carpet (or did I change my shoes maybe?) and the static build-up ceased to be so bad. I had become well trained as a Pavlov dog.

  49. 40KV is voltage, not current, and it is nothing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Static electricity is always in the thousands of volts. That's not the least bit surprising. What would be interesting, but is not listed is the current: how many amps was he running through the plastics? That's the only thing which could explain melting plastic...

    1. Re:40KV is voltage, not current, and it is nothing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They mention amps in what looks like the original story: http://the.standard.net.au/articles/2005/09/16/112 6750111141.html

    2. Re:40KV is voltage, not current, and it is nothing by Savantissimo · · Score: 1

      Once we know the voltage and can estimate the time to discharge, the only factor left to figure out the current is what this guy's capacitance is. I'll bet he was big, very big.

      --
      "Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery?" - Patrick Henry
  50. Or you could check the ultimate source by ynotds · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Our local telephone directory service unambiguously lists the person named in the Warrnambool Standard article linked in the parent.

    Maybe the knee jerk skeptics from Zonk down could back up their skepticism with some fact checking, but I guess that is asking a bit much.

    --
    -- Our systemic servants do not good masters make.
    1. Re:Or you could check the ultimate source by sonamchauhan · · Score: 1

      Yup, I back up your assertion - I've verified his listing as well. Good work!

      Also the article in the Standard makes sense. It doesn't have the voltage/amp confusion reported by this ./ article.

    2. Re:Or you could check the ultimate source by Goaway · · Score: 1

      No matter how many people your lolcal telephone directory service lists, it won't change the laws of physics, and they happen to call bullshit on the story.

    3. Re:Or you could check the ultimate source by That's+Unpossible! · · Score: 1

      Maybe the knee jerk skeptics from Zonk down could back up their skepticism with some fact checking, but I guess that is asking a bit much.

      This statement makes no sense. Skepticism requires that it be "knee jerk" to function properly. See, first you read a story that sounds extraordinary, and then you are skeptical of it AUTOMATICALLY. If you have time, you research it and try to find extraordinary evidence to back it up, and then you might start to believe it is true.

      You don't ever have to "back up your skepticism with fact checking." You do fact checking to ease your skepticism.

      --
      Ironically, the word ironically is often used incorrectly.
    4. Re:Or you could check the ultimate source by khallow · · Score: 1

      It may just be a case of bad reporting. Namely, that the carpet was treated with a flamible material. Or it might be a hoax (and the hoaxers happen to read phonebooks too). But it certainly didn't happen the way the story claims.

    5. Re:Or you could check the ultimate source by Namarrgon · · Score: 1
      But it certainly didn't happen the way the story claims.

      I'm skeptical of your claim.

      --
      Why would anyone engrave "Elbereth"?
    6. Re:Or you could check the ultimate source by khallow · · Score: 1

      Hrmmm, reading through followup articles from Australia, it turns out that the story appears more or less correct. Apparently such things have happened before (though very rarely) and Australian sources cite official sources extensively. Your skeptism was justified.

  51. 1.21 gigawatts!!!!!!!!! by opusman · · Score: 1

    [nt]

  52. Well written but BS by IOOOOOI · · Score: 1
    * "There were several scorch marks in the carpet, and we could hear a cracking noise -- a bit like a whip -- both inside and outside the building," said fire official Henry Barton.

    Where was Barton when he heard these sounds? Wouldn't Mr Clewphone^H^H^H^H^Her have heard them sooner? Why did he ignore them?

    * Clewer, who after leaving the building discovered he had scorched a piece of plastic on the floor of his car, returned to seek help from the firefighters.

    What an amazing coincidence that he went back! They never would have figured it out otherwise.

    * "We tested his clothes with a static electricity field meter and measured a current of 40,000 volts, which is one step shy of spontaneous combustion, where his clothes would have self-ignited," [fire official] Barton said.

    I wonder if MY local firehouse has a static electrictiy field meter!? and I'd be curious i anyone knows if this alleged spontaneous combustion / voltage relationship holds any water.

    1. Re:Well written but BS by DaCool42 · · Score: 1

      I'd be curious i anyone knows if this alleged spontaneous combustion / voltage relationship holds any water.

      None at all. That's only half of the information you need to know the potential energy. You need to know the amount of charge as well. A volt can be defined as one joule (potential energy) per coulomb (charge). In other words, how many electrons transferred between the jacket and the sweater?

      --

      ----
      All of whose base are belong to the what-now?
  53. Wait, wait... by Cody+Hatch · · Score: 1

    *DESPITE* it being on Reuters?

    How about, BECAUSE?

    I mean, this *IS* Reuters we're talking about here. :-/

  54. Better article by nihilogos · · Score: 2, Interesting

    More detail here. Apparently an ABC journalist verified that there were burn marks on the carpet.

    --
    :wq
    1. Re:Better article by Zacha · · Score: 1

      Which gels with the Standard article, which says an ABC technician was consulted.

  55. What device? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "The device measured a remarkable 30,000 volts on a synthetic zip-up jacket Mr Clewer had been wearing under a woollen jacket."

    Would you like to give more detail on this device the firefighters so happened to have which they used to measure the electric potential on a jacket? I can't think of any devices that can measure the voltage between two non-conductors. Also, a potential difference (volt) needs to be with respect to something. Was it with respect to ? A -30,000 volt wire or something?

    The air 4 feet off the ground has an electric potential of 130 volts or so, but it's a pain to measure, and no machine can quickly do this.

    This is obviously a hoax. I wonder how many people are getting dumber by reading slashdot. (Like on April Fools... hehe) News for Nerds: Suff that Matters. Disclamer: read with caution.

    1. Re:What device? by dogod · · Score: 1

      The air 4 feet off the ground has an electric potential of 130 volts or so, but it's a pain to measure, and no machine can quickly do this.
       
      and people called Tesla a fool. just need to tap into that potential.

  56. What is the date today? by Rank_Tyro · · Score: 1

    For a minute, I thought it must be April first.

    --
    Today's show is brought to you by the number 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0: 25
  57. despite the fact? by alcmaeon · · Score: 1

    I would say "given the fact." My opinion of the media must be a lot lower than yours.

  58. Those aussies sure know how to party... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Static electricity is a similar mechanism to lightning, where you have clouds rubbing together and then a spark generated by very dry air above them,"

    Errm, yeh, right, clouds rubbing together LOL, kindof gives it away big time :)

    Just for those who aint in the know this is NOT how lightning is generated, as a rough description; lightning is formed by the potential energy difference between the top and bottom of the cloud stack, the taller the cloud stack the more potential energy the more impressive the lightning storm, clouds are just like big batteries really...

    Like most posters have said, its amps that do damage not volts, 200 amps at 12 volts could kill you, 0.001 amps at 75,000 volts will just give you a small jolt and yes in the right circumstances this can cause fire, I've seen demonstrations involving static igniting petrol fumes but I think for the spark from the static discharge to be capable of burning the carpet you would need a lot more than 40Kv and a reasonable amount of current in order to generate a fat enough spark to create combustion, 13 amps at 240 volts will burn skin because the current flows from the power line through your body (to ground) but static has no discernable current hence nothing flows when the discharge occurs and for another thing, are there any carpets out there which will conduct electricity (i.e. carry a current) ? Not as far as I know unless the carpet was wet of course (water is a reasonable conductor) but then burning would not occur... Current of course being the flow of electrons, thats why we use metals for wiring, they are good conductors and allow the electrons to flow freely (which is also why there are issues with sharp angles in the pathways on multi gigahertz PCB's - the electrons are going too fast to turn the corner ;-}) As far as I know the reason we humans conduct electricity well is because our body contains electrolytic salts dissolved in our bodily fluids, they aid the flow of current, which brings me to another question is sea water a better conductor than fresh water...

    OK, now sum1 shoot me before I get carried away and my head explodes...

    1. Re:Those aussies sure know how to party... by Lord+Maud'Dib · · Score: 1

      (which is also why there are issues with sharp angles in the pathways on multi gigahertz PCB's - the electrons are going too fast to turn the corner

      So you're saying electrons travel faster or slower depending on the frequency of the circuit? They must travel pretty slow through the mains at only 50Hz (or 60Hz depending where you live). PCB traces need to be as short as possible (among probably some other precautions in multi-gigahertz speeds) to reduce inductance, not so electrons can turn the corner.

    2. Re:Those aussies sure know how to party... by DaCool42 · · Score: 1

      or rather, to reduce inductance, resistance, and capacitance of the trace and to provide a smaller area for noise to be induced.

      --

      ----
      All of whose base are belong to the what-now?
  59. Static shock? by Brad1138 · · Score: 1

    He doesn't happen to fly around on a glowing man hole cover does he?

    --
    If you could reason with religious people, there would be no religious people
  60. static electricity field meter? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm a firefighter in the US and I've never heard of this piece of equipment. I'm guessing if this story gets any more press we'll be carrying one on all of our apparatus by week's end. ;)

  61. Re:40kV. So? by pinballblue · · Score: 1

    Quickly pull off about 3 feet of scotch tape and it swings up to stick to your arm. Measure that static (with an 'infinite' impedance voltmeter) and there's about 50,000 volts. Not likely to set an office on fire though but it might zap a sensitive IC.

  62. Old News by Cheirdal · · Score: 1
  63. Despite? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    I'm not sure what the editors mean by "despite the fact" something is carried by Reuters, it might be false. al-Reuters has been going down hill for some time now. Reuters seems to be focusing almost entirely on controversy and emotional manipulation now, whereas it used to be a straightforward news bureau similar to Associated Press. It seems like they discovered a gold mine in playing games with edgy-but-straightlaced coverage of the Clinton impeachment hearings and never recovered.

    Anything from Reuters should be taken with a grain of salt. That goes double for any newspaper or website with a majority of Reuters content.

  64. Hmm... no, I don't see it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    They mention "volts running through X" in several places (which makes no sense because voltage is like pressure; it does not move). They mention voltage (a different number than in the other article) but nothing about how that could result in burns.

    You actually create insanely hot temperatures when you scuff your feet on a floor. You do melt the carpet doing that, but only the top few layers of molecules :) Similarly, static electricity sounds scary because it easily runs in the thousands of volts... but the voltage is not refreshed. Once it is discharged it is gone. And discharge at that voltage happens by leakage in the air, through his feet, etc. It could not create temperatures that high over that large an area.

    Another way to look at is is where is this energy coming from? Movement of his arms while he walks. Just how much energy is in the movement of your arms? Not a lot. If this were true he should be tied down and forced to create electricity for a small city. Converting food to electricity with his magical clothes would be so cheap compared to any other power source. :p

    1. Re:Hmm... no, I don't see it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well then, you need your eyes checking again bucko, because it's sitting right there at the bottom of the page:

      He said Mr Clewer's clothes were at no stage dangerous because they were low in amps which could be deadly.

      Nice work, what with the skim reading and the conclusion jumping and the calling me a bare-faced liar.

      Of course the mainstream media is going to say things like 'volts running through X' - they assume their readers have no understanding of science, most probably because they have no understanding of science themselves. They get the facts and print their interpretation of events. For a story to get attention and credibility from places like the BBC, I find it more likely that it's grounded in truth, and that the facts have been distorted and over-simplified by idiot journalists with an NVQ in art and media studies.

      It's typical slashdotter arrogance to say "this story is a load of crap". Yes, it may be unlikely, but we don't have all the facts - the temperature, the humidity, the exact types of material worn, what types of material he was walking on, how long he walked between discharges - none of that. All we have is the end of a chain of reporters who have been paraphrasing each other. It's like saying "God doesn't exist because the stories in the bible are ridiculous" - true, the stories in the bible are ridiculous, and true, God doesn't exist, but you can't prove one by stating the other.

    2. Re:Hmm... no, I don't see it by Goaway · · Score: 1

      No matter how many data points you pile on this one, it still won't make one little bit of sense.

      Unless maybe the carpet was soaked in gasoline.

  65. Danger! High Voltage! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fire in the disco
    Fire in the taco bell
    Fire in the disco
    Fire in the gates of hell

    Don't you want to know how we keep starting fires?
    It's my desire, It's my desire, It's my desire

    Don't you want to know how we keep starting fires?
    It's my desire, It's my desire, It's my desire

    Danger! Danger! High Voltage!
    When we touch, When we kiss
    Danger! Danger! High Voltage!
    When we touch, when we kiss
    When we touch

    Danger! Danger! High Voltage!
    When we touch, When we kiss
    Danger! Danger! High Voltage!
    When we touch, when we kiss
    When we touch, when we kiss

    Don't you want to know how we keep starting fires?
    It's my desire, It's my desire

    Don't you want to know how we keep starting fires?
    It's my desire, It's my desire

    Danger! Danger! High Voltage!
    When we touch, When we kiss
    Danger! Danger! High Voltage!
    When we touch, when we kiss
    When we touch

    Danger! Danger! High Voltage!
    When we touch, When we kiss
    Danger! Danger! High Voltage!
    When we touch, when we kiss
    When we touch, when we kiss

    No more

    Fire in the disco
    Fire in the disco
    Fire in the taco bell
    Fire in the disco
    Fire in the disco
    Fire in the gates of Hell

    Gates of Hell

  66. Hoax by bredk · · Score: 0

    40kV? Thats not even a jigawatt.

    --
    http://slashdot.su/
  67. apparently... by Captain+Nick · · Score: 1

    After reaching 88 MPH, he left burn marks in the carpet, and somehow generated 1.21 gigawatts, which in turn, caused all the toilets to spin the other way, which in turn caused this story to smell like horseshit.

  68. Its Friday! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Aw, Hell Its a Friday Night!

  69. Re:40kV. So? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    To elaborate on what the parent poster said, assume the capacitance of the human body is 10 pF (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capacitor). Using the equation: E = 0.5*C*V^2, a potential difference of 40kV only gives a maximum of 0.016 Joule of energy. That's not a lot of energy. Assuming the discharge happens over 1 millisecond, this would result in a power of 16 Watt, which is obviously insufficient to ignite someone.

    Unless the person was standing in a convenient fuel-air mixture, it is unlikely they spontaneously combusted due to electrostatic discharge.

  70. Why is this so difficult to believe ? by craznar · · Score: 1

    I'm not saying it's true, but having seen (and felt) 2 inch bolts of static from wandering around in 3% humidity .... I can really see this is feasible.

    Time for a Mythbusters Episode....

    --
    EMail: 0110001101100010010000000110001101110010 0110000101111010011011100110000101110010 0010111001100011011011110110
    1. Re:Why is this so difficult to believe ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No it's not feasible. High voltage is fine, but leaving trails of molten carpet isn't. Static electricity involves small amounts of charge. You just don't get enough sustained current to have these effects.

    2. Re:Why is this so difficult to believe ? by craznar · · Score: 1

      burned carpet, molten plastic - get your quotes straight.

      "Static electricity involves small amounts of charge."

      Then you obviously have no idea what you are talking about.

      Lightning is STATIC ....

      --
      EMail: 0110001101100010010000000110001101110010 0110000101111010011011100110000101110010 0010111001100011011011110110
  71. ESD Meter? by mustafap · · Score: 1

    "We tested his clothes with a static electricity field meter and measured a current of 40,000 volts, which is one step shy of spontaneous combustion, where his clothes would have self-ignited"

    Do firefighters in Australia carry ESD meters now? Wow, I thought they only carried can openers.

    --
    Open Source Drum Kit, LPLC deve board - mjhdesigns.com
  72. National geographic by antikristian · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Had a special where they debunked Spontaneous Human combustion. One plausible theory seemed to be the "human wick" theory. Basicly you fall asleep smoking, the cloth/clothes around you catch fire, you are knocked unconcious by the fumes, the clothes act as a wick burning up the fat in your body, often only the legs remain due to less fat an no cloth on them (old ladies are frequent wictims to this) Also, bones burn due to the fact that a lot of the old ladies have ostoperosis.

    --
    A computer is a tool, but I am not. I use Linux
    1. Re:National geographic by Anne_Nonymous · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      A friend's 87 year-old Grandmother spilled a hurricane lamp on herself and burnt to death. I asked him if they had her cremated, and that sick fucker laughed.

  73. Mythbusters by antikristian · · Score: 1

    I Can't wait for the mythbusters episodeL:)

    --
    A computer is a tool, but I am not. I use Linux
  74. clouds rubbing together by arch119 · · Score: 1
    "Static electricity is a similar mechanism to lightning, where you have clouds rubbing together and then a spark generated by very dry air above them," said Gosden.

    What does he think clouds are? Huge masses of flying cotton ?

    1. Re:clouds rubbing together by craznar · · Score: 1

      No - he thinks that clothes and clouds are huges masses of atoms, complete with circling electrons (and some waving ones).

      Well - considering my mum used to tell me Thunder happenned when God dropped something, but never explained what lightning was.... and I wasn't game to ask.

      --
      EMail: 0110001101100010010000000110001101110010 0110000101111010011011100110000101110010 0010111001100011011011110110
    2. Re:clouds rubbing together by Garridan · · Score: 1

      No. Cotton doesn't create static. Some clouds are wool (the gray ones) and others are nylon (the white ones). Duh. Where'd you go to school?

  75. I went to school with that guy ! by Azzhole · · Score: 0

    Yepperz.. Ole Sparky Clewer ! What a prankster ! He used to embarrass the female teachers buy making their vibrators turn on and jump out of their purses onto the desk ! Ole Sparkster...

  76. A huh. by ErikZ · · Score: 1


    Remember folks; the Mainstream Media is superior to Bloggers due to their layers of fact checking editors and professional reporters. All who have been professionally trained and do this stuff for a living!

    Far superior when compared to some guy sitting in his pajamas in his living room.

    --
    Democrats or Republicans. They are both taking us to the same place and they are not afraid of us anymore.
  77. Static is easy (so are hoaxes) by jd · · Score: 5, Informative
    You can rapidly build up charges of a few tens of thousands of volts at very close to zero current. It's not that hard to build a few million volts, provided the current is low enough and the surroundings are insulating enough. The key, as you've pointed out, is power - and you don't have a whole lot without current.


    A Van De Graaf generator is basically a band of insulating material being rotated in a tower with some means of transferring a charge to it. There are relatively cheap desktop and home models that'll produce nearly half a million volts. Schools use such devices all the time, so if the fireman hasn't seem a voltage that high, he skipped classes.


    Having said that, early atom-smashers used Van De Graaf generators only capable of producing five million or so volts. It seems reasonable to suspect something will burn before it is blasted out of existence. So, somewhere between 400,000 volts and 5,000,000 volts, you might be able to ignite something.


    However, here we get a problem. You can't just carry around half a million volts and not notice it. Your hair tends to stand on end, for a start. ANYTHING metal - even a doorknob - will cause a discharge to occur. Getting into his car certainly would have - even if the car were carbin-fiber, the key would be metal and the distance short enough for an arc to occur.


    There's also the problem of where you lodge a charge that great. A capacitor is basically two electrostatic devices with an insulator between them. In this case, the insulator would be the shoes, and the electrostatic device the person. I'll assume there are enough nails holding the carpet down to act as the other electrostatic device.


    But what is the capacitance of a person? The figure I've been able to get with a Google search is an average of 204 pF with a typical range of 95 to 398 pF. (It varies according to height and weight, so a seven-foot sumo wrestler might have a higher capacitance than this range shows.)


    In other words, not really what you'd need to carry half a million volts around. The jacket would have carried more, but unless it was made of Tantallum or some other material with very high capacitance, I doubt you'd be able to store enough charge to start setting things on fire.


    In other words, there is nothing credible about the story. The voltages are abnormally low for a static device and way too low to actually do any fire damage, there's nowhere a higher charge could have been stored and there would have been too many points at which positively violent arcing would have occurred if it had been stored.

    --
    It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    1. Re:Static is easy (so are hoaxes) by sonamchauhan · · Score: 1

      > Getting into his car certainly would have - even if the car were carbin-fiber,
      > the key would be metal and the distance short enough for an arc to occur.

      From what is probably the source article:
      http://the.standard.net.au/articles/2005/09/16/112 6750111141.html

      "[...] returning to his car at the Ozone car park.
      There he found that a plastic bag used to protect his seat from water after surfing was badly charred beneath his feet."

    2. Re:Static is easy (so are hoaxes) by shadow_slicer · · Score: 2, Informative

      Nice post, except for one thing: Capacitance is not a limit on the voltage in a capacitor. Capacitance is just the ratio of stored charge to voltage. A higher capacitance means that it stores more charge at a given voltage.
      What limits the voltage in a capacitor is the dielectric breakdown voltage. This is the voltage where the insulator between the two plates becomes conductive and arcing occurs.

      But of course, even if the person involved did have a field that big, with a capacitance of 204pF they would only be storing 0.3264 Joules of energy (which couldn't increase the temperature of a gram of water by half a degree)...

    3. Re:Static is easy (so are hoaxes) by Antique+Geekmeister · · Score: 1

      The charred plastic bag under his butt had an entirely separate excuse involving Boy Scouts, a supper of burritos, and making smores.

    4. Re:Static is easy (so are hoaxes) by writermike · · Score: 1

      A Van De Graaf generator [amasci.com] is basically a band

      Yeah, that Extreme guy totally ruined them...

      --
      If Nalgene water bottles are outlawed, only outlaws will have Nalgene water bottles.
    5. Re:Static is easy (so are hoaxes) by DavidTC · · Score: 1
      Even if he did manage to get some insanely high voltage by magic, while it would indeed arch and melt stuff, it would only do it once.

      He'd walk too close to a lamp or an electrical outlet, arc a foot of electricity, melting nearby plastic, catching random things on fire, at least tripping a breaker and probably frying the electrical system of the office and certainly killing himself, but then he's stop. And not just because he'd be dead, he'd have no power left.

      You can't 'keep' giving off enough electricty to melt plastic unless you're carrying around a power line main or something. It's like talking about someone soaked in gasoline who's now a human flamethrower...it doesn't work that way. He might catch on fire, he might create an explosion under the right conditions, but he's not going to walk around shooting off little jets of fire.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
  78. You need anti-static in your clothesdryer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It sounds like you're in serious need of some anti-static dryer sheets. If you're still in a college environment, these things also have another great use. Toss wrinkled clothes into the dryer with an anti-static sheet and a damp paper towel. In about 5 minutes, the clothes will be wrinkle-free, as if you'd ironed them.

  79. I wonder... by Elitist_Phoenix · · Score: 1

    Hmmm, I wonder what repeditive motion made with the upper part of his body would have lead to such a build-up. Also in related news, the man has RSI in his wrists!

    --
    "I'm going to f***ing bury that guy, I have done it before, and I will do it again. I'm going to f***ing kill Google"
  80. regrets... by tinkerton · · Score: 1

    Who can deny that this also sounds like a firecracker.

  81. Soylent DHMO by GroeFaZ · · Score: 0

    Soylent DHMO is water!!

    --
    The grass is always greener on the other side of the light cone.
  82. It might not be that untrue by sasha328 · · Score: 1

    There is another link to this story on the ABC.
     
    I wouldn't discount this story out of hand. It's been very dry in Australia lately, and I have been getting shocks quite often. I have on many occasion got a zap when touching my car or closing the garage do. Once (a few days ago) while in the process of shaking hands, we even heard the crack. It is painful.
    So, I think this story is not exagerated. Afterall, they even called in the CFS.

    1. Re:It might not be that untrue by koehn · · Score: 1

      Umm, "very dry" at some reasonably high temperature around 20 degrees C, I presume? That's not dry. Try finding out how dry the air gets around -30 C. Yes, we get lots of sparks (we wear sweaters and jackets with nylon linings too), I even get used to touching my car door with my key when I get out (1 cm sparks!) yet somehow the behavior described in the article has never happened.

      Time for snopes.

  83. Ignites??? by DoktorTomoe · · Score: 1

    He made some scorch marks ... that's hardly ingition, is it?

  84. Not so fast, buckos... by vacuum_tuber · · Score: 1

    If leaping to conclusions were an Olympic event, Slashdot would be the home of a large number of gold medal holders.

    When I was in Jr. High School I had an insulated synthetic jacket made of some material like nylon or rayon. One day the elevator in my apartment building was painted with some goopy paint with texture thingies in it. Afteward I noticed that I was sometimes shocked when touching the metal door to leave at my destination floor. I put two and two together and figured it must be my jacket touching the elevator walls. The elevator was quite small and it was difficult to be in it in a bulky jacket without the jacket touching anything.

    So I slid along the wall, rubbing the jacket against the paint, then touched the metal control panel. (SNAP!) Ouch! I got out my keys and tried it again, using a key to touch the panel. I still felt it in my hand but it was no longer actually painful.

    This became a game for the rest of the winter on my departures in the morning to go to school and my arrivals back from school in the afternoons. I tried to see how big a spark I could generate from the tip of the key to the elevator panel.

    I didn't carry a ruler but I'd estimate the largest sparks were a good quarter-inch, and they were very hot. The color was white and they made a loud SNAP. Discharging one through a finger was wayyyyy painful.

    The point is... while I have no idea what really happened in the incident reported in the article, all the people here claiming one or more wild-assed theories why a jacket couldn't be involved in generating significant static charge are talking through their assholes. I had a jacket that produced very painful static discharges and for all I know the combination of materials in the jacket and the elevator paint may not even have been optimal for generating such charges.

    If I still had the jacket and the elevator I'd offer to demonstrate serious static jacket charge by discharging it to the corneas of the ignorant skeptics. That would be a hoot... "(rub-rub-rub) OK, look closely at this key..." SNAP! "YEOW-ow-ow-ow-ow-ow-ow-ow-ow-ow-ow-ow-ow!"

    --
    Look at the bright side: there's always seppuku.
  85. I can answer some my source of dead floppys ME by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1 the jacket being like me. Only sections discharge at a time. Ie lining sections I would guess be acting like as caps.

    2 The combination had to be one heck of a static creator. Ie moving charging. Most likely the Discharing to carpet kept him kinda safe.

    Any one who ever been highly charged will tell you that you can zap 10 to 20 times without fully discharging. With control over body all can be the same size zaps.

    3 Simple num fingers. Burn or over used remove the required sence of feel. Or no current flow to fingers. Don't say this cannot be done. I have been holding onto a earth in one hand and zaping a person with the other to my school teachers confusion. And the hair rasing experment I was only allowed to do once. After I walked meant to been discharaged walked access the room and zap a person who and been poking fun at me. Important factors lower salt content and slightly low Iron content. Lowers body conductive means and allows current carrying also low amount of sweet and humidty.

    I speek for people zaping me in the computer room for fun. Some of my friends did not understand why I want all them to zap me on partical points. Under 5 mm zapx50 for me to give 1x40mm return zap. Yes it hurts(the 40mm zip hurts the zaper and the zapee. I would not recommend it and don't think a ring will save you it will make it worse because to release more Volts quicker) but boy does it scare the crap out of people they stop zaping people now as a zaper hide the pain then they get really scared. Mind over body if you can control you body you can control where current flows for about 95%. Now if jacket is coping me its really dangerous because 40000 V could be only part of the charge. A combied bolt could be a lot more.

    My bodys annoying means of holding charge cost me alot of disks these days I normally wear stuff that will not build charge. The day that floppy are no more it will be good.

  86. Just seen the Aussie TV news pictures by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Those that think this is a hoax better think again. There were some brief interviews with very sober looking office workers (the guy was there for a job interview) as well as the fire brigade officer that attended. There were obvious, though small, scorch marks on the carpet.

    He had a synthetic (nylon??) jacket over a woolen jumper apparently. Assuming it was a day with 0% humidity it is all quite possible

  87. Huh? by PlacidPundit · · Score: 1
    Obviously, despite the fact that this is carried by Reuters, you should take some of the 'facts' presented here with some NaCl.

    Perhaps you meant because the story is carried by Reuters it shouldn't be taken seriously?

    1. Re:Huh? by KillerBob · · Score: 1

      Considering that 90% of the news in print comes from either Reuters or Associated Press, are you meaning to imply that 50% of the news out there shouldn't be taken seriously?

      Don't answer that... Reuters is usually a reputable news source. One of my personal little joys is seeing an article on Reuters, submitting it to /. and being rejected, then seeing the same story on /. with a link to some other news site a week later. It gives me a little kick and makes me smirk inwardly.

      It's unimportant. What is important is that I don't think I'll understand why people seem to think that Reuters is inherently a bad news agency, even though half of the news they read in "trusted" sources comes from Reuters originally.

      What they're describing *is* possible. Unlikely, but it is possible. It's entirely possible to have a static charge that strong without killing yourself, for two reasons: one, it's the combonation of voltage and amperage that determines how much energy is actually flowing through you. You could have a million volts in your system, but if it's only at 0.000001 amps, it's not going to kill you. The second reason is that static electricity tends to the outside. The laws of polar attraction stand, and all the negatively-charged ions (that's what static electricity is) are going to repel each other, and form a shell around the outside of you, meaning that the level of charge inside your body core is going to be a whole lot smaller than that outside your body. Same thing happens when a car gets hit by lightening... passengers probably wouldn't know it'd happened, except for the loud noise and bright flash.

      --
      If you believe everything you read, you'd better not read. - Japanese proverb
    2. Re:Huh? by PlacidPundit · · Score: 1
      Considering that 90% of the news in print comes from either Reuters or Associated Press, are you meaning to imply that 50% of the news out there shouldn't be taken seriously?

      More like 100%. But even a stopped clock is right twice a day, so I'll give 'em a percentage point or two, just because I'm a nice guy.

  88. rubbing clouds by tinkerton · · Score: 1

    anyone read the line at the bottom?

    "Static electricity is a similar mechanism to lightning, where you have clouds rubbing together and then a spark generated by very dry air above them" .
    It's supposed to be from "a senior lecturer in electrical engineering at Sydney University".

    I'm trying to understand it in such a way that it makes sense.
    I thought charge separation was caused by vertical currents separating ice crystals from water droplets in clouds.

    1. Re:rubbing clouds by chawly · · Score: 1

      No, no - the man was talking about his sex life with this rubbing clouds lark.

      --
      How many beans make five, anyhow ? ... Charles Walmsley
  89. Watch more Mythbusters!! by eggman9713 · · Score: 1

    40kV is not the issue here. As noted in earlier posts, it is the AMPS not the volts, that count. And if he discharged enough amps to make something combust, he would be a dead man, since 6 milliamps is enough to kill you. Lightning can be as much as 100 MEGAvolts and people sometimes survive that. Obviously the current is going to be a little bit higher than 6 mAmp.

  90. an even better article ... by tinkerton · · Score: 1

    would have the title "hazardous carpet can self-ignite from static discharge." Static discharges easily leave tiny burn marks. But these shouldn't spread. That a guy causes particularly heavy static discharges is cute, but if you don't compare it to what happens commonly, the article stinks. And this article stinks more than a heavily statically charged man letting one fly.

  91. I tried. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I figured I'd have a hard time since, to be considered scientific, experiments should be repeatable and I couldn't imagine a way to repeat it after the guy was burnt to death.

    Anyway I went on and asked some 35 guys (statistical magic number, don't ask) if they would spontaneously participate in an experiment involving combustion which would leave them charred.

    I got many interesting answers but, on average, they were basically "Hell, no!".

    So, with enough empyrical evidence, I concluded that there's no spontaneous combustion.

  92. Department of Redundancy Department by Fortran+IV · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...wearing a woolen shirt and a synthetic nylon jacket...

    As opposed to a natural nylon jacket, made from the finest virgin Icelandic nylon harvested from the nests of shore birds.

    --
    I figure by 2030 or so my 6-digit UID will be something to brag about.
    1. Re:Department of Redundancy Department by vistic · · Score: 0, Troll

      I'll sell you one for just $200.

    2. Re:Department of Redundancy Department by Fortran+IV · · Score: 1

      I'll sell you one for just $200.

      You crook! My classic Eddie Bauer natural nylon jacket with Icelandic alpaca lining only cost $184 (plus S&H).

      --
      I figure by 2030 or so my 6-digit UID will be something to brag about.
  93. Renewable Energy Source by Darkling-MHCN · · Score: 0, Troll

    Hey think about it... this could actually work ! Get everyone on the planet to wear nylon jackets. Once every few hours we earth ourselves directly into the power grid. If you then made illegalised cars and made everyone ride motorbikes or push bikes think of the potential !!

    Sure a few people might spontaneously combust every now and then, a couple of occasional fires.... but wouldn't that cost be worth saving the environment for ?

  94. No kidding! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes, stay away from that Dihydrogen Monoxide stuff!

    If you really do have to imbibe, we all know that Hydronium Hydroxil is MUCH safer!

  95. Nonsense... by mwillems · · Score: 2, Insightful

    OK... this is a nonsense story. 40 kV is voltage, not current. You can build up 40 kV every time you walk on a nylon carpet, or you rub against a cat's skin. We have all had sparks pass between our hand and our keyboard we sit down, or with the wall when we have had rubber shoes on.

    (Tip: this is annoying, but just touch the wall with a key and you'll not feel the spark.)

    Voltage is not dangerous "unless". To spark a fire you need not just voltage, but current as well. A 30 kV spark discharge from your hand at 0.1 uA (micro-ampere) would do a lot less harm than a 30 kV powerline at 100 Amps (the latter would incinerate you instantly).

    To set a carpet on fire you would need quite a lot of current. If this carpet was set on fire by a shirt (how, by the way: was he rubbing his chest on the floor?), then it was a weird carpet fire waiting to happen anyway.

    But of course this makes a cute story to fill an otherwise empty page. Myths always do.

    --

    ---
    BDOS ERR ON A:>
  96. reactor by Eternal+Annoyance · · Score: 1

    Maybe it's time to build a reactor based on this effect?

  97. Had to be said by Alien54 · · Score: 1
    I have a MSEE and feel like feeding the news trolls.

    MSEE = MicroSoft Engineering Enhancment?

    The guy basically describes himself as a walking leyden jar with automatic charger. Shazaam!

    A similar effect is often seen in the winter in northern climes. People with fuzzy sweaters and woolen clothing wearing nylon parkas. They shock the heck out of themselves getting in and out of their cars with the nylon weave cushion covers.

    --
    "It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"
    1. Re:Had to be said by speedothebrief · · Score: 1
      Unfortunately you are going to need a little bit more than fuzzy swaeater logic to back that up.

      MSEE = a Masters degree in Electrical Engineering.

      I would consider that much more than an appropriate education to debunk this story.


      A similar effect is often seen in the winter in northern climes. People with fuzzy sweaters and woolen clothing wearing nylon parkas. They shock the heck out of themselves getting in and out of their cars with the nylon weave cushion covers.


      Ok, yes, people do in fact create enough of a static charge to shock themselves.... not to start electrical fires. Unless his office was a QA team of gasoline sniffers (you know, to make sure it smells right), there is no way that a static charge built up around a human could ever ignite carpet, or melt plastic.

      not to beat a dead cow, but:

      "We tested his clothes with a static electricity field meter and measured a current of 40,000 volts, which is one step shy of spontaneous combustion, where his clothes would have self-ignited," Barton said.


      Wow! 40,000 volts of current, eh?! Publish that and give yourself a Nobel Peace Prize for research in the electrical theory field! One of two basic mistakes here still proves the story writer an assinine liar. First, he could have accidently written volts instead of amps. 40,000 amps.... heheheh I don't think so (he wouldn't have gotten to his car to melt the plastic... that discharge at the carpet would've fried him to dust). Second, he could have accidentally said current instead of voltage. And you are still going to have a very very difficult time convincing me that a fire department had the proper device to measure such a static field (and at what two test points did they take a measurement at?).

      The story is just one more in a long series of stories written by losers who wish they had something important to write.
    2. Re:Had to be said by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      they took the reading from his asshole to 0 (gnd)
      or from gnd to the 40KV power lines above their heads on the pylons

    3. Re:Had to be said by Alien54 · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Ok, yes, people do in fact create enough of a static charge to shock themselves.... not to start electrical fires. Unless his office was a QA team of gasoline sniffers (you know, to make sure it smells right), there is no way that a static charge built up around a human could ever ignite carpet, or melt plastic.

      Note that the original story, not the ignorant rewrite on rueters mentions only 30,000 volts and a mention of amps at the end. And in Australia, they are in late winter, this being the southern hemisphere.

      So plenty of potential for walking leyden jars. Obviously this all is unpossible. Modern science tells us so.

      Original Story

      Freak static
      By SARAH SCOPELIANOS
      September 16, 2005

      A DENNINGTON man was none the worse for wear yesterday despite having 30,000 volts running through his clothes.

      Warrnambool firefighters were baffled after Dennington cleaner Frank Clewer unintentionally caused three Koroit Street buildings to be evacuated.

      Last night fire officers said they remained puzzled about the incident in which carpet was scorched where Mr Clewer had walked.

      Mr Clewer, 58, was jovial about his fiery experience but said the circumstances were hard to believe.

      Soon to be made redundant from Nestle, he had arrived for a job interview that never quiet started.

      He could only chuckle about the events which led to firefighters stripping him of his clothes and finding 30,000 volts running through his synthetic jacket.

      "My wife has told me I'm not allowed to put on the electric blanket tonight and I'm going to have to lay off the surfing because I'll stun the sharks and we'll have fried flake in the bay," he laughed.

      Fire crews were called to Karingal's office yesterday after staff heard loud cracking sounds and noticed the carpet was burnt in several places.

      The "seriously weird" events began when Mr Clewer was standing at the office front counter when he heard a "mighty crack" before being led into a room to begin an interview for a carer's job.

      Then staff noticed burn marks the size of ten cent pieces on the carpet and called the fire brigade.

      Fire officers' investigations included removing carpet and evacuating surrounding buildings.

      Mr Clewer spoke with them for about 20 minutes then went to the bank and a surf store before returning to his car at the Ozone car park.

      There he found that a plastic bag used to protect his seat from water after surfing was badly charred beneath his feet.

      Thinking staff at Karingal were experiencing the same "strange" happenings, which included electric zapping sounds, he returned to the Koroit Street building to consult fire officers.

      "I was talking to them and I let out a crack. It is all too bizarre...and when I was getting inside my car after giving them my name and phone number, I let out another almighty crack and it was heard inside the building by the fire officers and inside the ABC studio."

      Mr Clewer was given overalls to wear as fire officers used a device to check static electricity on him and his belongings.

      The device measured a remarkable 30,000 volts on a synthetic zip-up jacket Mr Clewer had been wearing under a woollen jacket.

      His jeans had a small burn at the knee.

      Warrnambool fire officer Trevor Roberts said officers were baffled.

      "We called Powercor, an electrician, and spoke to a technician from the ABC."

      He said Mr Clewer's clothes were at no stage dangerous because they were low in amps which could be deadly.

      This story was found at:

      http://the.standard.net.au/articles/2005/09/16/112 6750111141.html

      --
      "It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"
  98. anybody ever watch the tick? by Legato895 · · Score: 1

    i fondly remember the tick's animated series and although it was awhile ago, there was a superhero who's sole power was wearing a carpet and shuffling around :D

  99. I'm sure you meant to say... by DreadfulGrape · · Score: 1

    ..."because of" not "despite."

    re: Obviously, despite the fact that this is carried by Reuters, you should take some of the 'facts' presented here with some NaCl.

    --
    sig has been sent away for a few small repairs...
  100. Funny post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Obviously, despite the fact that this is carried by Reuters, you should take some of the 'facts' presented here with some NaCl


    That is a hilarious punchline for that post.

  101. FBI Now Investigating by Inaffect · · Score: 1

    FOX News is reporting that Special Agent Fox Mulder and his partner Dana Scully will be headed to Australia to begin a formal investigation.

  102. Power-walking plants by DeckerDel · · Score: 1

    Next we can scrap nuclear power plants for statically charged employees, maybe this could be a new meaning for running the circuit :)

  103. Re:40kV. So? by wakdjunkaga · · Score: 1
    40kV is nothing. Anyone who has worked in a plastics factory (and snooped around with an electrostatic field meter) has routinely seen levels up to the 100 to 150 kV range, and sometimes beyond.

    The typical outcome is a small shock no worse that what you get after sliding over a car seat on a cold, dry morning, and touching the car door latch on your way out.

    We used to produce 50" wide x 40 mil polystyrene rollstock at 50 FPM, and it would sometimes be necessary to troubleshoot in the area. Every so often you'd get zapped ... up to 5" long "bolts" ... in this case, very uncomfortable, and nerve-rattling, but none of us exploded into flame.

    The only truly dangerous ES potentials were when a worn through section of 3" diameter aluminum pipe (used in a material scrap suction system to feed roll trim back to a grinder) was replaced with PVC by someone who didn't know better. End result was a Vandergraff generator of significant potential, and ended up knocking the guy off his feet later in the day when feeding ribbon into it.

    40 kV? A trail of melted carpet? C'mon!

  104. Got an urban legend to bust... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Call mythbusters.

  105. Its just bunk by dilvish_the_damned · · Score: 1

    But it does bring up a question I have been wondering about. It does seem that some people carry more of a charge than others. That is some people consistantly burn out chips when they touch them in a rude fasion but it is very hard for me to do the same. Is this through habbits of touching grounded things like Tony Shelwhatshisface in Monk or is there some chemical thing going on that makes us noticably different?
    Is there training and can I learn to start fires by touch as well? Also what does KERNEL PANICK mean. Is that bad? I think I am having one.

    --
    I think you underestimate just how much I just dont care.
  106. personality? by p51d007 · · Score: 1

    I just have to say this..........guess he has an electric personality?

  107. He could burn the building down by mogwai7 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Thats what they get for taking the man's stapler. :P

  108. Posted by by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As soon as I saw the headline I knew this had to have been posted by Zonk. Way to go!

  109. Re:40kV. So? by elgatozorbas · · Score: 1

    Another way would be to store charge on a plate capacitor. By pulling the plates away from each other, the capacity C goes down. Because C in C=Q/V goes down and obviously the charge Q stays, V should go up. Maybe this is cheating a bit, because the field strength (E=V/distance) will not increase I think, but still it is easy to build up a high voltage.

  110. oblig spinal tap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    hundreds of people spontaneously combust every year - it's just not widely reported, that's all.

  111. Saw it on the news tonight by Anthony · · Score: 1

    And pictures of the carpet burns and interviews with witnesses. No it is nowhere near April.

    --
    Slashdot: Where nerds gather to pool their ignorance
  112. I call hoax by retro128 · · Score: 1, Redundant

    40,000 volts is actually not much. In fact, I'd say it's easy to build up that much static charge (Van DeGraff generator, anyone?) But Back To The Future Shoes? Come on. And what is this "40,000 volts is one step shy of spontaneous combustion" BS? First of all, it's AMPS that cause fires, not VOLTS. Second, if he was grounding out enough power to leave fire in his wake, he would have been barbequed long before he could take a second step.

    --
    -R
  113. "Inside Joke" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sorry, but I'm relatively new to this site, and unfortunately, am unaware of the "inside joke" about obtaining news from Reuters.

    Can someone please explain this one to me? I'd like to hop on the Reuters-bashing bandwagon, too, but I'm afraid that I'll look like a fool if I sit here and try to look cool by criticizing Reuters without a shred of evidence as to why. (I learned that lesson the hard way when I jumped on the NASA-bashing bandwagon.)

    Seriously, this is not intended to be a troll, nor flamebait. I sincerely would like someone to explain this one to me.

    I thank you, in advance,
    Marc P. Driscoll

  114. Hey, that'd make some neat armor... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you put it over a rubber suit, of course...

    "Gimme the wallet!"

    "Ok" *gets out metal coated wallet, holds it in his hand*

    *Thief reaches for wallet*
    *BRRRZZZZAP!*
    *Thief twitches on floor*

    "Too staticy for you, eh?"*

  115. well by carguy84 · · Score: 1

    that's what he gets for wearing nylon after labor day...

  116. There go my dreams.. by twosmokes · · Score: 1

    Everyone's sciene "facts" are ruining my ambitions of becoming an electrical supervillain.

    I figured I could rob banks and take day-care facilities hostage by threatening to put on my very hip weatherproof jacket.

    Oh well... I'll just continue 'Plan Greenhouse' by dispersing all these Arid Extra Dry cans I have.

  117. Sydney? by AussiePenguin · · Score: 1

    Why doesthe news article say Sydney when it happened in Warrnambool?

    --

    Jeremy
    Melbourne, Australia
    Jabber Australia

    1. Re:Sydney? by Tony+Hoyle · · Score: 2, Interesting

      ..becuase most of us outside AU haven't heard of Warrnambool, but we have heard of sydney.

      If you read the news around here, *everything* that happens in AU happens in sydney.

      The Reuters article is a particularly bad piece of journalism though.. confusing volts and amps, inserting the 'rubbing clouds' quote, and even getting the facts wrong (it was 30kv not 40kv).

    2. Re:Sydney? by chawly · · Score: 1

      And I personally cannot believe that a place called Warrnambool exists. Obviously, if it existed, any normal human being would be struck by lightening just for going there and the article would therefore be pure fabrication of journalistic imagination. No, it must have happened in Sydney or Reuters would never have gotten wind of it.

      --
      How many beans make five, anyhow ? ... Charles Walmsley
  118. Powered by dead cats. by chub_mackerel · · Score: 1

    Hoax!!? No, it's not a hoax! He charged up his static field with dead cats.

  119. Yet another joke by Kingrames · · Score: 1

    ...he wanted to show up at the office dressed to kill.

    --
    If you can read this, I forgot to post anonymously.
  120. I don't get it by Markus+Landgren · · Score: 1

    When we went to Paris, the French charged my girlfriend to a voltage of 300 kV relative to ground. She neither combusted nor started any fires around her!

  121. no doorknobs? by GodWasAnAlien · · Score: 1

    If he touched any metal he would have lost most of the charge.

    Also was he wearing bunny slippers and shuffling his feet?

  122. Uh oh! by callipygian-showsyst · · Score: 1
    Firefighters took possession of Clewer's jacket and stored it in the courtyard of the fire station, where it continued to give off a strong electrical current.

    If this is true, then I need to go back to college to re-learn physics!

  123. Reuters authoritative? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Obviously, despite the fact that this is carried by Reuters, you should take some of the 'facts' presented here with some NaCl.

    The fact that it is carried by Reuters means you'll be needing quite a bit of NaCl.

  124. Lightning is from two clouds rubbing together??? by MikeLip · · Score: 1

    And they say the *American* education systems sucks! I'm guessing the Aussies won't be puting a man on the moon anytime soon then... :)

  125. I hope they used wooden poles to handle it! :) by MikeLip · · Score: 1

    Think of the potential in that jacket (no pun intended). The answer to the energy crisis is windbreakers and woolens!

  126. Ah-ha...THAT'S how lightning works! by Roland+of+Gilead · · Score: 1
    "Static electricity is a similar mechanism to lightning, where you have clouds rubbing together and then a spark generated by very dry air above them," said Gosden

    So THAT'S how lightning works!
    /slaps forehead

    If we can only stop those clouds from rubbing together (think:rubbing balloon on head) and stop that dang dry air from generating sparks!
    //slaps Gosden's forehead
  127. Good, but one mistake by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Capacitance doesn't have anything to do with the maximum voltage that can be stored. In fact, a smaller capacitor can be more easily charged with a higher voltage because it requires less current.

    The maximum voltage is related to the resistance of the medium separating the charged plates. The resistance where this starts to conduct (and usually in a destructive way) is called the breakdown resistance.

    At the voltages they were talking about even insulators like plastic and carpet... even the air would start to conduct bits of the charge away. There's just no reasonable way to explain how that charge could have stayed in place while he was touching things.

    And of course, as you mention, the really fatal flaw in the story is about the burn marks and melting. There's just not enough energy to do that kind of thing from the motion of him walking around. The low capacitance would mean that even at insanely high voltages there wouldn't be enough current to transfer the amount of energy needed.

  128. Spontainius combustion? by geekoid · · Score: 1

    Perhaps it was a small event related to spontainious combustion?

    Before flaming me, please take some time to study that phenomenon. It is quite odd.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  129. One possible reason could be... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Static can be a source of ignition.

    If I was attending a gas, liquid or powder based incident - say chemicals stored nearby or leaking or whatever - I'd want to know if any static charge existed in the area, if I was charged, or if I was building up or generating a potentially (no pun intended) dangerous charge whilst dealing with it.

    I'd also imagine that a device to measure static charge would be rather different from your average voltmeter.

    1. Re:One possible reason could be... by Farmer+Tim · · Score: 1

      Static can be a source of ignition.

      Which is precisely why you don't wan't to go poking probes around the place possibly creating sparks, you just neutralise the fuel regardless. Hosing an object will discharge static or covering it with foam will prevent ignition, and those are usually the first steps in a flammables spill.

      --
      Blank until /. makes another boneheaded UI decision.
  130. Scepticical news stories by heroine · · Score: 1

    First, unless it's a suicide bomber with really lousy wiring skills, you can't maintain 40,000 V for more than a fraction of a second since it would immediately arc. Secondly, this is the latest in a long decline for Reuters.

    Mainstream media has been more and more psychotic since 2000. There was a time you never thought you'd see Bill Tucker and Bill Hemmer get dumped from CNN.

  131. fleece and electronics by dmoorhouse · · Score: 1

    I took an electronics course years ago. I was wearing a fleece sweater in a dry climate in winter. For some odd reason I could not get my circuit to work properly. That damn led would not stay on when it was supposed to. So I thought I would check out some of the other students circuits. Each time I walked up to one the guy would swear because his circuit suddenly would malfunction. It took me about five such instances to realize it was me! I radiated for about six feet around me and lost a few friends for that day... Mind you, I wasn't melting anything.

  132. Oh, well that's easy then. by jd · · Score: 1

    If it's magic, it must be all that Harry Potter's fault.

    --
    It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
  133. 40,000V = 1.33cm spark by skintigh2 · · Score: 1

    I learned in school the breakdown resistance of air was 30kV/cm, so a 40kV charge (not current...) would creat a whopping 1.33cm spark. I've done better under the sheets.

  134. Now there's news: by Farmer+Tim · · Score: 1

    Someone managed to find two sober ABC employees on the same day!

    --
    Blank until /. makes another boneheaded UI decision.
  135. I'm living proof by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes, this is BS. Others have stated most of the reasons why it is BS but I will add my own. My own personal experience.

    IIRC, air ionizes at around 40,000 volts per inch. I had to get new shoes a few years ago because I was walking around at work with my hair jumping up whenever I walked through the metal doorframe to my office, and had sparks around 2 inches long shooting out of my fingers when I reached for other ground points, such as the electronics I was working with at the time.

    Based on that, I estimate that I was frequently walking around with around 80,000 volts of charge built up, and the only damage it ever caused was a few ruined CPUs. No burns, nothing melting, no SHC.

  136. um, yes it is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Distribution lines to multi-block neighborhoods are 14.4kv. Had one running down my street that occasionally incinerated hapless squirrels in a place I used to live. Then it gets stepped down by transformers to 220 for individual service.

  137. Who Ya Gonna Call? by Thomas+Henden · · Score: 1

    Mythbusters!

    They've already busted a myth regarding a "Static Cannon", which is described below at this page:

    Although, the PVC pipe they tested, looked more like 8 feet, than 8 inch, it seems like no way you can build up a charge that might ignite your clothes like that, unless you've spilled flammable chemicals like acetone (nailpolish remover) or gasoline. A friend of me who attended a welding class, once told about a classmate who used oxygen to blow away some dust from his fleece jacket, and some time later ignited a smoke, which in order ignited his jacket which even many minutes later, contained high amounts of oxygen. It might be true, but I wouldn't believe it completely unless it was confirmed by Mythbusters, of course.

    So unless there where flammable liquids spilled right besides where the static spark hit, I find it highly unlikely, that a static spark would ignite the carpet and those clothes. Think about it - how much larger is the possibility that someone sooner or later drops a burning cigarette on a similar carpet and/or clothes? We'd hear about it, if there were extremely flammable clothes or carpets like this, and those products/materials would very quickly be pulled off the market. It even counts against this story how elaborate it is. One spark and perhaps one little flame or a burn mark? Perhaps yes, but not a melting trail of plastic and/or fire on that carpet, and even in his car, without him detecting what was going on a little sooner!
    Did those sparks btw jump all the way from his jacket, and into the floor, or via his pants (ouch), or what?

    I say this myth is completely BUSTED!

  138. Update from Victoria, Australia by mdoreian · · Score: 1

    This is a true story (even fair dinkum!). I'm a firefighter with the fire service involved, the Country Fire Authority (CFA). Two friends of mine are stationed at Warrnambool, and after chatting to both them and the Officer In Charge (Henry Barton), I can assure you that it's most definitely not a hoax. Perhaps the media has embellished or distorted the facts somewhat, but the basic story of a man walking into an office in Warrnambool leaving scorch marks on the carpet, and later having his jacket measured at 30K+ volts holds true. I've also spoken to our Public Affairs section, who were amazed when I told them of the interest (and scepticism) that is being generated in this incident, world-wide. CFA Public affairs have said that they will update the website http://www.cfa.vic.gov.au/ with information about the story asap. There's even some photos, showing the jacket involved, and the scorch marks on the carpet. Hope this helps.

  139. Re:SHD by cubicleman · · Score: 1

    Yes... and worse than gas is SHD...spontaneous human diarreha.. I get it too frequently, esp. after eating spicy curries...

  140. Strange, but true by brindafella · · Score: 1

    This story created something of a media sensation for a few days, with various stories of varying scientific relevance.

    I have to say that it "arcs me up" to see the media treat this kind of simple science story with disdain and hype, trying NOT to understand and then explain the simple science involved.

    --
    Looking at space, radio, science and computing from a 'down-under' amateur enthusiast perspective.
  141. That jacket might be handy... by ACORN_USER · · Score: 1
    .. when your ibook is out of juice.

    Ok, I tried it. Ooops. Good thing I took out that service plan.

  142. Re:Lightning is from two clouds rubbing together?? by md65536 · · Score: 1

    I was so surprised to see that explanation, that I looked up how lightning works to reassure myself that that isn't the standard explanation.

    It isn't, but the explanation I found still says " the method of cloud charging still remains elusive" (http://science.howstuffworks.com/lightning.htm), and goes on to talk about a charge between cloud and earth, and "break down" of the air. They don't mention rain and they seem less convinced of their explanation than I do about mine so here it is:

    How I thought lightning works:
    Falling water droplets tend to lose electrons (this is why waterfalls produce the same euphoric feeling that negative ion generators do, according to their manuals), leaving negatively charged air above the rain. The falling positively charged droplets can then provide a path for the negative charge, so that rather than making a huge jump through the air, the charge "leaders" make a large number of very short jumps.

    I probably shouldn't base my scientific knowledge on negative ion generator manuals, but when other sources say "actually we don't really know...", I tend to trust my own ideas. I probably also shouldn't use slashdot to field those ideas...

  143. Re:zaaaaap - real life photo by drizst+'n+drat · · Score: 1

    As in these photo's of a man, high on PCP, touching a live 16,600 wire!!! http://www.tb3.com/tesla/sparky.htm