Everything you've said applies, more so, to the radiation from household lightbulbs, cfls or LEDs, which also emit at much higher power and energy levels.
You are wrong. In a THz scan some photons are absorbed or scattered while others are reflected. You measure the reflected ones. Ionizing radiation has the ability to excite electrons enough that they can escape from their atoms, producing charged nuclei. Ionizing radiation doesn't break up nuclei.
THz photons are not high enough energy to knock out electrons. It is not ionizing.
THz (and microwave) may be useful for looking at things like possible skin and breast cancers because the tumor tissue has different EM properties than normal tissue.
If the billing isn't going to change and the distribution is symmetric, half the people's bills will go up and half will go down. It's not surprising at all that some went up.
Meh. You can tell most of those things from looking at someone's shoes.
If you're really paranoid about ubiquitous powerline data connections (which are NOT the same as smart meters, and don't really exist yet), put in a filter. You're not tampering with the meter at all.
Most people's non-smart meters are on the outside of the house. If you care to stand around and look you can get FAR higher frequency data than a smart meter will give you. But for the average burglar, two checks on successive days should be fine for deciding whether the occupants are away or not.
It can see if you're using a lot of power to grow pot. On the other hand, the regular meter sees that too, as does the meter reader who comes in to read it.
Yes. Recently, actually. My friend and I decided to hike from Battery Park to Central Park. It was hot, sticky and uncomfortable. We appreciated getting back to the air conditioned house afterward. My life was at no point in danger.
If the AC had gone out for a day or a week I'd have been uncomfortable, but not in danger.
I've also been to places that make the NE US look like a temperate climate (oh wait, it is). Places where air conditioning is a rumour. They also do just fine, and so did I after a few days of adjustment.
If electricity is essential to your daily life, you might want to seriously consider changing your life. I definitely appreciate the convenience of electricity, and I wouldn't get a whole lot of work done if it went out for an extended period of time, but my life certainly wouldn't be in danger, and I'd even be entertained.
Don't forget that hose poor living in squalor and filth would be stealing from and infecting the rich, and periodically lining them up against walls and shooting them.
Subsidizing basics like power, clean water, sewer and education for the poor works out quite well for the rich overall.
Or buy some candles. Seriously, the power goes out for a few days in the summer and it's such a big deal?
In the town I grew up in, the power used to go out in the winter sometimes. When it was -40. My friend's lizard died during one multi day outage, but other than that everyone managed to do just fine.
Sounds like they investigated rather thoroughly, including replicating some peoples' setups to see if they could produce a false positive. They didn't.
The average Slashdotter, or at least the ones who moderate and post, seems to have the "I know all about science/statistics/whatever" and "stupid scientists don't know as much as I do" attitudes. Although you can really replace "science" with just about anything and that statement would probably be true.
"Some sort of independent verification needs to be worked into the process before a new study is put out there for general consumption."
The media, and the public, need to learn. Publishing and dissemination are a critical part of science and shouldn't be compromised to make some reporters' jobs easier. Fraud isn't even the big problem with jumping to conclusions based on unverified studies - FAR more studies will be incorrect simply due to honest false positives than to fraud.
In some places those are the only two ways to ELIMINATE traffic jams. You can ease them considerably, and possibly eliminate them in some situations, by making some fairly small changes to the way traffic flows. Timing lights, replacing lights with overpasses (or just blocking access from some streets), reversing lanes at certain times of the day, etc.
There's one place on the freeway near me that is almost always bumper to bumper. The road before and after this spot is usually fine. What's the problem? Some idiot highway planner designed an on ramp that comes up to the (elevated) highway level blind, then the merge lane is nonexistent. So anybody coming up that on ramp finds themselves suddenly in a highway lane, and anyone in that highway lane instantly tries to move over to the left, etc. The problem could be solved by either making a reasonable acceleration lane at highway level, getting the on ramp to highway level faster, or even blocking off the rightmost lane of the highway (generally the highway isn't at capacity anyway).
Slashdot Mirror
Sounds like an awesome idea. Until you have to replace your windshield.
Everything you've said applies, more so, to the radiation from household lightbulbs, cfls or LEDs, which also emit at much higher power and energy levels.
Nope. THz waves don't penetrate much. You measure scatter. CT requires projection images.
You could potentially get limited 3Dish data on things near the surface, but that's of limited value and probably not worth the cost and complexity
You are wrong. In a THz scan some photons are absorbed or scattered while others are reflected. You measure the reflected ones. Ionizing radiation has the ability to excite electrons enough that they can escape from their atoms, producing charged nuclei. Ionizing radiation doesn't break up nuclei.
THz photons are not high enough energy to knock out electrons. It is not ionizing.
THz (and microwave) may be useful for looking at things like possible skin and breast cancers because the tumor tissue has different EM properties than normal tissue.
As opposed to the kid I just sent to get his ball out of your yard for $1. Or me peeking over your fence at your current meter.
If the billing isn't going to change and the distribution is symmetric, half the people's bills will go up and half will go down. It's not surprising at all that some went up.
I see someone has already pointed out that the sun can cause cancer. You really should have done the comparison with a lightbulb.
Meh. You can tell most of those things from looking at someone's shoes.
If you're really paranoid about ubiquitous powerline data connections (which are NOT the same as smart meters, and don't really exist yet), put in a filter. You're not tampering with the meter at all.
Most people's non-smart meters are on the outside of the house. If you care to stand around and look you can get FAR higher frequency data than a smart meter will give you. But for the average burglar, two checks on successive days should be fine for deciding whether the occupants are away or not.
Hm... ever hooked up an oscilloscope to a radio circuit carrying digital signals, like a wifi router?
That white/yellow ball (or tube) in the ceiling is putting out a lot more radiation than the ham or the smart meter too.
Fair enough. Disconnect his power. And his cable, water and sewer.
Why? They can detect your grow op perfectly well using the lower frequency data you get from a manual meter.
It can see if you're using a lot of power to grow pot. On the other hand, the regular meter sees that too, as does the meter reader who comes in to read it.
Yes. Recently, actually. My friend and I decided to hike from Battery Park to Central Park. It was hot, sticky and uncomfortable. We appreciated getting back to the air conditioned house afterward. My life was at no point in danger.
If the AC had gone out for a day or a week I'd have been uncomfortable, but not in danger.
I've also been to places that make the NE US look like a temperate climate (oh wait, it is). Places where air conditioning is a rumour. They also do just fine, and so did I after a few days of adjustment.
If electricity is essential to your daily life, you might want to seriously consider changing your life. I definitely appreciate the convenience of electricity, and I wouldn't get a whole lot of work done if it went out for an extended period of time, but my life certainly wouldn't be in danger, and I'd even be entertained.
Don't forget that hose poor living in squalor and filth would be stealing from and infecting the rich, and periodically lining them up against walls and shooting them.
Subsidizing basics like power, clean water, sewer and education for the poor works out quite well for the rich overall.
Or buy some candles. Seriously, the power goes out for a few days in the summer and it's such a big deal?
In the town I grew up in, the power used to go out in the winter sometimes. When it was -40. My friend's lizard died during one multi day outage, but other than that everyone managed to do just fine.
"I mean, why would they bother investigating?"
Sounds like they investigated rather thoroughly, including replicating some peoples' setups to see if they could produce a false positive. They didn't.
You must be new here.
The average Slashdotter, or at least the ones who moderate and post, seems to have the "I know all about science/statistics/whatever" and "stupid scientists don't know as much as I do" attitudes. Although you can really replace "science" with just about anything and that statement would probably be true.
Nine or ten papers a year isn't terribly unusual for someone with a decent sized lab.
"Some sort of independent verification needs to be worked into the process before a new study is put out there for general consumption."
The media, and the public, need to learn. Publishing and dissemination are a critical part of science and shouldn't be compromised to make some reporters' jobs easier. Fraud isn't even the big problem with jumping to conclusions based on unverified studies - FAR more studies will be incorrect simply due to honest false positives than to fraud.
Those were grids. This is a cloud.
In some places those are the only two ways to ELIMINATE traffic jams. You can ease them considerably, and possibly eliminate them in some situations, by making some fairly small changes to the way traffic flows. Timing lights, replacing lights with overpasses (or just blocking access from some streets), reversing lanes at certain times of the day, etc.
There's one place on the freeway near me that is almost always bumper to bumper. The road before and after this spot is usually fine. What's the problem? Some idiot highway planner designed an on ramp that comes up to the (elevated) highway level blind, then the merge lane is nonexistent. So anybody coming up that on ramp finds themselves suddenly in a highway lane, and anyone in that highway lane instantly tries to move over to the left, etc. The problem could be solved by either making a reasonable acceleration lane at highway level, getting the on ramp to highway level faster, or even blocking off the rightmost lane of the highway (generally the highway isn't at capacity anyway).