jjrakman

I've been doing a little more readin on this Natural EMF Meter, and it claims to be able to detect weak DC fields, while ignoring AC.

I've played with one myself, and have seen it work. Insomuch as when a person walks about in a room, the needle will go off, seemingly detecting a person's movements. Whether it's actually detecting my movement itself, or the bioelectric field I'm putting off I suppose is up for debate. But the other settings on the meter do seem to do as advertised.

Would it be safe to say then, that AC is almost always artificial, while weak DC is mostly natural?

O.K., so how can these meters be able to differentiate between artificial EMF and natural EMF?

http://www.trifield.com/EMF_meter.htm

http://www.trifield.com/EMF_natural.htm

What am I missing here?

I guess I'm primarily concerned with the low frequency area.

Would it be safe to assume that an AC EMF field is usually artificial whereas a DC EMF field is usually natural?

One other question.

The body also gives off EMF as does the Earth and other biological life forms. What portion of the electromagnetic spectrim do these natural EMF's lie?

Also, how can one discern between an artificial EMF and a natural EMF, what properties makes them different?

Thanks very much for your help!

How's this?

So if that kind of EMF is not represented in that graph, would there be another graph that does represent it?

Sorry for being a dolt, I'm trying to wrap my head around these concepts in a Physics for Dummies kind of way.

But I'm having a hard time finding 50Hz on this graph:

You say it's off the bottom, below Long-Waves? By off the bottom, do you mean to say that it's not represented on the chart?

Actually, if you go back far enough in time, our ancestors did have UV vision. We have three types of cones for colour vision. Birds and many reptiles have four, with the fourth being for UV vision. Way back before our ancestors were mammals, they had four cones and could see into the ultra violet. It is quite possible that some of the genetic material for UV vision is still part of our genome, and a relatively small mutation could restore UV vision.

Can any animals see in the Infrared portion?

And are there any animals who can hear infrasonic and ultrasonic wavelengths?

Well mains is ~50Hz so off the bottom...

Mains, do you mean a main electrical line?

And do you mean 50MHz? Just below VHF in the Radio section?

My understanding is that rhodopsin is a chemical in the rods, and needs to be present to see in low-light conditions. Light breaks it down but red is least effective at doing this, so dim, red light will not tend to disrupt night vision.

So that would mean that UV light would break down rhodopsin significantly more, is that right?

O.K., so if I were looking at this graph:

What portions would I color in to represent the EMF given off by electrical gear that can be detected by an EMF Meter?

But some do have auditory sense beyond the usual 18hz - 21000hz range, and some can see a slightly larger range of colours in the EM spectrum.

Would you know if there's any case studies on such people that I can read up on?

Night vision is tied to the chemical rhodopsin, found in the rods, which breaks down more readily with shorter wavelengths. So UV will not tend to preserve night vision.

So UV light retards or prevents rhodopsin from covering the rods, thus creating poor nightvision?

Plus, true UV is very bad for your retinas.

Can you explain the effects?

Thanks much for your help!

So looking at this graph:

Where is the RF and ELF portion of the spectrum located?

... for a person to have one of the following mutations:

1) to be able to see into the infrared and ultraviolet wavelengths

2) To be able to hear ultra and infra sonic sound waves.

Anyone?

It's known that astonomers use red flashlights and planes have cockpits lit with red light, in order to preserve a person's night vision.

So if red light preserves night vision, would an ultraviolet flashlight do the same, if it's on the other end of the spectrum?

What effect does ultraviolet light have on a person's night vision?

that`s utterly Useless to the OP, what he picking up is EM radiation in the Radio section for the most part (and that extends down to but not including 0Hz).

with an EMF meter most Definitely he will be "seeing" the Radio part.

IR is NOT detectable with an EMF meter I can assure!

O.k. So electromagetic fields coming off of electronics and wiring, is only a certain portion of the electromagnetic spectrum?

So which portion is it?

how did you get this wrong again?

 

UV, X-Ray, Gamma = ionizing

everything else on the spectrum = nonionizing

Sorry for the confusion. thanks. I understand that now.

So would the following be true then?

Radiation emanates, and if that radiation is of sufficient energy it hits molecules and will ionize them. Any radiation capable of ionizing a molecule is ionizing radiation?

Sorry to be so difficult, just trying to understand here.

the things around you home are likely to main Line frequency 50 or 60 Hz depending on your country, things like the 16KHz flyback transformer in your TV set, electric motors (frequency depends on spin rate and windings connected to the comutator) if you have Compact fluorescent bulbs then you`ll be getting 6 to 7 KHz broadband multi-phasic sweep etc....

So what portion of the electromagnetic spectrum is that, is that radio waves, infrared, gamma waves, etc.?

O.k. Let me see if I understand this.

Radiation emanates, and if that radiation is of sufficient energy it hits molecules and will ionize them. Any radiation capable of ionizing a molecule is ionizing radiation?

i said the opposite. i was talking in terms of energy and frequency. you perhaps thought i mean wavelength.

So then what you mean is that everything from UV through Long Wave radio is capable of ionizing? Does that mean visible light is capable of ionization?

So if I'm using an EMF meter to look for electromagnetic fields around my house, what portion of the electromagnetic field am I looking at?

I guess I'm having a hard time understanding the distinction between what is laid out in the electromagnetic spectrum, and what is given off in electromagnetic fields.

whenever a changing current passes through a conductor you can be certain that it is in the EM spectrum.

So what portion(s) of the electromagentic spectrum do these electromagnetic fields lie in?

no, it has to have enough energy per photon to eject an electron from an orbital.

Are all portions of the electromagnetic spectrum capable of having this kind of energy, including visible light?

its everything from ultra violet down that isn't ionizing.

So are you saying that Ultra Violet, X-Rays and Gamma Rays are not ionizing? Ultra Violet light can be ionizing?

So does anyone have a definition of ionizing radiation?

A molecule can be ionized. Does the ionization coming off that molecule constitute the radiation then?