Power-dressing man leaves trail of destruction
Dennis
Dennis
Ralf Ullrich
No.
--
We can live without religion and meditation,
but we cannot survive without human affection.
Dalai Lama
Hugh Gibbons
wrote:
> Dennis wrote:
> > Is this for real?
> >
> > http://tinyurl.com/a7zs7
> >
> > Dennis
>
> No.
There is so much improper terminology, written by somebody
who doesn't understand electricity, that it certainly bears
little resemblance to any actual events. At best, it's wildly
exaggerated. It's probably possible for a spark from a person's
clothes to set things alight. Certainly, highly inflammable
materials like gases or vapors. But lighting carpet from static
electricity? Not likely.
==> IT'S NOT TO LATE TO START PAYING ATTENTION <==
Hatunen
The versions tend to vary. See
http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5478,16627614%255E2862,00.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/4252692.stm
http://www.abc.net.au/news/items/200509/1461751.htm?westernvic
http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,,1572152,00.html
************* DAVE HATUNEN (hat...@cox.net) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
Ralf Ullrich
> The versions tend to vary. See
> http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5478,16627614%255E2862,00.html
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/4252692.stm
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/items/200509/1461751.htm?westernvic
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,,1572152,00.html
Well, I hardly see there much variation.
40.000 Volts of static electricity is not that much if the air is dry enough. Look at table 2 of
http://www.esda.org/basics/part1.cfm . And while the energy contained in these charges is sufficient
to damage electronic equipment and possibly it might be enough to ignite highly flammable materials
(like fuel vapors).
However, a burning match certainly produces thousand times more energy and it is hard enough to
produce scorch marks of the size of a 10p coin with them. Therefor I'm sure it is impossible for
static electricity to produce noticable scorch marks (although you could almost certainly find them
under a microscope).
cu
D.F. Manno
Dennis <tsalag...@asus.net> wrote:
> Is this for real?
>
> http://tinyurl.com/a7zs7
Yes, it really is a URL.
--
D.F. Manno | dfm2a...@spymac.com
The worst government is the most moral. One composed of cynics is often
very tolerant and humane. But when fanatics are on top there is no limit
to oppression.--H.L. Mencken, "Minority Report" (1956)
Lon
electricity it is difficult to give it much credence.
40K volts is no big thing, what sets the fire is the amperage.
As for the jacket retaining a charge after being removed, my guess
is that some Ozzie is having a bit of fun with a local reporter.
Lon
Someone needs to check that jacket for a series of nylon belts being
driven in loops inside the covering.
Hatunen
wrote:
>Hatunen wrote:
>> The versions tend to vary. See
>> http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5478,16627614%255E2862,00.html
>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/4252692.stm
>> http://www.abc.net.au/news/items/200509/1461751.htm?westernvic
>> http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,,1572152,00.html
>
>Well, I hardly see there much variation.
The accounts vary by voltage, 30KV, 36KV and 40KV, each one
supposedly measured by a policeman, or is it a fireman, who just
happened to have an instrument capable of measuring a static
charge without actually discharging it.
>40.000 Volts of static electricity is not that much if the air is dry enough. Look at table 2 of
>http://www.esda.org/basics/part1.cfm . And while the energy contained in these charges is sufficient
>to damage electronic equipment and possibly it might be enough to ignite highly flammable materials
>(like fuel vapors).
Even a 40KV static charge isn't out of the question, depending on
the materials rubbing together (around here it's usaully from
leather shoe soles rubbing across a carpet). 40KV would be a
spark a little over a centimeter in length even in dry air, and I
think I've drawn the occasional centimer spark when reahing for a
doorknob.
>However, a burning match certainly produces thousand times more energy and it is hard enough to
>produce scorch marks of the size of a 10p coin with them. Therefor I'm sure it is impossible for
>static electricity to produce noticable scorch marks (although you could almost certainly find them
>under a microscope).
If you have a van de Graf generator you might get burnt marks on
a carpet.
ron saarna
"D.F. Manno" <dfm2a...@spymac.com> wrote in message
news:dfm2a3l0t2-0756E...@news.x-privat.org...
> In article <Xns96D4AB0D6C74ts...@130.133.1.4>,
> Dennis <tsalag...@asus.net> wrote:
>
> > Is this for real?
> >
> > http://tinyurl.com/a7zs7
>
> Yes, it really is a URL.
Well, duh. He was clearly asking if was tiny.
Narelle
> Dennis wrote:
>
>> Is this for real?
>> http://tinyurl.com/a7zs7
>>
>> Dennis
>
>
> No.
>
http://smh.com.au/articles/2005/09/16/1126750129173.html?oneclick=true
N
Kevin D. Quitt
>electricity? Not likely.
Clearly you've never experienced the luxury of nitro-cellulose rugs.
--
_
Kevin D. Quitt Ke...@Quitt.net
96.37% of all statistics are made up
Lon
> Hatunen wrote:
>
>> The versions tend to vary. See
>> http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5478,16627614%255E2862,00.html
>>
>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/4252692.stm
>> http://www.abc.net.au/news/items/200509/1461751.htm?westernvic
>> http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,,1572152,00.html
>
>
> Well, I hardly see there much variation.
>
> 40.000 Volts of static electricity is not that much if the air is dry
> enough. Look at table 2 of http://www.esda.org/basics/part1.cfm . And
> while the energy contained in these charges is sufficient to damage
> electronic equipment and possibly it might be enough to ignite highly
> flammable materials (like fuel vapors).
But Ralf, these folks claim
"40,000 volts, which is one step shy of spontaneous combustion, where
his clothes would have self-ignited"
>
> However, a burning match certainly produces thousand times more energy
> and it is hard enough to produce scorch marks of the size of a 10p coin
> with them. Therefor I'm sure it is impossible for static electricity to
> produce noticable scorch marks (although you could almost certainly find
> them under a microscope).
I've seen Wimshurst discharges that could darken wood, but it was a
rather large Wimshurst with a lot of current behind it.
Typical hobbyist Van De Graaf just tickles a good one.
I'm waiting for someone to discover the pack of Leyden jars the
guy obviously had built into the jacket in order to get any
appreciable current behind the alleged sparks.
Dennis
> Ralf Ullrich wrote:
>> Dennis wrote:
>>
>>> Is this for real?
>>> http://tinyurl.com/a7zs7
>>
>> No.
>>
> Also reported in the smh:
> http://smh.com.au/articles/2005/09/16/1126750129173.html?oneclick=true
> N
Hmmm... '"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," Mr Barton said. "I've been firefighting for over
35 years and I've never come across anything like this."' And Han Solo
made the Kessell run in less than 12 parsecs, too... Mr. Barton doesn't
know a lot about electricity either. James Randi, where are you?
Dennis
R H Draney
>
> Hmmm... '"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,"
And one molecule away from plastic?...r
Narelle
>>http://tinyurl.com/a7zs7
>>http://smh.com.au/articles/2005/09/16/1126750129173.html?oneclick=true
>>http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5478,16627614%255E2862,00.html
>>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/4252692.stm
>>http://www.abc.net.au/news/items/200509/1461751.htm?westernvic
>>http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,,1572152,00.html
>
>
> http://www.buzzle.com/editorials/9-17-2005-76988.asp
> http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2005/09/16/report_man_burns_carpet_with_static_shock?mode=PF
> http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/news/archive/2005/09/16/international/i170443D31.DTL
> http://today.reuters.com/news/newsarticle.aspx?type=oddlyEnoughNews&summit=TokyoTechSummit05&storyid=2005-09-16T143042Z_01_EIC652134_RTRIDST_0_ODD-AUSTRALIA-ELECTRICITY-DC.XML
> http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4851077&ft=1&f=3
>
> I heard it on NPR so it must be true. There must be something up
> here. Several news outlets have carried the story, and none have
> given retractions or taken the story off their website. Therefore
> this is not a hoax. My guess is that Ozzies make carpet out of highly
> flammable[1] stuff, and it caught fire from static discharge. From
> there, the story has been morphed by reporters who are clueless about
> science. (If it were a hoax, the science would be more believable.)
> So reporters piece together factual phrases into this fantastic
> nonsense.
>
> [1] inflammable
Well, there does appear to be an "F. Clewer" who lives near Warnambool
http://www.whitepages.com.au/wp/search/results.jhtml?_DARGS=%2Fwp%2Fsearch%2FresSearchInput.jhtml
There is also an "H. Barton":
http://www.whitepages.com.au/wp/search/results.jhtml?_DARGS=%2Fwp%2Fsearch%2FsearchAgainInput.jhtml
Henry is OIC of the CFA:
http://www.warrnambool.vic.gov.au/Directory/s2_Item.asp?MKey=67&S3Key=22&h=0
I guess someone could give them a call.
N
Derek Lyons
>There must be something up here. Several news outlets have
>carried the story,
Given the tendency for news outlets to simply publish what comes off
the wire, widespread repetion is essentially a useless metric for
determining if a story is valid or not.
D.
--
Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.
-Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings.
Oct 5th, 2004 JDL
Burroughs Guy
> "Burroughs Guy" <BurroughsG...@aol.com.invalid> wrote:
>
> >There must be something up here. Several news outlets have
> >carried the story,
>
> Given the tendency for news outlets to simply publish what comes off
> the wire, widespread repetion is essentially a useless metric for
> determining if a story is valid or not.
You oversnipped me. I said "Several news outlets have carried the
story, and none have given retractions or taken the story off their
website." A bogus story can get picked up by all the services and
make its way to hundreds of news outlets. However, when the story is
bogus eventually people find that out. This one is weird enough that
We Would Know By Now(TM)
--
Burroughs Guy
Vaguer memories available upon request
John Schmitt
<BurroughsG...@aol.com.invalid> wrote:
[scads of URLs]
> I heard it on NPR so it must be true. There must be something up
> here. Several news outlets have carried the story, and none have
> given retractions or taken the story off their website.
It is also now on Netscape's site.
John "for whatever that means" Schmitt
--
Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
Ken Ward
Not necessarily. This is a funny season story. It can spread & not
be knocked out for ages. Interestingly enough, the one place I cannot
find the story is here in Victoria. I found it on newsgroups first, &
then on various national sites, but locally not at all.
A quote is alledgedly from the local fireman - this is Country Fire
Authority territory & it is extremely unlikely that he would have any
equipment capable of measuring static electricity - no call for it.
Another quote is alledgedly from a Sydney University professor. If
this had originated in Victoria, I would have expected quotes from a
University professor from any of the four major Universities in
Melbourne.
For the physics against it, see
http://www.advancedphysics.org/viewthread.php?tid=2328.
[In summary, well down the thread, a physics person has calculated the
static charge required to burn one small patch of carpet as in excess
of a tenth of a millicoulomb. However, the typical static charge on a
person is of the order of one microcoulomb. So on a wet day with high
humidity, this person could generate 100 time the normal static charge
with each step he took. I'll bet there are a lot of people looking
for that jacket!!]
Ernie Wright
> Not necessarily. This is a funny season story. It can spread & not
> be knocked out for ages. Interestingly enough, the one place I cannot
> find the story is here in Victoria. I found it on newsgroups first, &
> then on various national sites, but locally not at all.
I've been following it in the Warrnambool Standard,
http://the.standard.net.au/articles/2005/09/16/1126750111141.html
http://the.standard.net.au/articles/2005/09/20/1126982034295.html
and if nothing else comes of it, I've at least memorized the interesting
spelling of a faraway town.
- Ernie http://home.comcast.net/~erniew
Lon
> "Burroughs Guy" <BurroughsG...@aol.com.invalid> wrote:
>
>
>>There must be something up here. Several news outlets have
>>carried the story,
>
>
> Given the tendency for news outlets to simply publish what comes off
> the wire, widespread repetion is essentially a useless metric for
> determining if a story is valid or not.
This law of "stupidity is plagiarized according to Sturgeon's Law"
tends to apply most when hyperbolic expressions such as 40K volts
being just shy of spontaneous combustion are bandied about by
the illiterati.
Dennis
>> Not necessarily. This is a funny season story. It can spread & not
>> be knocked out for ages. Interestingly enough, the one place I cannot
>> find the story is here in Victoria. I found it on newsgroups first, &
>> then on various national sites, but locally not at all.
>
> I've been following it in the Warrnambool Standard,
>
> http://the.standard.net.au/articles/2005/09/20/1126982034295.html
"only to discover the apparent cause was a Dennington man with more
than 30,000 volts of static electricity built up in his jumper." So the
voltage has come down... Maybe they re-calibrated the meter?
"Mr Barton said he also received inquiries from the Alfred Hospital,
which was interested in the case and the types of materials Mr Clewer was
wearing in case it was of use in the treatment of divers suffering the
bends using a hyperbaric chamber." WTF??? Do they need to insulate divers
in a hyperbaric chamber?
Dennis
Ernie Wright
>> http://the.standard.net.au/articles/2005/09/20/1126982034295.html
>
> "Mr Barton said he also received inquiries from the Alfred
> Hospital, which was interested in the case and the types of materials
> Mr Clewer was wearing in case it was of use in the treatment of divers
> suffering the bends using a hyperbaric chamber." WTF??? Do they need
> to insulate divers in a hyperbaric chamber?
I wasn't sure what they meant by that either, but presumably they're
concerned about static discharges in the elevated pressure, pure oxygen
environment of a hyperbaric chamber. Assuming Static Man had hit upon
an especially static-prone combination of clothing materials, the
hospital would want to avoid dressing patients in them.
I don't think they'll learn anything useful, though. The story looks to
me like a bit of collective delusion. The capacitance of people and
their clothing just doesn't appear to be high enough to burn carpet with
static.
The carpet "burns," the crackling sounds, and Static Man's jacket might
not have anything to do with each other. It was raining and hailing at
the time, according to a couple of the accounts. The sounds might have
been lightning or weather-related power surges, or the rain shorting an
outdoor wire. The carpet spots might be coffee stains.
The only person that put them together initially was Static Man. As far
as I can tell, nobody who was there turned to look at him when they
heard the sounds; nobody witnessed the creation of the carpet spots or
saw sparks from Static Man's feet. The whole narrative was assembled by
Static Man after the fact and then reinforced by "experts" on the scene.
- Ernie http://home.comcast.net/~erniew
Dennis
>> "Mr Barton said he also received inquiries from the Alfred
>> Hospital, which was interested in the case and the types of materials
>> Mr Clewer was wearing in case it was of use in the treatment of
divers
>> suffering the bends using a hyperbaric chamber." WTF??? Do they
need
>> to insulate divers in a hyperbaric chamber?
>
> I wasn't sure what they meant by that either, but presumably they're
> concerned about static discharges in the elevated pressure, pure
oxygen
> environment of a hyperbaric chamber. Assuming Static Man had hit upon
> an especially static-prone combination of clothing materials, the
> hospital would want to avoid dressing patients in them.
I realized the same thing after a bit. Fires in a hyperbaric
chamber would be bad news indeed.
>
> I don't think they'll learn anything useful, though. The story looks
to
> me like a bit of collective delusion. The capacitance of people and
> their clothing just doesn't appear to be high enough to burn carpet
with
> static.
>
> The carpet "burns," the crackling sounds, and Static Man's jacket
might
> not have anything to do with each other. It was raining and hailing
at
> the time, according to a couple of the accounts. The sounds might
have
> been lightning or weather-related power surges, or the rain shorting
an
> outdoor wire. The carpet spots might be coffee stains.
>
> The only person that put them together initially was Static Man. As
far
> as I can tell, nobody who was there turned to look at him when they
> heard the sounds; nobody witnessed the creation of the carpet spots or
> saw sparks from Static Man's feet. The whole narrative was assembled
by
> Static Man after the fact and then reinforced by "experts" on the
scene.
That sounds about right. If it was raining, it seems quite
unlikely that he would have sparked at all. You only make sparks when
it's quite dry. I grew up in Kansas USA and learned that from
experience.
Dennis