EM weapons - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

archpaladin · 12-07-2004, 12:10 AM

The post here on rail guns got me speculating......anybody know anything about EM weapons? I mean seriously devastating, conspiracy theory causing, arms race qualifying, global dominating type weapons.

For those who want to do some reading:
http://www.raven1.net/arms.htm
http://www.cheniere.org/books/analysis/history.htm

Anybody think there's any validity to the scare of harmful EM use in warfare?

PS: I don't recall this being discussed anywhere before.....if I'm just repeating something, tell me to shut up.

MrTuffPaws · 12-07-2004, 06:51 PM

1920s style death rays. Didn't Tesla invent them?

Willravel · 12-07-2004, 08:45 PM

Sounds a lot like the Tesla "Death" Ray. It's really amazing how ahead of time Tesla was in the areas of physics and engineering, specifically in dealing with high voltage alternting currents.
Scientists believe that the Tesla Ray was a focused beam of energy. I'll explain.
There are three means (if not more) of directly transmitting electrical energy from one location to a remote location in a "wireless" fashion:
1. The broadcasting of electromagnetic waves from point A to point B - where those waves excite atoms to produce electricity. This method is feasible for power transmission and weapons applications, but unfortunately is impractical to technology except in the microwave region of the spectrum. Tesla's experiment, being primarlly alternator-based and not using any solid-state components, could not have reached a high enough frequency by orders of magnitude to transmit microwave band energy. So that's a no.
2. Direct-current transmission of energy from source to target. This is the principle of particle accelerators - the electrons or other particles are moved in a linear fashion through the accelerator, to be directed at a target. This method of wireless transmission was also impractical to Tesla, because it requires a mechanical arrangment that is monumentally expensive, complicated, and energy-consumptive, and and produces a beam that is unfocusable, easily distorted and dissapated, and has an effective distance measured in feet, not miles.
3 Alternating current transmission of power - the longitudinal wave interference device. An alternating current at a high voltage - such as those that Tesla worked on in his career (was my hint too obvious?) - could be a means of providing transmission of power between remote locations with substantially smaller losses. Alternating atmospheric currrents, however, have several drawbacks - including the fact that they are inherently unfocused in nature. The possible solutions to this problem will be discussed below.

There are a few various possibilities for the transmission of power, and Tesla probably entertained them all. The real problem, of course, was simply how to get the electricity to point b. Tesla wouldn't have even cared if it came from point a, which brings two choices to mind. Firstly, the transmission of power from point a to point b requires a few things. Since electricity moves from a point with a high potential to a point with a low - or opposite - potential, it was in Tesla's best interests to have the target point b at a lower electrical potential than the surrounding environment - otherwise the electrons would get lost after only a few feet. Tesla would have considered this potential difference to be the only thing of any import to the transmission of power, and hence, why move the electricity from point a at all - simply make point b a lower potential than it's surrounding environment.

Tesla would have wanted a device that could create a positive potential around the target object. Once that target was ionized to a high enough voltage, electrons from the surrounding environment would simply flood into the target due to electrostatic attraction. Once he had created a device that could positively ionize an object at a distance, he simply had to arrange a terminal at point a with a high opposite potential to supply electrons, which would then literally be pulled to the target source. Aparently, the easiest way to do this also tends to focus the beam of electrons, creating a direct bolt of lightning from point a to point b (pretty cool, eh?).

The Weapon

Tesla's "Death" Ray lies somewhere inbetween wave mechanics and electrical engineering - and is thus easily missed by the increasingly specialized numbers of scientists and technicians in the world today. He basically used a Fresnal Lens to focus a 'longitudinal wave', hence creating a focused electrostatic potential at the target. This 'fresnel' effect is also responsible for focusing of the subsequent electron beam from point a to point b.

Tesla's concept used longitudinal waves - which are not really waves at all. Longitudinal waves correspond to cariations in electrostatic potential - such as those produced by an AC curent traveling through the atmosphere. Longitudinal electrical waves can be focused with a fresnel lense like ordinary waves, meaning that the wave amplitudes add at the focal point - hence, the environment recieves a theoretical potential of -15 volts, and the target recieves -30 volts. A multizoned fresnel lens would undoubtedly increase this focal potential a great deal more than a single zoned lens, but a single zoned lens has an infinite number of focal points at regularly spaced intervals, whereas a muntizoned lens has only one.

It's not really ana EM weapon, it's electrostatic, but I figured it's what you're looking for.

archpaladin · 12-07-2004, 11:03 PM

Particularly fascinating information. I always thought Tesla was a genius.

I was actually referring to anything EM in nature that could be used for potentially destructive ends. For example, there's an instrument that I can't remember the name of, which is used in scientific studies, and it generates a powerful magnetic field at a localized section of the brain, disrupting all neuronal activity there for a set period of time. It's used in studies to help determine what happens when particular areas of the brain don't work, but it has to be used carefully, as any miscalculation could cause serious harm to the person (ie. shut down neurons involved in respiration).

That, or things like ELF-generating weapons that trigger gag reflexes in human subjects (tested in France, I believe).....you know, stuff that really shouldn't be used in weaponry but that some military whacko decided would be good for just the right kind of situation.

Lebell · 12-08-2004, 05:38 AM

Guess what?

http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99991470
-----------------------------------------

Microwave beam weapon to disperse crowds

10:07 29 October 01

Tests of a controversial weapon that is designed to heat people's skin with a microwave beam have shown that it can disperse crowds. But critics are not convinced the system is safe.

Last week, the Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL) in New Mexico finished testing the system on human volunteers. The Air Force now wants to use this Active Denial Technology (ADT), which it says is non-lethal, for peacekeeping or riot control at "relatively long range" - possibly from low-flying aircraft.

ADT uses a 2-metre dish to create a narrow beam of microwaves that can be scanned across a crowd or even aimed at individuals. AFRL is using infrared photography to analyse the heating effect on the volunteers' bodies.

AFRL says that the 3-millimetre wavelength radiation penetrates only 0.3 millimetres into the skin, rapidly heating the surface above the 45 °C pain threshold. At 50 °C, they say the pain reflex makes people pull away automatically in less than a second - it's said to feel like fleetingly touching a hot light bulb. Someone would have to stay in the beam for 250 seconds before it burnt the skin, the lab says, giving "ample margin between intolerable pain and causing a burn".

Little data

But critics question the AFRL's claims that the weapon's undisclosed exposure levels are safe. John Pike of think tank Globalsecurity.org fears that the beam power needed to scare people may be too close to the level that would injure them.

Air Force scientists helped set the present skin safety threshold of 10 milliwatts per square centimetre in the early 1990s, when little data was available, says Louis Slesin, editor of Microwave News.

That limit covers exposure to steady fields for several minutes to an hour - but heating a layer of skin 0.3 mm thick to 50 °C in just one second requires much higher power and may pose risks to the cornea, which is more sensitive than skin. A study published last year in the journal Health Physics showed that exposure to 2 watts per square centimetre for three seconds could damage the corneas of rhesus monkeys.

Jeff Hecht, Boston

Willravel · 12-09-2004, 09:27 AM

Wow. Good post, Lebell. Those air force guys weren't paying attention in physics class though. 3 mil wavelength is dangerous. If they use this on a crowd, anyone with a pacemaker will probably die. This is a wonderful example of why I hate the governments weapons programs. I say test it on the jackass who put this torture into play.

12-07-2004, 12:10 AM	#1 (permalink)
archpaladin Crazy	EM weapons The post here on rail guns got me speculating......anybody know anything about EM weapons? I mean seriously devastating, conspiracy theory causing, arms race qualifying, global dominating type weapons. For those who want to do some reading: http://www.raven1.net/arms.htm http://www.cheniere.org/books/analysis/history.htm Anybody think there's any validity to the scare of harmful EM use in warfare? PS: I don't recall this being discussed anywhere before.....if I'm just repeating something, tell me to shut up.

12-08-2004, 05:38 AM	#5 (permalink)
Lebell Cracking the Whip Location: Sexymama's arms...	Guess what? http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99991470 ----------------------------------------- Microwave beam weapon to disperse crowds 10:07 29 October 01 Tests of a controversial weapon that is designed to heat people's skin with a microwave beam have shown that it can disperse crowds. But critics are not convinced the system is safe. Last week, the Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL) in New Mexico finished testing the system on human volunteers. The Air Force now wants to use this Active Denial Technology (ADT), which it says is non-lethal, for peacekeeping or riot control at "relatively long range" - possibly from low-flying aircraft. ADT uses a 2-metre dish to create a narrow beam of microwaves that can be scanned across a crowd or even aimed at individuals. AFRL is using infrared photography to analyse the heating effect on the volunteers' bodies. AFRL says that the 3-millimetre wavelength radiation penetrates only 0.3 millimetres into the skin, rapidly heating the surface above the 45 °C pain threshold. At 50 °C, they say the pain reflex makes people pull away automatically in less than a second - it's said to feel like fleetingly touching a hot light bulb. Someone would have to stay in the beam for 250 seconds before it burnt the skin, the lab says, giving "ample margin between intolerable pain and causing a burn". Little data But critics question the AFRL's claims that the weapon's undisclosed exposure levels are safe. John Pike of think tank Globalsecurity.org fears that the beam power needed to scare people may be too close to the level that would injure them. Air Force scientists helped set the present skin safety threshold of 10 milliwatts per square centimetre in the early 1990s, when little data was available, says Louis Slesin, editor of Microwave News. That limit covers exposure to steady fields for several minutes to an hour - but heating a layer of skin 0.3 mm thick to 50 °C in just one second requires much higher power and may pose risks to the cornea, which is more sensitive than skin. A study published last year in the journal Health Physics showed that exposure to 2 watts per square centimetre for three seconds could damage the corneas of rhesus monkeys. Jeff Hecht, Boston __________________ "Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU! Please Donate!

12-07-2004, 06:51 PM	#2 (permalink)
MrTuffPaws Addict Location: NorCal	1920s style death rays. Didn't Tesla invent them?

12-07-2004, 08:45 PM	#3 (permalink)
Willravel ... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.	Sounds a lot like the Tesla "Death" Ray. It's really amazing how ahead of time Tesla was in the areas of physics and engineering, specifically in dealing with high voltage alternting currents. Scientists believe that the Tesla Ray was a focused beam of energy. I'll explain. There are three means (if not more) of directly transmitting electrical energy from one location to a remote location in a "wireless" fashion: 1. The broadcasting of electromagnetic waves from point A to point B - where those waves excite atoms to produce electricity. This method is feasible for power transmission and weapons applications, but unfortunately is impractical to technology except in the microwave region of the spectrum. Tesla's experiment, being primarlly alternator-based and not using any solid-state components, could not have reached a high enough frequency by orders of magnitude to transmit microwave band energy. So that's a no. 2. Direct-current transmission of energy from source to target. This is the principle of particle accelerators - the electrons or other particles are moved in a linear fashion through the accelerator, to be directed at a target. This method of wireless transmission was also impractical to Tesla, because it requires a mechanical arrangment that is monumentally expensive, complicated, and energy-consumptive, and and produces a beam that is unfocusable, easily distorted and dissapated, and has an effective distance measured in feet, not miles. 3 Alternating current transmission of power - the longitudinal wave interference device. An alternating current at a high voltage - such as those that Tesla worked on in his career (was my hint too obvious?) - could be a means of providing transmission of power between remote locations with substantially smaller losses. Alternating atmospheric currrents, however, have several drawbacks - including the fact that they are inherently unfocused in nature. The possible solutions to this problem will be discussed below. There are a few various possibilities for the transmission of power, and Tesla probably entertained them all. The real problem, of course, was simply how to get the electricity to point b. Tesla wouldn't have even cared if it came from point a, which brings two choices to mind. Firstly, the transmission of power from point a to point b requires a few things. Since electricity moves from a point with a high potential to a point with a low - or opposite - potential, it was in Tesla's best interests to have the target point b at a lower electrical potential than the surrounding environment - otherwise the electrons would get lost after only a few feet. Tesla would have considered this potential difference to be the only thing of any import to the transmission of power, and hence, why move the electricity from point a at all - simply make point b a lower potential than it's surrounding environment. Tesla would have wanted a device that could create a positive potential around the target object. Once that target was ionized to a high enough voltage, electrons from the surrounding environment would simply flood into the target due to electrostatic attraction. Once he had created a device that could positively ionize an object at a distance, he simply had to arrange a terminal at point a with a high opposite potential to supply electrons, which would then literally be pulled to the target source. Aparently, the easiest way to do this also tends to focus the beam of electrons, creating a direct bolt of lightning from point a to point b (pretty cool, eh?). The Weapon Tesla's "Death" Ray lies somewhere inbetween wave mechanics and electrical engineering - and is thus easily missed by the increasingly specialized numbers of scientists and technicians in the world today. He basically used a Fresnal Lens to focus a 'longitudinal wave', hence creating a focused electrostatic potential at the target. This 'fresnel' effect is also responsible for focusing of the subsequent electron beam from point a to point b. Tesla's concept used longitudinal waves - which are not really waves at all. Longitudinal waves correspond to cariations in electrostatic potential - such as those produced by an AC curent traveling through the atmosphere. Longitudinal electrical waves can be focused with a fresnel lense like ordinary waves, meaning that the wave amplitudes add at the focal point - hence, the environment recieves a theoretical potential of -15 volts, and the target recieves -30 volts. A multizoned fresnel lens would undoubtedly increase this focal potential a great deal more than a single zoned lens, but a single zoned lens has an infinite number of focal points at regularly spaced intervals, whereas a muntizoned lens has only one. It's not really ana EM weapon, it's electrostatic, but I figured it's what you're looking for.

12-07-2004, 11:03 PM	#4 (permalink)
archpaladin Crazy	Particularly fascinating information. I always thought Tesla was a genius. I was actually referring to anything EM in nature that could be used for potentially destructive ends. For example, there's an instrument that I can't remember the name of, which is used in scientific studies, and it generates a powerful magnetic field at a localized section of the brain, disrupting all neuronal activity there for a set period of time. It's used in studies to help determine what happens when particular areas of the brain don't work, but it has to be used carefully, as any miscalculation could cause serious harm to the person (ie. shut down neurons involved in respiration). That, or things like ELF-generating weapons that trigger gag reflexes in human subjects (tested in France, I believe).....you know, stuff that really shouldn't be used in weaponry but that some military whacko decided would be good for just the right kind of situation.

12-09-2004, 09:27 AM	#6 (permalink)
Willravel ... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.	Wow. Good post, Lebell. Those air force guys weren't paying attention in physics class though. 3 mil wavelength is dangerous. If they use this on a crowd, anyone with a pacemaker will probably die. This is a wonderful example of why I hate the governments weapons programs. I say test it on the jackass who put this torture into play.