Friday, July 2, 2010
Public understanding of electromagnetic radiation seems to be about 700
years behind the times. So I have taken ample literary license in telling
the story of the Siege of Calais in 1346. It illustrates the distinction
between the intensity of electromagnetic radiation and the energy of
photons. The English King, Edward III, alluded to earlier royal-bedroom
diplomacy in claiming to be King of France as well as England. Under
French rules, however, sleeping around was no big deal and the French King,
Philip, refused to give his crown to Edward. However, Edward had five
times as many men as Philip; so he ordered the entire army to assemble on
the Dover cliffs and throw stones at France. That is, the "intensity" of
the bombardment was very high. The closest point was Calais. The shore in
Calais is indeed littered with rocks even today. But are these English
rocks thrown by Edwards men, or indigenous French rocks? English
geologists have launched a ten year study of the rocks to find out.
Kinesiologists say it's impossible to throw a rock 34 kilometers. That is,
the "energy" was much too low to reach Calais.
In her New York Times column last Friday, Dowd took the cell phone/cancer
issue to a whole new level of ignorance. She askes if technological
advances "are really time bombs?" Provocative question, but why would she
include cigarettes? Tobacco wasnt developed, it was "borrowed" from
primitive tribes about 400 years ago. The only "advance" has been to prove
scientifically that tobacco is harmful, leading to widespread bans and
warnings. With the decline in smoking, life expectancy in the most advanced
nations has risen to above 80, twice what it is in less developed
countries. So what is the time bomb she talks about? Like rocks thrown at
Calais from Dover, microwaves are far below the cancer energy threshold.
That threshold lies at the extreme blue/ultraviolet end of the visible
spectrum. That's why you don't want to spend as much time in the sun as I
did, and certainly don't want to use a tanning salon. Your cell phone is
rude and intrusive and a hazard if used on the road, but it won't cause
cancer. Why has the media consistently failed to explain this simple fact
is a mystery.
The allegations arose following the hacking of private e-mails at the
University of East Anglia in the UK. It seemed to be a case of arresting
the victim. A single line, stated out of context, sounded like something
it wasn't.
|
