posted on Apr, 10 2010 @ 01:01 PM
reply to post by rufusdrak
First off, let me say I in no way support the original experiment posted in this thread. I've posted twice on the ridiculousness of that paper and
its use of an EEG with a high impedance probe to detect "ocular extramission".
Now, as to the emission of ELF, let us consider a low frequency emission at we're all familiar with, although maybe slightly less "extra low". In
the U.S. our electricity is transmitted at 60 Hz, which has a wavelength of 5000 kilometers or roughly 3106 miles. I think where we're running into
some confusion here is the difference between emission and efficient emission. Let's assume that to be an efficient emitter of 60 Hz EM waves a
monopole antenna needs to be at least 1/10th of the wavelength of the signal. Then that would require an antenna 310 miles long! But do we encounter
60 Hz interference from "antennas" that are shorter than 310 miles? Absolutely! We can't get rid of the stuff, its everywhere. An "antenna" need
not be a significant portion of the signals wavelength to transmit that signal, it will just not be a very good emitter. Like I said before, there is
nothing preventing your body from transmitting a signal, but it would not be high in magnitude at all.
This is descibed in the article posted by ucalien, not only did they use massive antennas (to be an efficient receiver) but they used a
transimpedance amplifier on the detector with a gain of 45 dB! Also, you do not need an RF receiver to detect ELF, your detection system only needs to
have significant bandwidth to resolve the desired signal. The convenient implications of this idea is that they were able to use electronics and
software indented for normal audio frequencies, think cheap opamps and a decent computer sound card.
As an electrical engineer I can tell you that while the article posted using an EEG to detect eye beams is absolutely terrible, the article from the
Czech Republic that detects ELF from the human body has a little bit more engineering rigor. In my opinion the proper way to do the experiment would
have been a differential measurement employing two identical antennas, one with a man present, one without, in order to suppress noise that is common
to both antennas (common mode rejection). Also the low-frequency bandwidth of the electronics used should be clearly stated as most audio frequency
electronics begin to roll off below 20 Hz.