[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [TenTec] 95% Shield

To: "Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment" <tentec@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [TenTec] 95% Shield
From: "Ron Castro" <ronc@sonic.net>
Reply-to: Ron Castro <ronc@sonic.net>, Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment <tentec@contesting.com>
Date: Thu, 22 May 2008 07:52:34 -0700
List-post: <tentec@contesting.com">mailto:tentec@contesting.com>
The frequencies of ionizing radiation are well above the visible light 
frequencies and part way through the ultra violet range.  Power levels are 

Last I heard, there were no repeaters on those wavelengths in my area :-)

         Ron  N6IE

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Carter" <k8vt@ameritech.net>
To: "Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment" <tentec@contesting.com>
Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2008 5:37 AM
Subject: Re: [TenTec] 95% Shield

> Gary Hoffman wrote:
>>  And, of course, as you already know, RF that is high enough in
>>  frequency is in fact ionizing radiation.
> Gary,
> I did NOT know that.
> How high is "high enough in frequency"? What power levels? (Could just a
> milliwatt or two of RF have enough power to cause ionization, no matter
> what the frequency?)
>>  It does not have to come from a "nuclear source".
> This could be x-rays. Is that what you are referring to? However, you
> stated above "*RF* that is high enough...", and I don't know if I would
> define x-rays as 'RF'. Or maybe the whole issue is just a matter of
> semantics.
> Could you please elaborate a bit if you are alluding to something other
> than x-rays or if you are calling x-rays 'RF'.
> Thanks,
> Carter  K8VT
> _______________________________________________
> TenTec mailing list
> TenTec@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec

TenTec mailing list

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>