Re: [Amps] Here's a Shocker

[John Lawson <jpl15@panix.com>]

  Dennis - check how things are quoted - I wasn't responding to anything 
you wrote.


On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 Dennis12Amplify@aol.com wrote:

> In a message dated 11/15/04 2:13:55 PM Central Standard Time,
> wlfuqu00@uky.edu writes:
>
> * I didn't know that I was that uneducated in that  area.
> * I taught circuit analysis using Boylestad at Morton  College.
> * I held a 1st class FCC license until I received a  'grandfathered' General.
> * Ignorance is bliss I guess......


  What I responded to was this:

> In a message dated 11/13/04 9:40:48 AM Central Standard Time,
> dezrat1242@ispwest.com writes:
>
> Which makes me wonder if it  wouldn't be good to have our AC power
> lines run at about 1000 Hz or  so.  No more shocks, no more accidental
> electrocutions.  The  worst that could happen would be a burn.
> Something to think about,  eh?
>
> I know the arguments against it - transmission loss being the  most
> significant - but someday when houses have their own little  nuclear
> generators and are "off the grid" it might be something to  consider.

  Unless you're participating under two seperate accounts...   ?

And the point remains, that someone who believes that electrocution / 
shock hazards will be mitigated by a slight change in mains frequency 
evidences and distression, and potentially deadly, lack of understanding 
of the basic facts of AC theory, and I was moved by a human concern for 
his personal saftey.


  BTW- is it possible for you to share URLs / Links / Citation to this 
very useful data you refer to? It would help perhaps in an understanding 
of these issues.

  Most of which are (basically) covered in the various question pools for 
modern Ham licences, no?



Cheers

John KB6SCO

_______________________________________________
Amps mailing list
Amps@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps