[Amps] Here's a Shocker
John Lawson
jpl15 at panix.com
Mon Nov 15 16:19:46 EST 2004
Dennis - check how things are quoted - I wasn't responding to anything
you wrote.
On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 Dennis12Amplify at aol.com wrote:
>
> In a message dated 11/15/04 2:13:55 PM Central Standard Time,
> wlfuqu00 at 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 at 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
More information about the Amps
mailing list