Call Search
     

New to Ham Radio?
My Profile

Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
Strays
Survey Question

Operating
Contesting
DX Cluster Spots
Propagation

Resources
Calendar
Classifieds
Ham Exams
Ham Links
List Archives
News Articles
Product Reviews
QSL Managers

Site Info
eHam Help (FAQ)
Support the site
The eHam Team
Advertising Info
Vision Statement
About eHam.net

   Home   Help Search  
Pages: Prev 1 [2]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Indoor Apartment Antenna and RF exposure  (Read 7694 times)
G3RZP
Member

Posts: 4965




Ignore
« Reply #15 on: December 25, 2012, 12:16:55 PM »

With 50 years of exposure for me and a relative with even more exposure to very high power RF having worked for years at HF QRO tx stations, (he's 86), I don't believe that HF RF exposure gives me a greater cancer risk than automotive emissions and all the other claimed carcinogens.

There's a lot more proven carcinogens out there that we are all exposed to....
Logged
AC5UP
Member

Posts: 3956




Ignore
« Reply #16 on: December 25, 2012, 12:33:38 PM »

But what if it's discovered that RF exposure encourages a false sense of understanding the effects of RF exposure?

Would that be like asking drug users to document the effect of hallucinogenic drugs while they're under the influence of hallucinogens....?

Just Sayin'.   Roll Eyes
Logged

Never change a password on a Friday                
K4SAV
Member

Posts: 1851




Ignore
« Reply #17 on: December 25, 2012, 05:17:20 PM »

A mag loop has much higher levels of H fields than a larger antenna.  A mag loop isn't all H fields either.  At distances of about 11% of a wavelength to 1 wavelength from the loop, the loop has more E fields than a small horizontal dipole.  So much for the "magnetic" loop myth.
http://www.w8ji.com/magnetic_receiving_loops.htm

I seriously doubt there is anyone on this forum that is qualified to determine the RF levels which are safe, or not, but there seems to be some who are willing to offer an opinion.  Advising anyone to ignore the rules is not something an elmer should do.  If you want to speculate about what is safe, go right ahead, but don't advise anyone to violate the rules based on your opinion.

There are several reasons for abiding by the rules.  That is all you have to do.  Of course you could ignore the rules, and hope maybe some yoyo won't drag you into court and claim you caused his cancer, and then you could have the unenviable task of trying to prove that levels exceeding the rules are safe.  I would much rather give the yoyo the task of trying to prove that levels less than the rules are not safe.

Jerry, K4SAV
Logged
VA7CPC
Member

Posts: 2414




Ignore
« Reply #18 on: December 25, 2012, 06:51:21 PM »

Small Magnetic Loop = no electrical field.  Well, minimal.
. . .

Maxwell's equations govern the relationship between magnetic and electrical fields.

If the antenna radiates, it produces _both_ electrical and magnetic fields.    You can't have one without the other.

I second a previous comment - run the numbers through an RF-exposure calculator.  That will either relieve your worries, or show that you have something to worry about.  I think there's one in the "public" section of the ARRL website -- arrl.org   .

.               charles
Logged
RFDOG
Member

Posts: 23




Ignore
« Reply #19 on: December 30, 2012, 07:58:20 AM »

Oh get over yourselves...
Logged
WA8JNM
Member

Posts: 175




Ignore
« Reply #20 on: December 30, 2012, 09:16:59 AM »

AC5UP:

Very funny!

Dave
Logged
Pages: Prev 1 [2]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!