You'd think I'd know better than to debate some of these folks using my 1960's high school science. Here's the situation:

Someone posted an extremely stupid "CALIFORNIA RADIATION EXPERT: COLUMBIA DISASTER WAS TERRORIST ATTACK" message, copied and pasted from around the nets. I said the article was utter nonsense and the "expert" had no clue what he was talking about because he stated among other things: "Columbia enters into an invisible cloud of extremely high radiation spewing southward from Gakona, Alaska. The cloud of relativistic electrons penetrate deeply into Columbia, instantly causing strange heating on the northern or left side of the spacecraft toward Alaska, both on the left wing and even on the upper left side of the craft near the left cargo bay door."

I debunked this on the grounds that radiation isn't a "cloud of relativistic electrons" (which hit a 10 on my "woo-woo" meter) but rather waves.

Someone stood up for the "relativistic electrons" and challenged me with (spelling mistakes are all theirs): "Wrong! Particle-wave duality in quantum mechanics makes it very clear that particles and waves can under most circumstances not be distinghuised. Point to add: When relativistic electrons are suddenly stopped, for instance by a shuttle, they radiate brehmstralung(German lingo; means Brake-radiation) in the X-ray to gamma ray regime depending a bit on how fast they are."


So my question is: who's right? As far as I know, light radiation is photons and yes, I accept the duality there. I've also heard of particle radiation. But I've never heard of ANY radiation (particularly radiation for weaponry) using "relativistic electrons." That sounds like something somebody made up.

And I've got to admit that I was more than dinked off by the cheezy little scenario where HAARP produces weapons and throgh lax security allows some evil foreign grad student-cum-Al Qaida cell to blow up Columbia using HAARP as a weapon.

(you can find the article here, about halfway down the page: http://www.conspiration.cc/conspirat...n_mystere.html

Well, electrons can certainly be relativistic. However, when they are highly energetic they act more like particles and less like waves (this is similar to photons, in that regard). Brehmsstrahlung radiation is an effect of fast moving electrons, I do agree.

What I don't know about is this "cloud" of relativistic electrons emanating from Alaska. You need to have something to accelerate these bad boys, and I don't know what in Alaska would be doing it. However, I'm not up on my physical geology. Maybe kilopi can help us out. It seems to me, any phenomenon such as that I would have heard of before, but that doesn't mean anything. I've been surprised in the past.

I can pretty much put to bed any rumors of natural production of relativistic electrons in Alaska. I think they're talking about HAARP there, in Gakona. Still...

HAARP doesn't have any kind of equipment to generate a focused particle beam.

No one has demonstrated the ability to keep such a beam reasonable coherent over such a long distance of lower and upper atmosphere.

HAARP didn't even have line-of-sight visibility anywhere near Columbia's reentry path. Waaay over the horizon, even at 200000+ feet. (Ran a quick check with STK to confirm this.)

Of course, I read about some conspircacists who attended an open house at the HAARP facility itself and were still fuming about the big gummint coverup.

I. Never. Stop. Being. Amazed. *sigh*

Thanks, STS! The "over the horizon" will make another good point. We've got someone on that board who follows HAARP obsessively and concludes that twitches in the signals are causing things like earthquakes, airplane disasters, and so forth. It would not surprise me to find that HAARP had been implicated in Bad Fishing Days by some of these folks.

Can someone help me out on the radiation question? ARE radiation waves made up of "relativistic electrons"?

(sigh. 1960's science classes just do NOT cut the mustard.)

If it's a cloud of electrons spewing all the way from Alaska, you wouldn't think it would favor one side of Columbia over the other.

__________________
Everything I need to know I learned through Googling.

How would such a cloud make it through the ionosphere (70 to 400km high)? Wouldn't electrons be highly attracted to the ions? Wouldn't something that intense spectacularly light up the northern skies?

Some comments:

Columbia enters into an invisible cloud of extremely high radiation spewing southward from Gakona, Alaska

What do they mean, by "extremely high"? High in altitude, energy, or is it high on drugs? Looking at the link, the story refers to it as "high radiation" all over the place. This is not a sign of someone who knows what they are talking about.

An "invisible cloud of ... radiation"

"Radiation" is frequently chosen by the media because it sounds worse--I would think a scientist would have referred to it as a "stream of high energy charged particles", and certainly not a "cloud of radiation", invisible or otherwise.

Referring to a stream of relativistic electrons as a "cloud of invisible radiation", is ... well ... kind of right ... sort of. Or is it? Yes, it could be argued that electrons can have wave-like properties, and that EM waves are radiation.
So it's a real iffy thing to say that it's a valid description. The phrasing of it in that way just gives me the impression that the person who wrote it doesn't understand it. A scientist in the field wouldn't call it that.

Bremsstrahlung occurs whenever an electron is deflected in its path by an intense electric field--such as when it passes close to an atomic nucleus. The electron is decelerated in the deflection, losing energy, and the energy lost becomes an emitted photon (hence Bremsstrahlung = "braking radiation").

"strange heating"

What? What's so strange about heating? The use of the word "strange" in this context is inexplicable to me.

Can someone help me out on the radiation question? ARE radiation waves made up of "relativistic electrons"?

(sigh. 1960's science classes just do NOT cut the mustard.)

How 'bout some late '80s-early '90s? [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif[/img]

A radiation wave is just an electromagnetic signal moving through space (ExB, or "E cross B", where E and B are the electric and magnetic field vectors). Gamma rays, ultraviolet, visible, and infrared light, microwaves, radio, and the 60-Hz radiation from power lines are all "radiation waves". The ones I've listed are arranged in order of highest to lowest frequency/energy (except that "radio" covers a wide range.) Fundamentally, there all the same thing.

Due to that wacky wave-particle duality, though, each bit of radiation is also a photon. You can detect individual photons with a quantum detector (a CCD, for example). As JS has indicated, though, the particle view makes a lot more sense at high energies. (Where do you localize a photon with an equivalent wavelength of many meters?)

That said, "radiation" is also often used to describe things which we almost always think of as particles, such as protons. (Cosmic rays are very high-energy protons.) Neutrons (such as produced by the infamous "neutron bomb") and, yes, electrons can also be described this way. Usually this means they're at very high energy, i.e., moving at relativistic speeds.

To suggest that HAARP, which can "focus" radio waves (broadly) on an area of the ionosphere above the facility, can generate some sort of electron beam, is absurd. It is, in fact, physically impossible for some kind of high-energy beam of directed particles to be generated by such a facility.

Usually, the people bashing HAARP are saying that its influence, which is miniscule compared to the natural variations in the ionosphere, causes (deliberately or not) earthquakes, mind control, etc. This is a lot like saying I could cause a tsunami to hit Spain if I did a "cannoball" off the Brooklyn Bridge. But this Columbia thing is a whole new level of paranoid nonsense.


<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: sts60 on 2003-03-07 16:17 ]</font>

Hi,
this reminds me on a thread I read several days ago.
http://members2.boardhost.com/prouty/msg/78423.html

I wonder if these quotes are authentic? If so, they would produce a slightly more complex picture.

quote:
These are also the weapons referred to in 1997 by Defense Secretary William Cohen, when he said:

"Others [terrorists] are engaging even in an eco-type of terrorism whereby they can alter the climate, set off earthquakes, volcanoes remotely through the use of electromagnetic waves... So there are plenty of ingenious minds out there that are at work finding ways in which they can wreak terror upon other nations...It's real, and that's the reason why we have to intensify our [counter terrorism] efforts." - Defense Secretary William Cohen, 1997

One of the leading experts in the new science of scalar electromagnetics is scientist Thomas E. Bearden, and he has published many papers at his website Cheniere.Org. In a letter to a writer named "Russell" (Correspondence section) Bearden says,

"In short, Russell, the Secretary of Defense of the United States confirmed that there are indeed novel kinds of EM weapons, right now and have been for some time, which have been and are being used to (1) initiate earthquakes, (2) engineer the weather and climate, and (3) initiate the eruption of volcanoes. We wrote about those exact uses of the weaponry decades ago. Several nations now have such weapons. Three of them (two on one side and the other on a hostile side) are even firing practice shots into Western Australia, as a convenient test range."

end of quote

Aha! Found the source of that quote!

He did make a keynote address in April of 1997 at the Conference on Terrorism, Weapons of Mass Destruction, and U.S. Strategy at the Georgia Center, Mahler Auditorium, University of Georgia. MOST of what they cite is in his remarks and Q&As.

http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Apr1..._t0428coh.html

However, the context is ambiguous. He had been talking about fake threats:
"The same thing is true about just the false scare of a threat of using some kind of a chemical weapon or a biological one. There are some reports, for example, that some countries have been trying to construct something like an Ebola Virus, and that would be a very dangerous phenomenon, to say the least. Alvin Toeffler has written about this in terms of some scientists in their laboratories trying to devise certain types of pathogens that would be ethnic specific so that they could just eliminate certain ethnic groups and races; and others are designing some sort of engineering, some sort of insects that can destroy specific crops. Others are engaging even in an eco- type of terrorism whereby they can alter the climate, set off earthquakes, volcanoes remotely through the use of electromagnetic waves. "

He didn't make any other speeches that I've found about setting off earthquakes and volcanos and the like. It sounds as though the quote was talking about false scares.

Tom Bearden! Yes, indeedy, he is an "expert" of sorts. If I recall correctly, he claims that electric motors use electricity only because they are so poorly designed--if PROPERLY designed they would run perfectly well from "zero-point energy" and need no external power source at all.

HAARP, as mentioned, has achieved quite a mythic status among Creme-Filled Twinkies. It's too bad, but Nick Begich's book "Angels Don't Play This HAARP" gives these guys plenty of completely preposterous, physically impossible "evidence" that HAARP's fixed antennas, with less wattage than a good-sized AM radio station, can produce focussed transmissions precisely targeted to produce earthquakes, enable mood control of populations, and goodness knows what else.

We are deep in the Land of the Twinkies here, amigos, and no logical argument will long survive. Here's my usual spiel on "Dr." Begich: he is not a physicist, he is not an electricial engineer, and he has no scientific basis for making his claims; his "doctorate" is an honorary degree--"Dr. Begich received his doctorate in traditional medicine from The Open International University for Complementary Medicines in November 1994."

The Open Internation University for Complementary Medicines (in Sri Lanka) offers the following diplomas, $350.00 US each:

Reiki Healing, Medical Astrology, Magnetotherapy, Bach Flower (??), Indo Allopathy, Aromatherapy, Naturapathy (sic), Radiesthesia & Radionics, and of course Yoga & Massage.

To get a Doctor of Sciences degree:

"Eligibility:
Those persons who have passed any degree course from an authentic institution. OR Those persons who have completed the M.B.B.S., D.M.S., D.H.M.S., B.A.M.S., B.U.M.S. etc."

OR

"Practitioners/Research Workers who are practising for the last 10 years. Minimum basic qualification is exempted."

"Requirement for the Award: The candidate has to submit an original & authentic research work (thesis) of at least 300 pages (on full scape paper) in any branch of alternative medicine under the guidance of a competent person or institution after obtaining the prior approval of this institute."

"Total Fees : The total fees is U.S.$950. Full fees should be sent with the Form."

Isn't that a hoot? Hey, that is a CHEAP doctorate! But "Dr." Begich's degree was an honorary one, so one assumes that the fee and the 300-page dissertation were waived. Hehe!

Here's a link to the University's homepage.

Well, all this will help you not at all in your debate, I'm afraid--though I hereby give you full permission to quote anything you want from this post. I hope it's amusing to realize just what kind of "authority" the HAARP nuts are following.

And for a different perspective on Thomas Bearden, please see:

http://www.randi.org/jr/051002.html

I saw the article in question on the BroJon Gazette website but it didn't take long to determine it was sloppy tripe. Very early in the piece titled, "HAARP AND SPACESHIP COLUMBIA -- THAT COLD SATURDAY MORNING", the author wrote:I e-mailed the author asking which during which summer months this research was conducted and if, indeed, dark skies were required. He replied that yes, dark skies were necessary, so the research was done mostly in May, June, and July. I e-mailed again to explain that there are no "very dark" summer nights in Gakona but rather, from about mid-April to late August, the nighttime hours are no darker than astronomical twilight.

He responded with with a great deal of subject changing and goal post moving. He even went so far as to explain in great detail why a radio frequency receiver needed to be shielded from blue light scattered by the daytime atmosphere. When I effectively rebutted that claim, he stopped corresponding and now, the cited article is no longer on his site. I'm not even able to find it in the archive. Go figure.



<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Gramma loreto on 2003-03-07 18:45 ]</font>

There's a pretty good debunking of HAARP's potential as a weapon at this site: http://www.bltn.com/epona/HAARP.htm.

Here's a brief quote:

"The main element of the HAARP installation appears to be an array of HF antennas, running at between 5 and 10 MHz, putting out a radiated power directed upwards of around 360 kW (that’s a little less than the BBC world service). The effect of this is to cause heating of the ionosphere directly above the installation. This is one of the largest so called ‘Ionosphere Heaters’ but by no means the only one. There is a much much larger on in Russia, and an even bigger one in Norway. Plus one in Puerto Rico. And Luxembourg used to run really really big short wave transmitters for public broadcast in the early 50’s that heated the ionosphere up just nicely, thank you very much!"

The potential effect of HAARP on terrestrial electromagnetic flux is shown nicely on this chart, from the site linked above (the same chart is available on the official HAARP research site linked below):



In other words, it seems more likely that the ELF from a light-dimmer switch would trigger an earthquake than the ELF from HAARP. (Apparently dimmer switches are notorious among guitarists for generating noise in electric guitar pickups.)

The HAARP research project itself has a very comprehensive website at http://www.haarp.alaska.edu/haarp/gen.html.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: DStahl on 2003-03-07 20:25 ]</font>

Well, to overuse a trite phrase, "You guys ROCK!" Thank you so much for the education -- and once someone mentioned photons, I realized that no form of radiation used electrons in any way at all. Atom fragments, yes, but pure electrons, no. That's plasma.

Okay. Brain working now. Thanks, guys! Wonderful stuff!

Thanks Byrd for the quote. I doubt that someone high up should use this topic to explain fakes? I can follow when
"Bearden says,
"In short, Russell, the Secretary of Defense of the United States confirmed that there are indeed novel kinds of EM weapons..."
which is a perfectly straight argument, though Bearden might be no scientists at all.
On this board in another thread I have also read statements like:
Tesla is not entirely wrong or rejected by the scientific community, only sometimes...

This is not concincing either? Sorry

Wait a minute... Maybe they are talking about HARP. You know, the space-based weapon from the Remo Williams movie? [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif[/img]

Or HARP, the Canadian program to build a gun-launcher for sending satellites into orbit in the 60s, which was prematurely cancelled, quite likely inspiring Gerald Bull to, in frustration, advance the state the art of Iraqi weapons?

[img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_razz.gif[/img]

(Funny the conspiracy theorists always rag on HAARP and not HARP, when there may actually be a *genuine* conspiracy related to HARP!)

Cecil Adams (of The Straight Dope fame) also plays a little tune on the HAARP:
http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a960308.html