Fwd:Wood

 
Drasko,
 
what is not well understood might be  the content of water left in the  
wood, that is able to shield the scalar waves, which are responsible for the  
harmful effect of EMF. At the moment this is just a thought, that can be
proven  by measurements. As soon as I get the time, I will do this. But if, as
charles  says also the measurable  waves are to a certain degree shielded
through  wood, I should know perhaps taking 20 mm ordinary timber wood how much
this  would be not in db but in percentage, so i can compare.
 
Dietrich
 
 
Charles,
I have just checked briefly that booklet, there is no such  thing... You
should know that wood has almost no
shielding properties which can be accessed solely by objective means, i.e.  
measured the classic way... Wood doesn't stop EM waves.
What we were talking  about are possible wood properties in sense that it
gives some *subjective*  effect, which is still not well understood.  

Drasko




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Dr. Gruen,
You and I are more or less on same approach, but here there is an issue that Charles thinks *wood can shield measurable waves*... Wood is practically transparent for them. Wood doesn't shield EM waves significantly, even if moist.

Conversion from dB to percentage is easy, each 10 dB is 10 times (1.000 %), so 20 dB is 100 times, and 15 dB is about 32 times... Anyway, attenuation should be given in dB per a unit of thickness, so "15 dB for wood" means nothing without stating how thick wood. But anyway, for mentioned 15 dB gain, even concrete would have to be extremely thick!

Whoever stated such thing about wood is wrong, at the link Charles sent I was unable to find the data, he might wish to send us the exact reference, but I think he misunderstood the word hochlochziegel.

Drasko



--- In [hidden email], Gruendg@... wrote:

Hello Drasko,

on 25-03 I did sent you the correct URL.
I did not mention Hochlochziegel.

The curves show:
Laerche, Fichte-Tanne, Aussenwand mit Schutzplatte, Kiefer, Eiche. and those in different thicknesses.
The book contains many other building materials like windowpanes, etc.

Greetings,
Charles Claessens
member Verband Baubiologie
www.milieuziektes.nl
www.milieuziektes.be
www.hetbitje.nl
checked by Norton



  ----- Original Message -----
  From: Drasko
  To: [hidden email]
  Sent: Saturday, March 26, 2011 12:23 PM
  Subject: [eSens] Re: Wood




  Dr. Gruen,
  You and I are more or less on same approach, but here there is an issue that Charles thinks *wood can shield measurable waves*... Wood is practically transparent for them. Wood doesn't shield EM waves significantly, even if moist.

  Conversion from dB to percentage is easy, each 10 dB is 10 times (1.000 %), so 20 dB is 100 times, and 15 dB is about 32 times... Anyway, attenuation should be given in dB per a unit of thickness, so "15 dB for wood" means nothing without stating how thick wood. But anyway, for mentioned 15 dB gain, even concrete would have to be extremely thick!

  Whoever stated such thing about wood is wrong, at the link Charles sent I was unable to find the data, he might wish to send us the exact reference, but I think he misunderstood the word hochlochziegel.

  Drasko



  --- In [hidden email], Gruendg@... wrote:
  >
  >  
  > Drasko,
  >  
  > what is not well understood might be  the content of water left in the  
  > wood, that is able to shield the scalar waves, which are responsible for the  
  > harmful effect of EMF. At the moment this is just a thought, that can be
  > proven  by measurements. As soon as I get the time, I will do this. But if, as
  > charles  says also the measurable  waves are to a certain degree shielded
  > through  wood, I should know perhaps taking 20 mm ordinary timber wood how much
  > this  would be not in db but in percentage, so i can compare.
  >  
  > Dietrich
  >  
  >  
  > Charles,
  > I have just checked briefly that booklet, there is no such  thing... You
  > should know that wood has almost no
  > shielding properties which can be accessed solely by objective means, i.e.  
  > measured the classic way... Wood doesn't stop EM waves.
  > What we were talking  about are possible wood properties in sense that it
  > gives some *subjective*  effect, which is still not well understood.  
  >
  > Drasko
  >
  >
  >
  >
  > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
  >




  ------------------------------------

  Yahoo! Groups Links





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

The problem here as I see it is that some people get too full of their technical words and ideas and lose track of common sense.  You can read all the books and learn all the technical facts but you make the big mistake of assuming that science knows everything and has all the facts.  It just isn't so.  I live in a metal house and I can not receive radio signals inside that house unless I take an antenna wire and put it close to the walls.  Then I can receive weak signals on some stations.  Plain old ordinary common sense will tell you that there is some reflection inwards from those metal walls.  Yet your going to contradict persons such as myself who simply use common sense that makes much more sense than your pseudo logic.  You're just fooling yourself.  There are observations that I also make with wood inside my home and here you are trying to contradict that as well.  You can throw around technical terms and big words and make yourself appear to be an expert but your not conning me.

--- In [hidden email], "Drasko" <cvijovic@...> wrote:

Hello, Charles!
I like that you are persistent and that you back up your statements!
At the URL you sent (http://www.drmoldan.de/html/publikationen1.htm ) there are other links but at the very page there is nothing like you say...

But I found something on the issue at
http://www.izmf.de/download/archiv/Bayerisches_Landesamt.pdf
Indeed - I have to apologize for being so assured that any wood has insignificant shielding properties, but still your 15 dB (at 900 MHz)stands for 54 cm (!!) thick pine, what is practically illusionary... They explain it by content of resins, what is acceptable.
Anyway, solid pine even in 16 cm thickness (5 dB according to chart) is still extravagance for practical purposes, and 2 inches (5 cm) wood (pine!), what is still rather thick, is therefore only some 1.5 dB - what is negligible in practical measurements.

Hope now we have agreement on that?

Drasko



--- In [hidden email], "charles" <charles@...> wrote:

Hello Drasko,

sure I agree with you.

In your pointed dokument, the wood is stated on page 21.

Be also aware that 15 dB is not much.
Chicken wire does that too.

One needs at least 30 dB, where paint may give 40-50 dB, and there are tssues who would give 50 dB and other materials even 80 and 100 dB.
Of course they have a price tag.

But look at the HWG80 from Yshield. That does 80 dB and costs ? 12 / m².

Greetings,
Charles Claessens
member Verband Baubiologie
www.milieuziektes.nl
www.milieuziektes.be
www.hetbitje.nl
checked by Norton


  ----- Original Message -----
  From: Drasko
  To: [hidden email]
  Sent: Saturday, March 26, 2011 8:54 PM
  Subject: [eSens] Re: Wood




  Hello, Charles!
  I like that you are persistent and that you back up your statements!
  At the URL you sent (http://www.drmoldan.de/html/publikationen1.htm ) there are other links but at the very page there is nothing like you say...

  But I found something on the issue at
  http://www.izmf.de/download/archiv/Bayerisches_Landesamt.pdf
  Indeed - I have to apologize for being so assured that any wood has insignificant shielding properties, but still your 15 dB (at 900 MHz)stands for 54 cm (!!) thick pine, what is practically illusionary... They explain it by content of resins, what is acceptable.
  Anyway, solid pine even in 16 cm thickness (5 dB according to chart) is still extravagance for practical purposes, and 2 inches (5 cm) wood (pine!), what is still rather thick, is therefore only some 1.5 dB - what is negligible in practical measurements.

  Hope now we have agreement on that?

  Drasko



  --- In [hidden email], "charles" <charles@...> wrote:
  >
  > Hello Drasko,
  >
  > on 25-03 I did sent you the correct URL.
  > I did not mention Hochlochziegel.
  >
  > The curves show:
  > Laerche, Fichte-Tanne, Aussenwand mit Schutzplatte, Kiefer, Eiche. and those in different thicknesses.
  > The book contains many other building materials like windowpanes, etc.
  >
  > Greetings,
  > Charles Claessens
  > member Verband Baubiologie
  > www.milieuziektes.nl
  > www.milieuziektes.be
  > www.hetbitje.nl
  > checked by Norton
  >
  >
  >
  >   ----- Original Message -----
  >   From: Drasko
  >   To: [hidden email]
  >   Sent: Saturday, March 26, 2011 12:23 PM
  >   Subject: [eSens] Re: Wood
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >   Dr. Gruen,
  >   You and I are more or less on same approach, but here there is an issue that Charles thinks *wood can shield measurable waves*... Wood is practically transparent for them. Wood doesn't shield EM waves significantly, even if moist.
  >
  >   Conversion from dB to percentage is easy, each 10 dB is 10 times (1.000 %), so 20 dB is 100 times, and 15 dB is about 32 times... Anyway, attenuation should be given in dB per a unit of thickness, so "15 dB for wood" means nothing without stating how thick wood. But anyway, for mentioned 15 dB gain, even concrete would have to be extremely thick!
  >
  >   Whoever stated such thing about wood is wrong, at the link Charles sent I was unable to find the data, he might wish to send us the exact reference, but I think he misunderstood the word hochlochziegel.
  >
  >   Drasko
  >
  >
  >
  >   --- In [hidden email], Gruendg@ wrote:
  >   >
  >   >  
  >   > Drasko,
  >   >  
  >   > what is not well understood might be  the content of water left in the  
  >   > wood, that is able to shield the scalar waves, which are responsible for the  
  >   > harmful effect of EMF. At the moment this is just a thought, that can be
  >   > proven  by measurements. As soon as I get the time, I will do this. But if, as
  >   > charles  says also the measurable  waves are to a certain degree shielded
  >   > through  wood, I should know perhaps taking 20 mm ordinary timber wood how much
  >   > this  would be not in db but in percentage, so i can compare.
  >   >  
  >   > Dietrich
  >   >  
  >   >  
  >   > Charles,
  >   > I have just checked briefly that booklet, there is no such  thing... You
  >   > should know that wood has almost no
  >   > shielding properties which can be accessed solely by objective means, i.e.  
  >   > measured the classic way... Wood doesn't stop EM waves.
  >   > What we were talking  about are possible wood properties in sense that it
  >   > gives some *subjective*  effect, which is still not well understood.  
  >   >
  >   > Drasko
  >   >
  >   >
  >   >
  >   >
  >   > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
  >   >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >   ------------------------------------
  >
  >   Yahoo! Groups Links
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
  >




  ------------------------------------

  Yahoo! Groups Links





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[hidden email] wrote:
> I have just checked briefly that booklet, there is no such  thing...
>  

There is another book with charts for signal attenuation, and it is in
english.

EM Signal Attenuation in Construction Materials
NIST Construction Automation Program Report #3

Very technical, but they were focusing on what materials to build with, so
that people could use their cell phone inside their home. So do the
opposite!
I checked it out from the library.

Stewart

Hello,
 
I totally agree with Drasko although, I am curious about the measurements.
 
Pamela C


--- On Fri, 3/25/11, [hidden email] <[hidden email]> wrote:


From: [hidden email] <[hidden email]>
Subject: [eSens] Fwd:Wood
To: [hidden email]
Date: Friday, March 25, 2011, 8:23 PM


 




Drasko,

what is not well understood might be the content of water left in the
wood, that is able to shield the scalar waves, which are responsible for the
harmful effect of EMF. At the moment this is just a thought, that can be
proven by measurements. As soon as I get the time, I will do this. But if, as
charles says also the measurable waves are to a certain degree shielded
through wood, I should know perhaps taking 20 mm ordinary timber wood how much
this would be not in db but in percentage, so i can compare.

Dietrich


Charles,
I have just checked briefly that booklet, there is no such thing... You
should know that wood has almost no
shielding properties which can be accessed solely by objective means, i.e.
measured the classic way... Wood doesn't stop EM waves.
What we were talking about are possible wood properties in sense that it
gives some *subjective* effect, which is still not well understood.

Drasko

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]









     

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]