shielding Notebook

Classic

List

Threaded

17 messages Options

randolf_everywhere

shielding Notebook

Hello,

I am thinking of shielding my Notebook. Maybe with paint or with
wallpaper on its outside. I tested and know shielding it will help. But I do
not know If there can occur problems when I do it.

Randolf Weinand

Glenn Coleman

RE: shielding Notebook

Hello,

I have thought of something similar, but to hook an external keyboard, and
use a wire-mesh fence between me and the notebook. I figure if wire mesh
works on microwaves it may work here too. I may even make a whole box
around my notebook with notebook sitting in cage.

If it does work, then I can find a finer quality mesh so I can see monitor
better. I was going to start with some wire fencing with 1/4" holes to
begin with.

Glenn

----Original Message Follows----
From: "randolf_everywhere" <[hidden email]>
Reply-To: [hidden email]
To: [hidden email]
Subject: [eSens] shielding Notebook
Date: Sun, 26 Sep 2004 11:09:02 -0000

Hello,

I am thinking of shielding my Notebook. Maybe with paint or with
wallpaper on its outside. I tested and know shielding it will help. But I do
not know If there can occur problems when I do it.

Randolf Weinand

Gruendg

Re: shielding Notebook

In reply to this post by randolf_everywhere

Dear Glenn,

being a member of this group for some time, you should think of a simpler
solution to protect you against the radiation of your notebook. There are enough
hints in this list.

Dietrich

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

bbin37

Re: shielding Notebook

In reply to this post by Glenn Coleman

Hi Glenn & Randolf,

If we can take the computer's CPU clock speed as its highest frequency
component then the aperture/mesh size below which shielding for the
computer will begin is:

(0.3 m)/(CPU speed in GHz) or
(300 m)/(CPU speed in MHz)

Smaller aperture sizes than this work much better. For typical square
mesh, divide by the square root of 2 to account for the diagonal of
the mesh being its largest aperture width.

For example, if we had a 1 GHz CPU, then square mesh below (30
cm)/(sqrt 2) ~ (21 cm) will begin to confine the transverse EM
radiation. A 1/4" square mesh has as its largest aperture width
(0.25") * (1.414) ~ (0.35") ~ (0.89 cm) which should readily shield the
transverse emissions in the above example.

Beau

--- In [hidden email], "Glenn Coleman" <glennhcoleman@h...>
wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I have thought of something similar, but to hook an external
keyboard, and
> use a wire-mesh fence between me and the notebook. I figure if wire
mesh
> works on microwaves it may work here too. I may even make a whole
box
> around my notebook with notebook sitting in cage.
>
> If it does work, then I can find a finer quality mesh so I can see
monitor
> better. I was going to start with some wire fencing with 1/4"
holes to

> begin with.
>
> Glenn
>
>
> ----Original Message Follows----
> From: "randolf_everywhere" <Thats@M...>
> Reply-To: [hidden email]
> To: [hidden email]
> Subject: [eSens] shielding Notebook
> Date: Sun, 26 Sep 2004 11:09:02 -0000
>
> Hello,
>
> I am thinking of shielding my Notebook. Maybe with paint or with
> wallpaper on its outside. I tested and know shielding it will help.

But I do
> not know If there can occur problems when I do it.
>
>
> Randolf Weinand

Glenn Coleman

Re: shielding Notebook

In reply to this post by randolf_everywhere

>being a member of this group for some time, you should think of a simpler
>solution to protect you against the radiation of your notebook. There are
>enough
>hints in this list.

Dear Dietrich,

I have tried a number of the solutions, namely Quantum Home, Aulterra
Neutralizer, SpringLife Polarizer, and diet. None seem to eliminate the EMF
enough to get complete freedom from it at my computer. I always seem to
have to fight with illness to work at computer.

So I finally thought that creating a complete barrier between source and
myself may be a good solution.

I look at it as stepping outside the box for a moment and taking a new
approach.

I sense that although many people are getting allot of relief with methods
in this list, nobody has shown complete relief. That is my goal. Perhaps
that will only happen with a non-EMF environment.

Regards,

Glenn

David Fancy

Re: shielding Notebook

In reply to this post by bbin37

Hi Beau,

Thanks for the equation, that's useful. I;ve been using what I think is aluminum window
screen warpped in various folds around a throublesome modem. This has cut down the RF
emissions significantly, according to the Field Strength Meter. I've also sent it packing to
the other end of my house with a 50' ethernet cable. I can still notice a difference when its
actually turned off. Is there some way that the 50 cable is in some fashion acting as an
antenea for the modem's unblocked RF output? Is there anything more I can do while I'm
waiting for the delivery of Dietrich's bioprotect card to save my day?

Cheers
David F

--- In [hidden email], "Beau" <netfarer2@y...> wrote:

> Hi Glenn & Randolf,
>
> If we can take the computer's CPU clock speed as its highest frequency
> component then the aperture/mesh size below which shielding for the
> computer will begin is:
>
> (0.3 m)/(CPU speed in GHz) or
> (300 m)/(CPU speed in MHz)
>
> Smaller aperture sizes than this work much better. For typical square
> mesh, divide by the square root of 2 to account for the diagonal of
> the mesh being its largest aperture width.
>
> For example, if we had a 1 GHz CPU, then square mesh below (30
> cm)/(sqrt 2) ~ (21 cm) will begin to confine the transverse EM
> radiation. A 1/4" square mesh has as its largest aperture width
> (0.25") * (1.414) ~ (0.35") ~ (0.89 cm) which should readily shield the
> transverse emissions in the above example.
>
> Beau
>
> --- In [hidden email], "Glenn Coleman" <glennhcoleman@h...>
> wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I have thought of something similar, but to hook an external
> keyboard, and
> > use a wire-mesh fence between me and the notebook. I figure if wire
> mesh
> > works on microwaves it may work here too. I may even make a whole
> box
> > around my notebook with notebook sitting in cage.
> >
> > If it does work, then I can find a finer quality mesh so I can see
> monitor
> > better. I was going to start with some wire fencing with 1/4"
> holes to
> > begin with.
> >
> > Glenn
> >
> >
> > ----Original Message Follows----
> > From: "randolf_everywhere" <Thats@M...>
> > Reply-To: [hidden email]
> > To: [hidden email]
> > Subject: [eSens] shielding Notebook
> > Date: Sun, 26 Sep 2004 11:09:02 -0000
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > I am thinking of shielding my Notebook. Maybe with paint or with
> > wallpaper on its outside. I tested and know shielding it will help.
> But I do
> > not know If there can occur problems when I do it.
> >
> >
> > Randolf Weinand

David Fancy

Re: shielding Notebook

In reply to this post by Glenn Coleman

Hi Glen,

How's the niacin and folic acid experiment going? I'm seeing my naturopath tomorrow and
will run that by her as a possibility. Anything else really working?

I suspect Dietrich was referring to the Bioprotect devices he has developed. I've just
ordered some, I'll let you know how it goes.

Best

David

--- In [hidden email], "Glenn Coleman" <glennhcoleman@h...> wrote:

> >being a member of this group for some time, you should think of a simpler
> >solution to protect you against the radiation of your notebook. There are
> >enough
> >hints in this list.
>
> Dear Dietrich,
>
> I have tried a number of the solutions, namely Quantum Home, Aulterra
> Neutralizer, SpringLife Polarizer, and diet. None seem to eliminate the EMF
> enough to get complete freedom from it at my computer. I always seem to
> have to fight with illness to work at computer.
>
> So I finally thought that creating a complete barrier between source and
> myself may be a good solution.
>
> I look at it as stepping outside the box for a moment and taking a new
> approach.
>
> I sense that although many people are getting allot of relief with methods
> in this list, nobody has shown complete relief. That is my goal. Perhaps
> that will only happen with a non-EMF environment.
>
> Regards,
>
> Glenn

Charles-3

Re: shielding Notebook

In reply to this post by bbin37

Hello,

this equeation does not work.

You can't know what ferquencies are radiating from this thing.

The damaging part are the magnetic fields emanating.
And we know that they can be heavy.
Especially above the keyboard, whereunder the hard disk and motherboard are
placed.

My CRT monitor radiates hard with 91.1 kHz, but I found many other
frequencies.

You may hold a world receiver in front of your laptop.

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

----- Original Message -----
From: "Beau" <[hidden email]>
To: <[hidden email]>
Sent: Monday, September 27, 2004 01:48
Subject: [eSens] Re: shielding Notebook

>
> Hi Glenn & Randolf,
>
> If we can take the computer's CPU clock speed as its highest frequency
> component then the aperture/mesh size below which shielding for the
> computer will begin is:
>
> (0.3 m)/(CPU speed in GHz) or
> (300 m)/(CPU speed in MHz)
>
> Smaller aperture sizes than this work much better. For typical square
> mesh, divide by the square root of 2 to account for the diagonal of
> the mesh being its largest aperture width.
>
> For example, if we had a 1 GHz CPU, then square mesh below (30
> cm)/(sqrt 2) ~ (21 cm) will begin to confine the transverse EM
> radiation. A 1/4" square mesh has as its largest aperture width
> (0.25") * (1.414) ~ (0.35") ~ (0.89 cm) which should readily shield the
> transverse emissions in the above example.
>
> Beau
>
> --- In [hidden email], "Glenn Coleman" <glennhcoleman@h...>
> wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I have thought of something similar, but to hook an external
> keyboard, and
> > use a wire-mesh fence between me and the notebook. I figure if wire
> mesh
> > works on microwaves it may work here too. I may even make a whole
> box
> > around my notebook with notebook sitting in cage.
> >
> > If it does work, then I can find a finer quality mesh so I can see
> monitor
> > better. I was going to start with some wire fencing with 1/4"
> holes to
> > begin with.
> >
> > Glenn
> >
> >
> > ----Original Message Follows----
> > From: "randolf_everywhere" <Thats@M...>
> > Reply-To: [hidden email]
> > To: [hidden email]
> > Subject: [eSens] shielding Notebook
> > Date: Sun, 26 Sep 2004 11:09:02 -0000
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > I am thinking of shielding my Notebook. Maybe with paint or with
> > wallpaper on its outside. I tested and know shielding it will help.
> But I do
> > not know If there can occur problems when I do it.
> >
> >
> > Randolf Weinand
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Glenn Coleman

Re: shielding Notebook

In reply to this post by randolf_everywhere

Hi David,

The niacin and folic acid therapy was targetted towards improving overall
health and depression, but had possibility of helping EMF sensitivity. I
have been fortunate to have reduced nerve pain & headaches as a result,
which reduces EMF sensitivity - I'm allot more productive as a result.

I am curious about the Bioprotect device. I have to space out how much
money I spend on EMF gadgets, but I'm sure I'll get one sooner or later.

I have done almost everything I could find in the past 4 months. The root
cause of my problem seems to be rooted in my 7 amalgam mercury fillings I
had replaced 5 months ago. Since then I have been lucky to find one
naturopath, and two medical doctors specializing in dealing with mercury,
and have completely turned my life upside down. I now have a very strict
diet of foods that support healing (cut out everything that is commonly
known to be bad - sugar, white flour, caffeine, dairy, etc). Its difficult
to say exactly what has worked, since for me "life balance" with the right
stuff seems to be my key.

* I use SpringLife Polarizer on my notebook, hang Aulterra Neutralizer as
necklace, and have Quantum Home plugged into electrical system - Quantum
seems to have biggest impact on getting a good melatonin cleanse at night
since my sleep & energy are dramatically improved. EMF is known to reduce
effectiveness of melatonin if one sleeps with too much EMF. I have Quantum
Byte software on my notebook, but can't notice any difference with computer
EMF or stress
.
* Mercury detox: DMSA with Cilantro, and DMPS with Cilantro. Sometimes I
add in chlorella, but I seem to feel not as great when I take chlorella so
don't use it as often. There is controversy about which way is best to
detox. My latest information tells me we detox naturally if we have enough
glutathione. My past email shows how to boost glutathione. Detox of
Mercury in brain and some organs requires DMSA to get it out.

* I quite black and green teas since they are loaded with flouride which
slows thyroid production. I also quit using flouride toothpaste.

* Became a pranic healer to rebalance my bodies energy field to reduce
symptoms.

* Practice Medicine Buddha regularly, listening to CD and going to temple
once a week. The frequncies of the chants and instruments helps settle and
recharge my energy system.

* I use coconut oil or butter on flax bread to help my thyroid & improve
metabolism.

* I drink 3 shakes a day of USANA (Olympic grade nutrition - but expensive.
My wife is a USANA manager so I get a good deal on it). USANA is like a
linus blanket for me - giving me relief everytime I drink it. I eat their
nutrition bars like candy since they quench cravings and are good nutrition.

* I take Salmon oil to reduce neurological side effects from mercury. I
take Evening Primrose Oil - supposed to be good for EMF.

* I do affirmations telling myself I feel great when I feel terrible.

* I do monthly Shiatsu to balance energy meridians.

* I walk as often as possible to get my energy field flowing.

* I tie it all together with faith, knowing I will eventually get better,
and just riding out the waves as they hit me. I find that the toughest
challenge. Wayne Dyer has an amazing book "There's a spiritual solution to
every problem", which gives me great hope in my recovery.

* If you have a thyroid challenge, the Buddhist chant "Om" and "Ah" are very
good for thyroid. I play a CD full of repetitive "Om" anytime I feel
scattered energy, or when I can't focus on reading. It calms my nervous
system like magic.

My goal is complete freedom from EMF symptoms. I may achieve this through
tolerance with a stronger body, or emf protection devices. I'm trying both
ways at once.

All in all, I feel a bit obsessive in my pursuit, but that is just my
nature. Perhaps I would get better with only half of what I am doing. It
seems to give me a lifestyle since I'm not able to work. ie. keep me busy
doing all these special things and looking for solutions so I don't focus
on my symptoms.

On the flip side it has all been a gift in disguise, since I am developing a
very extensive website to help simplify this process for others. It took me
5 years to have a clue about my problem. I believe people should find these
types of solutions much more rapidly, so that is my new dream. I have the
vision and the technical knowledge so it will happen, once EMF lets me stay
at my computer long enough.

Regards,

Glenn

----Original Message Follows----
From: "David Fancy" <[hidden email]>
Reply-To: [hidden email]
To: [hidden email]
Subject: [eSens] Re: shielding Notebook
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 00:37:30 -0000

Hi Glen,

How's the niacin and folic acid experiment going? I'm seeing my naturopath
tomorrow and
will run that by her as a possibility. Anything else really working?

I suspect Dietrich was referring to the Bioprotect devices he has developed.
I've just
ordered some, I'll let you know how it goes.

Best

David

--- In [hidden email], "Glenn Coleman" <glennhcoleman@h...> wrote:
> >being a member of this group for some time, you should think of a
simpler
> >solution to protect you against the radiation of your notebook. There
are
> >enough
> >hints in this list.
>
> Dear Dietrich,
>
> I have tried a number of the solutions, namely Quantum Home, Aulterra
> Neutralizer, SpringLife Polarizer, and diet. None seem to eliminate the
EMF

> enough to get complete freedom from it at my computer. I always seem to
> have to fight with illness to work at computer.
>
> So I finally thought that creating a complete barrier between source and
> myself may be a good solution.
>
> I look at it as stepping outside the box for a moment and taking a new
> approach.
>
> I sense that although many people are getting allot of relief with

methods
> in this list, nobody has shown complete relief. That is my goal.
Perhaps
> that will only happen with a non-EMF environment.
>
> Regards,
>
> Glenn

bbin37

Re: shielding Notebook

In reply to this post by Charles-3

Hi Charles,

I respectfully disagree with you concerning the equation. Please note
that I conditioned the equation's application by an a priori knowledge
of frequencies by saying "*If we can take* the computer's CPU clock
speed as its highest frequency component...". Of course, I do agree
that we can't know all the frequencies without measuring them first.
However, if we assume a maximum for the frequencies a body is emitting
we have concurrently placed a minimum on the emitted wavelengths.
Meshes with spacing smaller than this minimum wavelength begin to
appear as continuous surfaces without holes for transverse EM.

Also, I want to emphasize that I am not saying a mesh provides *total*
shielding of the transverse EM from a notebook computer. Everyone,
please pardon me if I inadvertently gave that impression by saying
near the end of my previous message "...should readily shield the
transverse emissions in the above example."

Let me be more complete. Given a mesh with spacing much smaller than
the minimum radiated wavelength, the level of shielding is dependent
on the characteristics of the mesh material -- its depth, its
permeability, its conductivity -- as well as the geometry and
frequency of the radiated field encountering it.

If we have an aluminum mesh enclosure fitting our spacing criteria
with wire thickness of 0.25 mm, a 1 GHz transverse EM plane wave
encountering it will be approximately attenuated to around
1/(2.718)^(100) its original amplitude after penetrating the mesh. A
100 MHz transverse EM plane wave will suffer attenuation to around
1/(2.718)^(33) its original amplitude. In near-field conditions, such
as a mesh around a notebook computer, the level of shielding is more
complex to calculate, but it will exist to some extent for these
frequencies for both the electric and magnetic field components.

Unfortunately, low-frequency transverse EM won't be hampered by this
mesh even though it 'looks' like a smooth surface to it. For a 100 Hz
transverse EM plane wave would require the mesh's depth to be 36x
thicker (around 8.5 mm) just to attenuate it down to 1/3 its original
amplitude.

Beau

--- In [hidden email], "Charles" <charles@c...> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> this equeation does not work.
>
> You can't know what ferquencies are radiating from this thing.
>
> The damaging part are the magnetic fields emanating.
> And we know that they can be heavy.
> Especially above the keyboard, whereunder the hard disk and
motherboard are

> placed.
>
> My CRT monitor radiates hard with 91.1 kHz, but I found many other
> frequencies.
>
> You may hold a world receiver in front of your laptop.
>
> Greetings,
> Charles Claessens
> member Verband Baubiologie
> www.milieuziektes.nl
> www.hetbitje.nl
> checked by Norton Antivirus
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Beau" <netfarer2@y...>
> To: <[hidden email]>
> Sent: Monday, September 27, 2004 01:48
> Subject: [eSens] Re: shielding Notebook
>
>
> >
> > Hi Glenn & Randolf,
> >
> > If we can take the computer's CPU clock speed as its highest

frequency
> > component then the aperture/mesh size below which shielding for
the
> > computer will begin is:
> >
> > (0.3 m)/(CPU speed in GHz) or
> > (300 m)/(CPU speed in MHz)
> >
> > Smaller aperture sizes than this work much better. For typical
square
> > mesh, divide by the square root of 2 to account for the diagonal
of
> > the mesh being its largest aperture width.
> >
> > For example, if we had a 1 GHz CPU, then square mesh below (30
> > cm)/(sqrt 2) ~ (21 cm) will begin to confine the transverse EM
> > radiation. A 1/4" square mesh has as its largest aperture width
> > (0.25") * (1.414) ~ (0.35") ~ (0.89 cm) which should readily
shield the

> > transverse emissions in the above example.
> >
> > Beau
> >
> > --- In [hidden email], "Glenn Coleman" <glennhcoleman@h...>
> > wrote:
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > I have thought of something similar, but to hook an external
> > keyboard, and
> > > use a wire-mesh fence between me and the notebook. I figure if

wire
> > mesh
> > > works on microwaves it may work here too. I may even make a
whole
> > box
> > > around my notebook with notebook sitting in cage.
> > >
> > > If it does work, then I can find a finer quality mesh so I can
see

> > monitor
> > > better. I was going to start with some wire fencing with 1/4"
> > holes to
> > > begin with.
> > >
> > > Glenn
> > >
> > >
> > > ----Original Message Follows----
> > > From: "randolf_everywhere" <Thats@M...>
> > > Reply-To: [hidden email]
> > > To: [hidden email]
> > > Subject: [eSens] shielding Notebook
> > > Date: Sun, 26 Sep 2004 11:09:02 -0000
> > >
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > I am thinking of shielding my Notebook. Maybe with paint or with
> > > wallpaper on its outside. I tested and know shielding it will

help.

> > But I do
> > > not know If there can occur problems when I do it.
> > >
> > >
> > > Randolf Weinand
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >

bbin37

Re: shielding Notebook

In reply to this post by David Fancy

Hey David,

What type of broadband technology are you using to connect to the
Internet, DSL or a cable modem? If you're using a phone-line based
technology like DSL, all the phone lines associated with a particular
phone number in your house are probably getting signals continuously
from the broadband network since it is always active. I think the
same issue would hold for a cable modem.

When the modem is off and you still sense the difference is the
computer also off? If the computer is on, did you have to install a
new network interface card (NIC) in your computer before you began
using the modem, or did you have to enable your motherboard's
built-in ethernet interface? If so, the NIC or onboard ethernet may
be the issue. If the computer is also off, my first guess would be
the consistent broadband signaling on your home phone lines or cable.
I'd try disconnecting the phone/cable company's feed into your home
and see if the situation clears up for you.

This reminds me -- keep your eyes peeled for BPL (Broadband over Power
Lines). I've heard from Roy Beavers that the power companies already
send signals over the grid for monitoring and maintenance. Now they
want in on the Internet money stream and are trying to use the grid
for broadband Internet connectivity. The remaining obstacle to
mainstream implementation that I know of is the short-wave radio
interference BPL transmissions have been shown to cause in some areas.
Imagine our situation if this signaling is added to the
environmental mix directly through our home wiring.

All the best,
Beau

--- In [hidden email], "David Fancy" <davidfancy@h...> wrote:

> I;ve been using what I think is aluminum window screen warpped in
> various folds around a throublesome modem. This has cut down the RF
> emissions significantly, according to the Field Strength Meter. I've
> also sent it packing to the other end of my house with a 50'
> ethernet cable. I can still notice a difference when its actually
> turned off. Is there some way that the 50 cable is in some fashion
> acting as an antenea for the modem's unblocked RF output?

bbin37

Re: shielding Notebook

> ...................................................... I think the
> same issue would hold for a cable modem.

In the sense that all the connected cable (not the phone lines) in
your home would carry the broadband network signals if you use a cable
modem. ;)

Beau

--- In [hidden email], "Beau" <netfarer2@y...> wrote:

> Hey David,
>
> What type of broadband technology are you using to connect to the
> Internet, DSL or a cable modem? If you're using a phone-line based
> technology like DSL, all the phone lines associated with a particular
> phone number in your house are probably getting signals continuously
> from the broadband network since it is always active. I think the
> same issue would hold for a cable modem.
>
> When the modem is off and you still sense the difference is the
> computer also off? If the computer is on, did you have to install a
> new network interface card (NIC) in your computer before you began
> using the modem, or did you have to enable your motherboard's
> built-in ethernet interface? If so, the NIC or onboard ethernet may
> be the issue. If the computer is also off, my first guess would be
> the consistent broadband signaling on your home phone lines or cable.
> I'd try disconnecting the phone/cable company's feed into your home
> and see if the situation clears up for you.
>
> This reminds me -- keep your eyes peeled for BPL (Broadband over Power
> Lines). I've heard from Roy Beavers that the power companies already
> send signals over the grid for monitoring and maintenance. Now they
> want in on the Internet money stream and are trying to use the grid
> for broadband Internet connectivity. The remaining obstacle to
> mainstream implementation that I know of is the short-wave radio
> interference BPL transmissions have been shown to cause in some areas.
> Imagine our situation if this signaling is added to the
> environmental mix directly through our home wiring.
>
> All the best,
> Beau
>
> --- In [hidden email], "David Fancy" <davidfancy@h...> wrote:
>
> > I;ve been using what I think is aluminum window screen warpped in
> > various folds around a throublesome modem. This has cut down the RF
> > emissions significantly, according to the Field Strength Meter. I've
> > also sent it packing to the other end of my house with a 50'
> > ethernet cable. I can still notice a difference when its actually
> > turned off. Is there some way that the 50 cable is in some fashion
> > acting as an antenea for the modem's unblocked RF output?

Charles-3

Re: shielding Notebook

In reply to this post by bbin37

Hello Beau,

I still maintain my meaning about those equations.
Let me go further.
I think it is a lot of bullshit.
No pun intended, but you cannot calculate the shielding effect.
You can only MEASURE the shielding effect, and must do that with several
different frequencies.
As is done by prof. Pauli of the University of the Bundeswehr (Army) in
Germany.
He is the authority for testing shielding materials.
And a lot of materials do react sometimes quite differently as expected!

The placing of a shielding material related to the source and related to the
person is also very important.
If the shielding is too close to the person, it can even raise the
elektrosmog.
That can be the case with those Baldachins around the bed, where by
*Ankopplungsspannungen* the body tension can raise enormously.
And in some ways the shielding material can also reinforce the incoming
radiation.

But a shielding material is not enough.

We have to look very hard at the longitudinal waves, which pass right
through shieldings.
(Here the other *things*, as mentioned in this group, come into focus. They
all have their working related to longitudinal waves)

It is an overwhelming new terrain.
But the answers to several questions raise much more new questions.

I realise, that for many of you, this item sounds like something out of Star
Trek, but it is a reality now, and explains a lot of what is happening and
why it is happening to many of us.

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

----- Original Message -----
From: "Beau" <[hidden email]>
To: <[hidden email]>
Sent: Monday, September 27, 2004 20:11
Subject: [eSens] Re: shielding Notebook

> Hi Charles,
>
> I respectfully disagree with you concerning the equation. Please note
> that I conditioned the equation's application by an a priori knowledge
> of frequencies by saying "*If we can take* the computer's CPU clock
> speed as its highest frequency component...". Of course, I do agree
> that we can't know all the frequencies without measuring them first.
> However, if we assume a maximum for the frequencies a body is emitting
> we have concurrently placed a minimum on the emitted wavelengths.
> Meshes with spacing smaller than this minimum wavelength begin to
> appear as continuous surfaces without holes for transverse EM.
>
> Also, I want to emphasize that I am not saying a mesh provides *total*
> shielding of the transverse EM from a notebook computer. Everyone,
> please pardon me if I inadvertently gave that impression by saying
> near the end of my previous message "...should readily shield the
> transverse emissions in the above example."
>
> Let me be more complete. Given a mesh with spacing much smaller than
> the minimum radiated wavelength, the level of shielding is dependent
> on the characteristics of the mesh material -- its depth, its
> permeability, its conductivity -- as well as the geometry and
> frequency of the radiated field encountering it.
>
> If we have an aluminum mesh enclosure fitting our spacing criteria
> with wire thickness of 0.25 mm, a 1 GHz transverse EM plane wave
> encountering it will be approximately attenuated to around
> 1/(2.718)^(100) its original amplitude after penetrating the mesh. A
> 100 MHz transverse EM plane wave will suffer attenuation to around
> 1/(2.718)^(33) its original amplitude. In near-field conditions, such
> as a mesh around a notebook computer, the level of shielding is more
> complex to calculate, but it will exist to some extent for these
> frequencies for both the electric and magnetic field components.
>
> Unfortunately, low-frequency transverse EM won't be hampered by this
> mesh even though it 'looks' like a smooth surface to it. For a 100 Hz
> transverse EM plane wave would require the mesh's depth to be 36x
> thicker (around 8.5 mm) just to attenuate it down to 1/3 its original
> amplitude.
>
> Beau
>
> --- In [hidden email], "Charles" <charles@c...> wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > this equeation does not work.
> >
> > You can't know what ferquencies are radiating from this thing.
> >
> > The damaging part are the magnetic fields emanating.
> > And we know that they can be heavy.
> > Especially above the keyboard, whereunder the hard disk and
> motherboard are
> > placed.
> >
> > My CRT monitor radiates hard with 91.1 kHz, but I found many other
> > frequencies.
> >
> > You may hold a world receiver in front of your laptop.
> >
> > Greetings,
> > Charles Claessens
> > member Verband Baubiologie
> > www.milieuziektes.nl
> > www.hetbitje.nl
> > checked by Norton Antivirus
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Beau" <netfarer2@y...>
> > To: <[hidden email]>
> > Sent: Monday, September 27, 2004 01:48
> > Subject: [eSens] Re: shielding Notebook
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Hi Glenn & Randolf,
> > >
> > > If we can take the computer's CPU clock speed as its highest
> frequency
> > > component then the aperture/mesh size below which shielding for
> the
> > > computer will begin is:
> > >
> > > (0.3 m)/(CPU speed in GHz) or
> > > (300 m)/(CPU speed in MHz)
> > >
> > > Smaller aperture sizes than this work much better. For typical
> square
> > > mesh, divide by the square root of 2 to account for the diagonal
> of
> > > the mesh being its largest aperture width.
> > >
> > > For example, if we had a 1 GHz CPU, then square mesh below (30
> > > cm)/(sqrt 2) ~ (21 cm) will begin to confine the transverse EM
> > > radiation. A 1/4" square mesh has as its largest aperture width
> > > (0.25") * (1.414) ~ (0.35") ~ (0.89 cm) which should readily
> shield the
> > > transverse emissions in the above example.
> > >
> > > Beau
> > >
> > > --- In [hidden email], "Glenn Coleman" <glennhcoleman@h...>
> > > wrote:
> > > > Hello,
> > > >
> > > > I have thought of something similar, but to hook an external
> > > keyboard, and
> > > > use a wire-mesh fence between me and the notebook. I figure if
> wire
> > > mesh
> > > > works on microwaves it may work here too. I may even make a
> whole
> > > box
> > > > around my notebook with notebook sitting in cage.
> > > >
> > > > If it does work, then I can find a finer quality mesh so I can
> see
> > > monitor
> > > > better. I was going to start with some wire fencing with 1/4"
> > > holes to
> > > > begin with.
> > > >
> > > > Glenn
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ----Original Message Follows----
> > > > From: "randolf_everywhere" <Thats@M...>
> > > > Reply-To: [hidden email]
> > > > To: [hidden email]
> > > > Subject: [eSens] shielding Notebook
> > > > Date: Sun, 26 Sep 2004 11:09:02 -0000
> > > >
> > > > Hello,
> > > >
> > > > I am thinking of shielding my Notebook. Maybe with paint or with
> > > > wallpaper on its outside. I tested and know shielding it will
> help.
> > > But I do
> > > > not know If there can occur problems when I do it.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Randolf Weinand
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>

xmanflash2001

Re: shielding Notebook

In reply to this post by Glenn Coleman

" I sense that although many people are getting allot of relief with
methods in this list, nobody has shown complete relief. That is my
goal. Perhaps that will only happen with a non-EMF environment."

Hi Glenn,

I wondered the other day how to escape the EMF.

I thought the most obvious solution, for those that work at home, would
be to use a data projector as the screen on a wall and work on that.

There would be no LCD Fleuro emissions, no EMF radiation from a CRT,
just the projector on the roof, and a mouse and keyboard with very long
extension cables and teh computer about 6 feet away.

What do you think?

Cheers
Pete

Glenn Coleman wrote:

> >being a member of this group for some time, you should think of a simpler
> >solution to protect you against the radiation of your notebook. There
> are
> >enough
> >hints in this list.
>
> Dear Dietrich,
>
> I have tried a number of the solutions, namely Quantum Home, Aulterra
> Neutralizer, SpringLife Polarizer, and diet. None seem to eliminate
> the EMF
> enough to get complete freedom from it at my computer. I always seem to
> have to fight with illness to work at computer.
>
> So I finally thought that creating a complete barrier between source and
> myself may be a good solution.
>
> I look at it as stepping outside the box for a moment and taking a new
> approach.
>
> I sense that although many people are getting allot of relief with
> methods
> in this list, nobody has shown complete relief. That is my goal.
> Perhaps
> that will only happen with a non-EMF environment.
>
> Regards,
>
> Glenn
>
>
>
> *Yahoo! Groups Sponsor*
> ADVERTISEMENT
> click here
> <http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=12cfc8rcf/M=309034.5312427.6491156.3001176/D=grphealth/S=1705062215:HM/EXP=1096330083/A=2349013/R=0/SIG=11ujt3qbm/*http://clickserve.cc-dt.com/link/click?lid=41000000005848070>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *Yahoo! Groups Links*
>
> * To visit your group on the web, go to:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/eSens/
>
> * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> [hidden email]
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=Unsubscribe>
>
> * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
> Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.
>
>

xmanflash2001

Re: shielding Notebook

In reply to this post by bbin37

" Imagine our situation if this signaling is added to the
environmental mix directly through our home wiring."

Hi Beau,

I read an article somewhere that said that those children who did live
near power lines and contracted leukemia were predominantly near power
lines that had signals traveling over them, whereas children that were
living near power lines that were not affected were mostly living near
power lines with no control signals..

I'll see if I can find it.. it might have been http://www.emfacts.com/,
anyhow there is potentially a world of hurt coming towards us in the
situation you mention..!

Cheers
Pete

Beau wrote:

bbin37

Re: shielding Notebook

In reply to this post by Charles-3

--- In [hidden email], "Charles" <charles@c...> wrote:
> Hello Beau,
>
> I still maintain my meaning about those equations.
> Let me go further.
> I think it is a lot of bullshit.

Hi Charles,

I'm glad we can be frank with each other. I agree to disagree with
you. :-D

Note that another person in our discussion group, David Fancy, found
measurable reduction in his modem's transverse EM emissions by
wrapping it in metal window screen mesh. This mesh's aperture spacing
is much smaller than what is nominal for DSL modem wavelengths.
Overlapping of layers was probably a factor, too, though.

> No pun intended, but you cannot calculate the shielding effect.
> You can only MEASURE the shielding effect, and must do that with
> several different frequencies.
> As is done by prof. Pauli of the University of the Bundeswehr (Army)
> in Germany.
> He is the authority for testing shielding materials.
> And a lot of materials do react sometimes quite differently as
> expected!

I don't think we are really saying different things here.

> But a shielding material is not enough.
>
> We have to look very hard at the longitudinal waves, which pass
> right through shieldings.

My post should be taken as limited to non-ionizing, transverse EM
radiation.

> (Here the other *things*, as mentioned in this group, come into
> focus. They all have their working related to longitudinal waves)
>
> It is an overwhelming new terrain.
> But the answers to several questions raise much more new questions.
>
> I realise, that for many of you, this item sounds like something
> out of Star Trek, but it is a reality now, and explains a lot of
> what is happening and why it is happening to many of us.
>

I value our dialog and the wealth of new information you share.

Thanks,
Beau

>
> Greetings,
> Charles Claessens
> member Verband Baubiologie
> www.milieuziektes.nl
> www.hetbitje.nl
> checked by Norton Antivirus
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Beau" <netfarer2@y...>
> To: <[hidden email]>
> Sent: Monday, September 27, 2004 20:11
> Subject: [eSens] Re: shielding Notebook
>
>
> > Hi Charles,
> >
> > I respectfully disagree with you concerning the equation. Please

note
> > that I conditioned the equation's application by an a priori
knowledge
> > of frequencies by saying "*If we can take* the computer's CPU
clock
> > speed as its highest frequency component...". Of course, I do
agree
> > that we can't know all the frequencies without measuring them
first.
> > However, if we assume a maximum for the frequencies a body is
emitting
> > we have concurrently placed a minimum on the emitted wavelengths.
> > Meshes with spacing smaller than this minimum wavelength begin to
> > appear as continuous surfaces without holes for transverse EM.
> >
> > Also, I want to emphasize that I am not saying a mesh provides
*total*
> > shielding of the transverse EM from a notebook computer.
Everyone,
> > please pardon me if I inadvertently gave that impression by saying
> > near the end of my previous message "...should readily shield the
> > transverse emissions in the above example."
> >
> > Let me be more complete. Given a mesh with spacing much smaller
than
> > the minimum radiated wavelength, the level of shielding is
dependent
> > on the characteristics of the mesh material -- its depth, its
> > permeability, its conductivity -- as well as the geometry and
> > frequency of the radiated field encountering it.
> >
> > If we have an aluminum mesh enclosure fitting our spacing criteria
> > with wire thickness of 0.25 mm, a 1 GHz transverse EM plane wave
> > encountering it will be approximately attenuated to around
> > 1/(2.718)^(100) its original amplitude after penetrating the
mesh. A
> > 100 MHz transverse EM plane wave will suffer attenuation to around
> > 1/(2.718)^(33) its original amplitude. In near-field conditions,
such
> > as a mesh around a notebook computer, the level of shielding is
more
> > complex to calculate, but it will exist to some extent for these
> > frequencies for both the electric and magnetic field components.
> >
> > Unfortunately, low-frequency transverse EM won't be hampered by
this
> > mesh even though it 'looks' like a smooth surface to it. For a
100 Hz
> > transverse EM plane wave would require the mesh's depth to be 36x
> > thicker (around 8.5 mm) just to attenuate it down to 1/3 its
original

> > amplitude.
> >
> > Beau
> >
> > --- In [hidden email], "Charles" <charles@c...> wrote:
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > this equeation does not work.
> > >
> > > You can't know what ferquencies are radiating from this thing.
> > >
> > > The damaging part are the magnetic fields emanating.
> > > And we know that they can be heavy.
> > > Especially above the keyboard, whereunder the hard disk and
> > motherboard are
> > > placed.
> > >
> > > My CRT monitor radiates hard with 91.1 kHz, but I found many

other

> > > frequencies.
> > >
> > > You may hold a world receiver in front of your laptop.
> > >
> > > Greetings,
> > > Charles Claessens
> > > member Verband Baubiologie
> > > www.milieuziektes.nl
> > > www.hetbitje.nl
> > > checked by Norton Antivirus
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Beau" <netfarer2@y...>
> > > To: <[hidden email]>
> > > Sent: Monday, September 27, 2004 01:48
> > > Subject: [eSens] Re: shielding Notebook
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Hi Glenn & Randolf,
> > > >
> > > > If we can take the computer's CPU clock speed as its highest
> > frequency
> > > > component then the aperture/mesh size below which shielding

for
> > the
> > > > computer will begin is:
> > > >
> > > > (0.3 m)/(CPU speed in GHz) or
> > > > (300 m)/(CPU speed in MHz)
> > > >
> > > > Smaller aperture sizes than this work much better. For
typical
> > square
> > > > mesh, divide by the square root of 2 to account for the
diagonal
> > of
> > > > the mesh being its largest aperture width.
> > > >
> > > > For example, if we had a 1 GHz CPU, then square mesh below (30
> > > > cm)/(sqrt 2) ~ (21 cm) will begin to confine the transverse EM
> > > > radiation. A 1/4" square mesh has as its largest aperture
width
> > > > (0.25") * (1.414) ~ (0.35") ~ (0.89 cm) which should readily
> > shield the
> > > > transverse emissions in the above example.
> > > >
> > > > Beau
> > > >
> > > > --- In [hidden email], "Glenn Coleman"
<glennhcoleman@h...>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > Hello,
> > > > >
> > > > > I have thought of something similar, but to hook an external
> > > > keyboard, and
> > > > > use a wire-mesh fence between me and the notebook. I
figure if
> > wire
> > > > mesh
> > > > > works on microwaves it may work here too. I may even make a
> > whole
> > > > box
> > > > > around my notebook with notebook sitting in cage.
> > > > >
> > > > > If it does work, then I can find a finer quality mesh so I
can
> > see
> > > > monitor
> > > > > better. I was going to start with some wire fencing with
1/4"

> > > > holes to
> > > > > begin with.
> > > > >
> > > > > Glenn
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > ----Original Message Follows----
> > > > > From: "randolf_everywhere" <Thats@M...>
> > > > > Reply-To: [hidden email]
> > > > > To: [hidden email]
> > > > > Subject: [eSens] shielding Notebook
> > > > > Date: Sun, 26 Sep 2004 11:09:02 -0000
> > > > >
> > > > > Hello,
> > > > >
> > > > > I am thinking of shielding my Notebook. Maybe with paint or

with
> > > > > wallpaper on its outside. I tested and know shielding it
will

> > help.
> > > > But I do
> > > > > not know If there can occur problems when I do it.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Randolf Weinand
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >

Charles-3

Re: shielding Notebook

Hello Beau,

I just wanted to point out, that
1. how nice the calculations may be, measurements show differently.
The occurring frequencies play an important role also.
2. longitudinal waves go right through shieldings.
Some shieldings even reinforce the destructive workings of longitudinal
waves.

It is even possible to neutralise or alter or influence those destructive
workings of longitudinal
waves without any shielding.

We still have a lot of study end investigation in front of us.

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

----- Original Message -----
From: "Beau" <[hidden email]>
To: <[hidden email]>
Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2004 19:04
Subject: [eSens] Re: shielding Notebook

>
> --- In [hidden email], "Charles" <charles@c...> wrote:
> > Hello Beau,
> >
> > I still maintain my meaning about those equations.
> > Let me go further.
> > I think it is a lot of bullshit.
>
> Hi Charles,
>
> I'm glad we can be frank with each other. I agree to disagree with
> you. :-D
>
> Note that another person in our discussion group, David Fancy, found
> measurable reduction in his modem's transverse EM emissions by
> wrapping it in metal window screen mesh. This mesh's aperture spacing
> is much smaller than what is nominal for DSL modem wavelengths.
> Overlapping of layers was probably a factor, too, though.
>
> > No pun intended, but you cannot calculate the shielding effect.
> > You can only MEASURE the shielding effect, and must do that with
> > several different frequencies.
> > As is done by prof. Pauli of the University of the Bundeswehr (Army)
> > in Germany.
> > He is the authority for testing shielding materials.
> > And a lot of materials do react sometimes quite differently as
> > expected!
>
> I don't think we are really saying different things here.
>
> > But a shielding material is not enough.
> >
> > We have to look very hard at the longitudinal waves, which pass
> > right through shieldings.
>
> My post should be taken as limited to non-ionizing, transverse EM
> radiation.
>
> > (Here the other *things*, as mentioned in this group, come into
> > focus. They all have their working related to longitudinal waves)
> >
> > It is an overwhelming new terrain.
> > But the answers to several questions raise much more new questions.
> >
> > I realise, that for many of you, this item sounds like something
> > out of Star Trek, but it is a reality now, and explains a lot of
> > what is happening and why it is happening to many of us.
> >
>
> I value our dialog and the wealth of new information you share.
>
> Thanks,
> Beau
>
> >
> > Greetings,
> > Charles Claessens
> > member Verband Baubiologie
> > www.milieuziektes.nl
> > www.hetbitje.nl
> > checked by Norton Antivirus
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Beau" <netfarer2@y...>
> > To: <[hidden email]>
> > Sent: Monday, September 27, 2004 20:11
> > Subject: [eSens] Re: shielding Notebook
> >
> >
> > > Hi Charles,
> > >
> > > I respectfully disagree with you concerning the equation. Please
> note
> > > that I conditioned the equation's application by an a priori
> knowledge
> > > of frequencies by saying "*If we can take* the computer's CPU
> clock
> > > speed as its highest frequency component...". Of course, I do
> agree
> > > that we can't know all the frequencies without measuring them
> first.
> > > However, if we assume a maximum for the frequencies a body is
> emitting
> > > we have concurrently placed a minimum on the emitted wavelengths.
> > > Meshes with spacing smaller than this minimum wavelength begin to
> > > appear as continuous surfaces without holes for transverse EM.
> > >
> > > Also, I want to emphasize that I am not saying a mesh provides
> *total*
> > > shielding of the transverse EM from a notebook computer.
> Everyone,
> > > please pardon me if I inadvertently gave that impression by saying
> > > near the end of my previous message "...should readily shield the
> > > transverse emissions in the above example."
> > >
> > > Let me be more complete. Given a mesh with spacing much smaller
> than
> > > the minimum radiated wavelength, the level of shielding is
> dependent
> > > on the characteristics of the mesh material -- its depth, its
> > > permeability, its conductivity -- as well as the geometry and
> > > frequency of the radiated field encountering it.
> > >
> > > If we have an aluminum mesh enclosure fitting our spacing criteria
> > > with wire thickness of 0.25 mm, a 1 GHz transverse EM plane wave
> > > encountering it will be approximately attenuated to around
> > > 1/(2.718)^(100) its original amplitude after penetrating the
> mesh. A
> > > 100 MHz transverse EM plane wave will suffer attenuation to around
> > > 1/(2.718)^(33) its original amplitude. In near-field conditions,
> such
> > > as a mesh around a notebook computer, the level of shielding is
> more
> > > complex to calculate, but it will exist to some extent for these
> > > frequencies for both the electric and magnetic field components.
> > >
> > > Unfortunately, low-frequency transverse EM won't be hampered by
> this
> > > mesh even though it 'looks' like a smooth surface to it. For a
> 100 Hz
> > > transverse EM plane wave would require the mesh's depth to be 36x
> > > thicker (around 8.5 mm) just to attenuate it down to 1/3 its
> original
> > > amplitude.
> > >
> > > Beau
> > >
> > > --- In [hidden email], "Charles" <charles@c...> wrote:
> > > > Hello,
> > > >
> > > > this equeation does not work.
> > > >
> > > > You can't know what ferquencies are radiating from this thing.
> > > >
> > > > The damaging part are the magnetic fields emanating.
> > > > And we know that they can be heavy.
> > > > Especially above the keyboard, whereunder the hard disk and
> > > motherboard are
> > > > placed.
> > > >
> > > > My CRT monitor radiates hard with 91.1 kHz, but I found many
> other
> > > > frequencies.
> > > >
> > > > You may hold a world receiver in front of your laptop.
> > > >
> > > > Greetings,
> > > > Charles Claessens
> > > > member Verband Baubiologie
> > > > www.milieuziektes.nl
> > > > www.hetbitje.nl
> > > > checked by Norton Antivirus
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: "Beau" <netfarer2@y...>
> > > > To: <[hidden email]>
> > > > Sent: Monday, September 27, 2004 01:48
> > > > Subject: [eSens] Re: shielding Notebook
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi Glenn & Randolf,
> > > > >
> > > > > If we can take the computer's CPU clock speed as its highest
> > > frequency
> > > > > component then the aperture/mesh size below which shielding
> for
> > > the
> > > > > computer will begin is:
> > > > >
> > > > > (0.3 m)/(CPU speed in GHz) or
> > > > > (300 m)/(CPU speed in MHz)
> > > > >
> > > > > Smaller aperture sizes than this work much better. For
> typical
> > > square
> > > > > mesh, divide by the square root of 2 to account for the
> diagonal
> > > of
> > > > > the mesh being its largest aperture width.
> > > > >
> > > > > For example, if we had a 1 GHz CPU, then square mesh below (30
> > > > > cm)/(sqrt 2) ~ (21 cm) will begin to confine the transverse EM
> > > > > radiation. A 1/4" square mesh has as its largest aperture
> width
> > > > > (0.25") * (1.414) ~ (0.35") ~ (0.89 cm) which should readily
> > > shield the
> > > > > transverse emissions in the above example.
> > > > >
> > > > > Beau
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In [hidden email], "Glenn Coleman"
> <glennhcoleman@h...>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > Hello,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I have thought of something similar, but to hook an external
> > > > > keyboard, and
> > > > > > use a wire-mesh fence between me and the notebook. I
> figure if
> > > wire
> > > > > mesh
> > > > > > works on microwaves it may work here too. I may even make a
> > > whole
> > > > > box
> > > > > > around my notebook with notebook sitting in cage.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If it does work, then I can find a finer quality mesh so I
> can
> > > see
> > > > > monitor
> > > > > > better. I was going to start with some wire fencing with
> 1/4"
> > > > > holes to
> > > > > > begin with.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Glenn
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ----Original Message Follows----
> > > > > > From: "randolf_everywhere" <Thats@M...>
> > > > > > Reply-To: [hidden email]
> > > > > > To: [hidden email]
> > > > > > Subject: [eSens] shielding Notebook
> > > > > > Date: Sun, 26 Sep 2004 11:09:02 -0000
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hello,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I am thinking of shielding my Notebook. Maybe with paint or
> with
> > > > > > wallpaper on its outside. I tested and know shielding it
> will
> > > help.
> > > > > But I do
> > > > > > not know If there can occur problems when I do it.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Randolf Weinand
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>