Alzheimer's Helmet ???

B

B1ackwater

Guest
BBC
An experimental helmet is being tested by scientists as a treatment
for Alzheimer's disease.

It delivers low levels of infra-red light, which researchers at the
University of Sunderland, believe may stimulate the growth of brain
cells.

Tests in mice showed it improved learning ability and a study in
humans is due to begin in the summer.

Current treatments for Alzheimer's delay progression of the disease
but cannot reverse memory loss.

The infra-red therapy was first developed to treat cold sores.

But when researchers studied how it worked, they found it stimulated
growth of cells and may have applications in other conditions.

Daily therapy

In tests in people with dementia using infra-red lasers, eight out of
nine people showed some improvement, said Dr Gordon Dougal, a GP and
director of Virulite, a medical research company based in County
Durham.

However, in order to safely deliver the treatment through the scalp,
he developed a helmet which bathes the brain in low levels of
infra-red light and would only need to be worn for 10 minutes a day.

- - - - -


Um ... couldn't they just sit out in the sun for
a little while each day ... ???

Nah - better to blow a lot of tax money on some
electronic helmet and a hospital bed than to let
the loonies out on the grass ....
 
On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 14:04:32 -0700, Bob Casanova <nospam@buzz.off>
wrote:

>On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 11:33:56 GMT, the following appeared in
>sci.skeptic, posted by bw@barrk.net (B1ackwater):
>
>>BBC
>>An experimental helmet is being tested by scientists as a treatment
>>for Alzheimer's disease.
>>
>>It delivers low levels of infra-red light, which researchers at the
>>University of Sunderland, believe may stimulate the growth of brain
>>cells.
>>
>>Tests in mice showed it improved learning ability and a study in
>>humans is due to begin in the summer.
>>
>>Current treatments for Alzheimer's delay progression of the disease
>>but cannot reverse memory loss.
>>
>>The infra-red therapy was first developed to treat cold sores.
>>
>>But when researchers studied how it worked, they found it stimulated
>>growth of cells and may have applications in other conditions.
>>
>>Daily therapy
>>
>>In tests in people with dementia using infra-red lasers, eight out of
>>nine people showed some improvement, said Dr Gordon Dougal, a GP and
>>director of Virulite, a medical research company based in County
>>Durham.
>>
>>However, in order to safely deliver the treatment through the scalp,
>>he developed a helmet which bathes the brain in low levels of
>>infra-red light and would only need to be worn for 10 minutes a day.
>>
>>- - - - -
>>
>>
>> Um ... couldn't they just sit out in the sun for
>> a little while each day ... ???
>>
>> Nah - better to blow a lot of tax money on some
>> electronic helmet and a hospital bed than to let
>> the loonies out on the grass ....
>
>I'm a bit curious regarding how infrared applied to the head
>gets through the skull. Or is the claim that conducted heat
>does the trick?

Actually, the skull is somewhat translucent - more so
in near-IR than in visible wavelengths. Any effect
though wouldn't be because of 'heat', but because of
some photocatalytic effect. Thing is, I'm not sure
what's in a human brain that can capture near-IR and
cause a chemical reaction.

Intense light MAY be able to stimulate the pineal glands
of people who still retain a few photoreceptors there, but
nobody is even sure what that would DO. In birds, it
biases them to migrate when the days get short ...

Oh, the best way to get light to the pineal gland -
up the nose, not through the top of the head. The
skull is very thin at the back of the nose and the
location is pretty near the pineal gland. Try jamming
a laser pointer up your nose for awhile and see what
happens. We'll expect a full report next week, unless
your 'third eye' opens and you transcend the material
plane ... or the pointers batteries leak :)

In any event, the SUN is a very bright light emitting
LOTS of near-IR. A lot cheaper than the helmet too.
 
On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 11:33:56 GMT, the following appeared in
sci.skeptic, posted by bw@barrk.net (B1ackwater):

>BBC
>An experimental helmet is being tested by scientists as a treatment
>for Alzheimer's disease.
>
>It delivers low levels of infra-red light, which researchers at the
>University of Sunderland, believe may stimulate the growth of brain
>cells.
>
>Tests in mice showed it improved learning ability and a study in
>humans is due to begin in the summer.
>
>Current treatments for Alzheimer's delay progression of the disease
>but cannot reverse memory loss.
>
>The infra-red therapy was first developed to treat cold sores.
>
>But when researchers studied how it worked, they found it stimulated
>growth of cells and may have applications in other conditions.
>
>Daily therapy
>
>In tests in people with dementia using infra-red lasers, eight out of
>nine people showed some improvement, said Dr Gordon Dougal, a GP and
>director of Virulite, a medical research company based in County
>Durham.
>
>However, in order to safely deliver the treatment through the scalp,
>he developed a helmet which bathes the brain in low levels of
>infra-red light and would only need to be worn for 10 minutes a day.
>
>- - - - -
>
>
> Um ... couldn't they just sit out in the sun for
> a little while each day ... ???
>
> Nah - better to blow a lot of tax money on some
> electronic helmet and a hospital bed than to let
> the loonies out on the grass ....

I'm a bit curious regarding how infrared applied to the head
gets through the skull. Or is the claim that conducted heat
does the trick?
--

Bob C.

"Evidence confirming an observation is
evidence that the observation is wrong."
- McNameless
 
B1ackwater wrote:
>
> BBC
> An experimental helmet is being tested by scientists as a treatment
> for Alzheimer's disease.
>
> It delivers low levels of infra-red light, which researchers at the
> University of Sunderland, believe may stimulate the growth of brain
> cells.
>
> Tests in mice showed it improved learning ability and a study in
> humans is due to begin in the summer.
>
> Current treatments for Alzheimer's delay progression of the disease
> but cannot reverse memory loss.
>
> The infra-red therapy was first developed to treat cold sores.
>
> But when researchers studied how it worked, they found it stimulated
> growth of cells and may have applications in other conditions.
>
> Daily therapy
>
> In tests in people with dementia using infra-red lasers, eight out of
> nine people showed some improvement, said Dr Gordon Dougal, a GP and
> director of Virulite, a medical research company based in County
> Durham.
>
> However, in order to safely deliver the treatment through the scalp,
> he developed a helmet which bathes the brain in low levels of
> infra-red light and would only need to be worn for 10 minutes a day.
>
> - - - - -
>
> Um ... couldn't they just sit out in the sun for
> a little while each day ... ???
>
> Nah - better to blow a lot of tax money on some
> electronic helmet and a hospital bed than to let
> the loonies out on the grass ....
>
I'll remember that if they ask me about using tax money to fund a helmet
for you.



--
"In August Rudyard's listlessness called for another series of major and
very unpleasant medical examinations.... He later joked ... 'If this is
what Oscar Wilde went to prison for, he ought to have got the Victoria
Cross.'", Andrew Lycett, "Rudyard Kipling"
 
On Jan 28, 12:19 pm, b...@barrk.net (B1ackwater) wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 14:04:32 -0700, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> >On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 11:33:56 GMT, the following appeared in
> >sci.skeptic, posted by b...@barrk.net (B1ackwater):
>
> >>BBC
> >>An experimental helmet is being tested by scientists as a treatment
> >>for Alzheimer's disease.
>
> >>It delivers low levels of infra-red light, which researchers at the
> >>University of Sunderland, believe may stimulate the growth of brain
> >>cells.
>
> >>Tests in mice showed it improved learning ability and a study in
> >>humans is due to begin in the summer.
>
> >>Current treatments for Alzheimer's delay progression of the disease
> >>but cannot reverse memory loss.
>
> >>The infra-red therapy was first developed to treat cold sores.
>
> >>But when researchers studied how it worked, they found it stimulated
> >>growth of cells and may have applications in other conditions.
>
> >>Daily therapy
>
> >>In tests in people with dementia using infra-red lasers, eight out of
> >>nine people showed some improvement, said Dr Gordon Dougal, a GP and
> >>director of Virulite, a medical research company based in County
> >>Durham.
>
> >>However, in order to safely deliver the treatment through the scalp,
> >>he developed a helmet which bathes the brain in low levels of
> >>infra-red light and would only need to be worn for 10 minutes a day.
>
> >>- - - - -
>
> >> Um ... couldn't they just sit out in the sun for
> >> a little while each day ... ???
>
> >> Nah - better to blow a lot of tax money on some
> >> electronic helmet and a hospital bed than to let
> >> the loonies out on the grass ....
>
> >I'm a bit curious regarding how infrared applied to the head
> >gets through the skull. Or is the claim that conducted heat
> >does the trick?
>
> Actually, the skull is somewhat translucent - more so
> in near-IR than in visible wavelengths. Any effect
> though wouldn't be because of 'heat', but because of
> some photocatalytic effect. Thing is, I'm not sure
> what's in a human brain that can capture near-IR and
> cause a chemical reaction.
>
> Intense light MAY be able to stimulate the pineal glands
> of people who still retain a few photoreceptors there, but
> nobody is even sure what that would DO. In birds, it
> biases them to migrate when the days get short ...
>
> Oh, the best way to get light to the pineal gland -
> up the nose, not through the top of the head. The
> skull is very thin at the back of the nose and the
> location is pretty near the pineal gland. Try jamming
> a laser pointer up your nose for awhile and see what
> happens. We'll expect a full report next week, unless
> your 'third eye' opens and you transcend the material
> plane ... or the pointers batteries leak :)
>
> In any event, the SUN is a very bright light emitting
> LOTS of near-IR. A lot cheaper than the helmet too.

This is interesting. Thanks. I shall look this up.
 
28 Jan 2008,"spudnuts: his balls, his brains and his crew."
<Eschewtheobvious@aol.com> in
news:aede2014-eec4-4637-82f7-7ac5f5147b58@p69g2000hsa.googlegroups.co
m:

> Anyway, the chemical interaction could be on a level most don't
> understand, due to theory, and lack of knowledge.


THATS RIHT!! IT WORKS!! THEY GIVE MY BRANE SHOCK THAIRAPY EVERY
WEEK AND I GET SMARTER AND SMARTER ALL THE TIME!! NOW I COULD
BEAT RONALD REGAN ARM RESTLING EVEN!!


> Couple years ago,I remember reading an article where a scientist
> had said all that could be discovered, was, and science had no
> where to go.
>
> WHAT a silly man.
>
> Imagine truly unlocking the atom...we've only just begun, now,
> haven't we?

NOT JUST THAT ATOM!! FREE THE ALL THE ATOMS!!

--
YOU STOPID LIBIRAL INTILLECTUWAL MORANS!!
YOU WERE BEHINDE THE DOOR WHEN THEY HANDLED THE BRANES!!
GETTA BRANE!! AND LERN THE LAFFER CURVE!! THEN LET US PRAY AND
SHOOT THE WARBERLERD MURMURLETS!!
 
On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 15:53:19 -0800 (PST), "spudnuts: his balls, his
brains and his crew." <Eschewtheobvious@aol.com> wrote:

>On Jan 28, 12:19=A0pm, b...@barrk.net (B1ackwater) wrote:
>> On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 14:04:32 -0700, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> >On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 11:33:56 GMT, the following appeared in
>> >sci.skeptic, posted by b...@barrk.net (B1ackwater):
>>
>> >>BBC
>> >>An experimental helmet is being tested by scientists as a treatment
>> >>for Alzheimer's disease.
>>
>> >>It delivers low levels of infra-red light, which researchers at the
>> >>University of Sunderland, believe may stimulate the growth of brain
>> >>cells.
>>
>> >>Tests in mice showed it improved learning ability and a study in
>> >>humans is due to begin in the summer.
>>
>> >>Current treatments for Alzheimer's delay progression of the disease
>> >>but cannot reverse memory loss.
>>
>> >>The infra-red therapy was first developed to treat cold sores.
>>
>> >>But when researchers studied how it worked, they found it stimulated
>> >>growth of cells and may have applications in other conditions.
>>
>> >>Daily therapy
>>
>> >>In tests in people with dementia using infra-red lasers, eight out of
>> >>nine people showed some improvement, said Dr Gordon Dougal, a GP and
>> >>director of Virulite, a medical research company based in County
>> >>Durham.
>>
>> >>However, in order to safely deliver the treatment through the scalp,
>> >>he developed a helmet which bathes the brain in low levels of
>> >>infra-red light and would only need to be worn for 10 minutes a day.
>>
>> >>- - - - -
>>
>> >> =A0 Um ... couldn't they just sit out in the sun for
>> >> =A0 a little while each day ... ???
>>
>> >> =A0 Nah - better to blow a lot of tax money on some
>> >> =A0 electronic helmet and a hospital bed than to let
>> >> =A0 the loonies out on the grass ....
>>
>> >I'm a bit curious regarding how infrared applied to the head
>> >gets through the skull. Or is the claim that conducted heat
>> >does the trick?
>>
>> =A0 =A0Actually, the skull is somewhat translucent - more so
>> =A0 =A0in near-IR than in visible wavelengths. Any effect
>> =A0 =A0though wouldn't be because of 'heat', but because of
>> =A0 =A0some photocatalytic effect. Thing is, I'm not sure
>> =A0 =A0what's in a human brain that can capture near-IR and
>> =A0 =A0cause a chemical reaction.
>>
>> =A0 =A0Intense light MAY be able to stimulate the pineal glands
>> =A0 =A0of people who still retain a few photoreceptors there, but
>> =A0 =A0nobody is even sure what that would DO. In birds, it
>> =A0 =A0biases them to migrate when the days get short ...
>>
>> =A0 =A0Oh, the best way to get light to the pineal gland -
>> =A0 =A0up the nose, not through the top of the head. The
>> =A0 =A0skull is very thin at the back of the nose and the
>> =A0 =A0location is pretty near the pineal gland. Try jamming
>> =A0 =A0a laser pointer up your nose for awhile and see what
>> =A0 =A0happens. We'll expect a full report next week, unless
>> =A0 =A0your 'third eye' opens and you transcend the material
>> =A0 =A0plane ... or the pointers batteries leak =A0:)
>>
>> =A0 =A0In any event, the SUN is a very bright light emitting
>> =A0 =A0LOTS of near-IR. A lot cheaper than the helmet too.- Hide quoted te=
>xt -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
>How does this compare to the use of microwaves, for instance, in
>medical procedures?

Microwaves just heat-up things. I've heard that carefully
selected frequencies CAN also induce an electrical current
between two close points ... but it had better be a damned
SMALL current if you're aiming at someones brain.

>And lasers already transfer information, don't they act as agents of
>delivery, quantum deliverance, so to speak? ( oh, lord, deliver me
>from the quantum! And the half -wit who purports to study the
>quantum!)

Unfortunately brains are Mac and lasers are PC ...

You'll have to wait for fully synthetic brains that
include universal optical data ports. Worth 75 years
in a liquid nitrogen vat IMHO ... :)

(btw, I don't see 'synthetic brains' as being made
of silicon and wires - though there may be a speck
or two of silicon in there. more like engineered,
improved flesh ... maybe a fair number of siliCONES ...
that's structured in a logical, addressable, servicable
fashion instead of natures helter-skelter)

>Anyway, the chemical interaction could be on a level most don't
>understand, due to theory, and lack of knowledge.

At present the route to the alleged effect is unknown.
Won't stay that way however. They'll start beaming
stuff at brain tissue samples and do 'before' and
'after' chemical profiles - and thus eventually zero
in on exactly WHAT in there absorbs near-IR and
catalyzes what other reaction.

That's the nice thing about science, you don't have to
stick with just todays 'revealed truth'. Heresey and
new prophecy is encouraged.

>Couple years ago,I remember reading an article where a scientist had
>said all that could be discovered, was, and science had no where to
>go.

We get such pronouncements every 50 years or so. I think
there was even an imperial Roman philosopher who said
that pretty much everything that CAN be known or made
already IS known or HAS been made.

Stephen Hawking himself suggested that the "end of
physics" (and, of course, all daughter sciences) was
upon us. This was back when he thought he and his
friends in the theoretical physics trade were just
about to create a 'theory of everything'.

Of course there are rather a lot of permutations
you can achieve with "everything" ...

>WHAT a silly man.

I'm not sure if they're "silly" ... most who have
made such pronouncements were actually pretty SMART
people, top of their professions. They simply had
an acute failure of 'vision' - and apparently skipped
their history classes too.

>Imagine truly unlocking the atom...we've only just begun, now, haven't
>we?

According to M-theory and superstringers ... that still
leaves eight more physical dimensions worth of stuff to
fool with. My math isn't good enough to work through
their stuff however, so I have to take it "on faith".
Fortunately proof IS availible if one builds enough
skill, so it's a different flavor of 'faith' than
the 'blind faith' preferred by conventional religions.

How do you think a seperated pair of particles act together
over time and distance after all ? Answer ... they are only
seperated from OUR crappy 3-D perspective. 'Time' and
'distance' are 'optical illusions' our space causes for
such events. The 'two' particles are really still joined,
at a higher dimensional level. All is one and one is
all ... as the song says.

Or, more succinctly, "There is no spoon". :)

It's a big BIG universe out there - and we're not up
to it. We'll NEED those synthetic brains ... the new
and improved models ... to get anywhere beyond our
narrow keyhole view of what's there, of what's 'real'.
 
On Tue, 29 Jan 2008 02:30:10 -0800 (PST), Bush sleeps with a night
light and a blankie <goofindoo@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Jan 28, 12:19 pm, b...@barrk.net (B1ackwater) wrote:
>> On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 14:04:32 -0700, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> >On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 11:33:56 GMT, the following appeared in
>> >sci.skeptic, posted by b...@barrk.net (B1ackwater):
>>
>> >>BBC
>> >>An experimental helmet is being tested by scientists as a treatment
>> >>for Alzheimer's disease.
>>
>> >>It delivers low levels of infra-red light, which researchers at the
>> >>University of Sunderland, believe may stimulate the growth of brain
>> >>cells.
>>
>> >>Tests in mice showed it improved learning ability and a study in
>> >>humans is due to begin in the summer.
>>
>> >>Current treatments for Alzheimer's delay progression of the disease
>> >>but cannot reverse memory loss.
>>
>> >>The infra-red therapy was first developed to treat cold sores.
>>
>> >>But when researchers studied how it worked, they found it stimulated
>> >>growth of cells and may have applications in other conditions.
>>
>> >>Daily therapy
>>
>> >>In tests in people with dementia using infra-red lasers, eight out of
>> >>nine people showed some improvement, said Dr Gordon Dougal, a GP and
>> >>director of Virulite, a medical research company based in County
>> >>Durham.
>>
>> >>However, in order to safely deliver the treatment through the scalp,
>> >>he developed a helmet which bathes the brain in low levels of
>> >>infra-red light and would only need to be worn for 10 minutes a day.
>>
>> >>- - - - -
>>
>> >> Um ... couldn't they just sit out in the sun for
>> >> a little while each day ... ???
>>
>> >> Nah - better to blow a lot of tax money on some
>> >> electronic helmet and a hospital bed than to let
>> >> the loonies out on the grass ....
>>
>> >I'm a bit curious regarding how infrared applied to the head
>> >gets through the skull. Or is the claim that conducted heat
>> >does the trick?
>>
>> Actually, the skull is somewhat translucent - more so
>> in near-IR than in visible wavelengths. Any effect
>> though wouldn't be because of 'heat', but because of
>> some photocatalytic effect. Thing is, I'm not sure
>> what's in a human brain that can capture near-IR and
>> cause a chemical reaction.
>>
>> Intense light MAY be able to stimulate the pineal glands
>> of people who still retain a few photoreceptors there, but
>> nobody is even sure what that would DO. In birds, it
>> biases them to migrate when the days get short ...
>>
>> Oh, the best way to get light to the pineal gland -
>> up the nose, not through the top of the head. The
>> skull is very thin at the back of the nose and the
>> location is pretty near the pineal gland. Try jamming
>> a laser pointer up your nose for awhile and see what
>> happens. We'll expect a full report next week, unless
>> your 'third eye' opens and you transcend the material
>> plane ... or the pointers batteries leak :)
>>
>> In any event, the SUN is a very bright light emitting
>> LOTS of near-IR. A lot cheaper than the helmet too.
>
>This is interesting. Thanks. I shall look this up.


Good. The more people who think about such things, the
sooner answers will come.
 
On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 20:19:30 GMT, the following appeared in
sci.skeptic, posted by bw@barrk.net (B1ackwater):

>On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 14:04:32 -0700, Bob Casanova <nospam@buzz.off>
>wrote:

<snip>

>>I'm a bit curious regarding how infrared applied to the head
>>gets through the skull. Or is the claim that conducted heat
>>does the trick?
>
> Actually, the skull is somewhat translucent - more so
> in near-IR than in visible wavelengths.

I wasn't aware of that; I would have thought that UV would
penetrate better - increasing penetration with increasing
energy. Thanks for the info.

> Any effect
> though wouldn't be because of 'heat', but because of
> some photocatalytic effect. Thing is, I'm not sure
> what's in a human brain that can capture near-IR and
> cause a chemical reaction.

Whatever it is, I'd think it would have to be something
naturally "tuned" to the IR frequencies involved, sort of
like microwave ovens are tuned to the (IIRC) rocking
frequency of the water molecule.

> Intense light MAY be able to stimulate the pineal glands
> of people who still retain a few photoreceptors there, but
> nobody is even sure what that would DO. In birds, it
> biases them to migrate when the days get short ...
>
> Oh, the best way to get light to the pineal gland -
> up the nose, not through the top of the head. The
> skull is very thin at the back of the nose and the
> location is pretty near the pineal gland. Try jamming
> a laser pointer up your nose for awhile and see what
> happens. We'll expect a full report next week, unless
> your 'third eye' opens and you transcend the material
> plane ... or the pointers batteries leak :)

<snort!> I think I'll pass, thanks... ;-)

> In any event, the SUN is a very bright light emitting
> LOTS of near-IR. A lot cheaper than the helmet too.

Point. But one would think if the IR available from the sun
could cause significant changes in brain chemistry it would
have been active damn near forever (on a human scale of
"forever", anyway - at least the past couple of
kilocenturies, during 99+% of which humans were essentially
outdoor creatures). Does anyone have data showing that the
incidence of what used to be called senile dementia has
increased in the recent past, since more people have spent
more of their lives out of the sun? (Yeah, I know - the
records from Uruk are somewhat sparse.) Or is it
hypothesized that this effect is some sort of recent
occurrence? Interesting, anyway, and one more reason to
spend more time fishing. ;-)
--

Bob C.

"Evidence confirming an observation is
evidence that the observation is wrong."
- McNameless
 
On Tue, 29 Jan 2008 17:56:57 -0700, Bob Casanova <nospam@buzz.off>
wrote:


>> Actually, the skull is somewhat translucent - more so
>> in near-IR than in visible wavelengths.
>
>I wasn't aware of that; I would have thought that UV would
>penetrate better - increasing penetration with increasing
>energy. Thanks for the info.

UV doesn't go through glass very well either.
 
On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 01:00:38 GMT, the following appeared in
sci.skeptic, posted by David Johnston <david@block.net>:

>On Tue, 29 Jan 2008 17:56:57 -0700, Bob Casanova <nospam@buzz.off>
>wrote:
>
>
>>> Actually, the skull is somewhat translucent - more so
>>> in near-IR than in visible wavelengths.
>>
>>I wasn't aware of that; I would have thought that UV would
>>penetrate better - increasing penetration with increasing
>>energy. Thanks for the info.
>
>UV doesn't go through glass very well either.

True, but not really that simple. This thread prompted me to
do a bit of digging, since all my theoretical knowledge on
the subject dates back to my undergraduate courses (and as
an EE I never had occasion to follow up). I found this to be
a fairly good synopsis of the penetration properties of EM
radiation:

http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/askasci/phy00/phy00890.htm
--

Bob C.

"Evidence confirming an observation is
evidence that the observation is wrong."
- McNameless
 
Bob Casanova <nospam@buzz.off> wrote:

>On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 01:00:38 GMT, the following appeared in
>sci.skeptic, posted by David Johnston <david@block.net>:
>
>>On Tue, 29 Jan 2008 17:56:57 -0700, Bob Casanova <nospam@buzz.off>
>>wrote:
>>
>>
>>>> Actually, the skull is somewhat translucent - more so
>>>> in near-IR than in visible wavelengths.
>>>
>>>I wasn't aware of that; I would have thought that UV would
>>>penetrate better - increasing penetration with increasing
>>>energy. Thanks for the info.
>>
>>UV doesn't go through glass very well either.
>
>True, but not really that simple. This thread prompted me to
>do a bit of digging, since all my theoretical knowledge on
>the subject dates back to my undergraduate courses (and as
>an EE I never had occasion to follow up). I found this to be
>a fairly good synopsis of the penetration properties of EM
>radiation:
>
>http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/askasci/phy00/phy00890.htm

It's all pretty messy, especially if you're talking
biological material. There are hundreds of 'windows'
where the EM radiation doesn't interact with much,
and hundreds of 'closed doors' where it does. The
diff between deep penetration and almost none can
be just a tiny difference in wavelength.

On the whole though, 'short' EM - UV-A/UV-B/UV-C -
expends most of its energy within a millimeter or two.
It is immediately absorbed by proteins, fats, water
and, most importantly, nucleic acids.

"They" are working on a sort of replacement for portable
X-Ray equipment, using visible and near-IR light instead.
While it is rapidly diffused by the tissues, SOME tiny
fraction goes in quite a way, hits something, and then
bounces straight back out again. Apparently if you've
got incredibly good timers, you can flash a beam at
tissue and then pick-out just the rays that bounced
straight back. They went the shortest distance, ergo
returned in the least time. There was some other neat-o
trick for looking deeper and deeper and still picking
out the correct reflections. The timescales are in
picoseconds ... I doubt you're gonna buy one of these
things for $19.95 on the Home Shopping Channel anytime
soon, but it's a COOL concept.

By using a tunable laser as the light source, they can
increase the contrast between different kinds of tissues.
For example, blood absorbs blue-green strongly, but not
fat or water. Scanning at several frequencies in the
blink of an eye, plus a little computing power to make
sense of the data, and a useful picture of someones
innards could be compiled without needing dangerous
x-rays or expensive supermagnets. Not ultracrisp pics
perhaps ... but consider the military, EMS and
walk-in clinic markets. A lot better than just poking
at someone and saying "Does that hurt ?" :)
 
I caught a great "mock-u-mentary" on the Independent
Film Channel the other night called "C.S.A." (Confederate
States of America). The premise was that the confederacy
more or less WON the civil war ... and what would follow.

Very funny ... right down to the built-in "commercials"
for products like "The Shackle" - a GPS locator beacon
thingie you put on your slaves - sold in the style of
Ginsu knives and that other "Only $19.95" crap. Good
teaser for the upcoming episode of COP... er "RUNAWAY"
too, following the brave officers in their quest to
reunite uppity slaves with their massas.

Historical events, even part of the JFK/Nixon TV
debate, were woven in, the meanings changed by
assigning a new context (is JFK talking about the
cold war and communism, or the 'slave problem' ?).

And then the "cotton curtain" ... a huge wall built
between the US and Canada ... :)

It WAS a bit rough in spots, a better director with
better actors could have made it smoother, but all
in all it's worth watching.

The producers, of course, believed that slavery and
race issues would dominate affairs in a "CSA". In
truth, slavery would have been phased out pretty
quickly ... the economic and logistical problems of
that system were becoming obvious even in the 1860s.
Instead I expect a kind of apartheid would have
become the norm.
 
On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 13:17:42 GMT, bw@barrk.net (B1ackwater) wrote:

>
>The producers, of course, believed that slavery and
>race issues would dominate affairs in a "CSA". In
>truth, slavery would have been phased out pretty
>quickly

What's your definition of "pretty quickly"? I'm thinking maybe 50 or
60 years. Just because there were problems doesn't mean that people
would abandon it easily. Just look how intractible things like
Communism turn out to be despite the problems they cause.
 
On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 19:24:42 GMT, David Johnston <david@block.net>
wrote:

>On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 13:17:42 GMT, bw@barrk.net (B1ackwater) wrote:
>
>>
>>The producers, of course, believed that slavery and
>>race issues would dominate affairs in a "CSA". In
>>truth, slavery would have been phased out pretty
>>quickly
>
>What's your definition of "pretty quickly"? I'm thinking maybe 50 or
>60 years.
>Just because there were problems doesn't mean that people
>would abandon it easily. Just look how intractible things like
>Communism turn out to be despite the problems they cause.

We'll never know for sure ...

Just fighting a war over it would tend to make
people keep the institution they fought for,
longer than if they perceived the war as being
mainly over other issues (which there were ...
'states rights' and northern tricks to reduce
southern profits amongst them).

I'd say 20 years until some slaveholders started
freeing their chattel. The speed at which the rest
did it would depend on the social status of the
earlier emancipators. If they were important,
influential men then freeing ones slaves would
become something 'respectable' people did, a
fashion trend. Those who didn't actually FREE
them would be expected to take better care of
their slaves ... maybe even start paying them
a pittance.

The actual legal right to keep slaves though ...
50 years may be pretty close. The war generation
would have to die off.

Oh, and there was one OTHER important consideration,
something even imperial Romans noted - once you put
someone in chains, crush them down under your heel,
be VERY careful about ever letting them up again
lest you get a knife in your back. Ex-slaves will
NOT be "grateful" ... they'll be ANGRY over their
time in chains.

Which is why the KKK and 'Jim-Crow' followed the war.
Had to KEEP 'em down so they wouldn't get uppity, and
dangerous. Remember, in some areas, african slaves
outnumbered 'whites'. There's always a pointy-headed
faction too that LIKES being 'massa' because it's
their ONLY claim to 'superiority'. Most of them
gravitated towards the KKK over the years.
 
On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 22:09:22 -0500, the following appeared
in sci.skeptic, posted by B1ackwater <bw@barrk.net>:

>Bob Casanova <nospam@buzz.off> wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 01:00:38 GMT, the following appeared in
>>sci.skeptic, posted by David Johnston <david@block.net>:
>>
>>>On Tue, 29 Jan 2008 17:56:57 -0700, Bob Casanova <nospam@buzz.off>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>> Actually, the skull is somewhat translucent - more so
>>>>> in near-IR than in visible wavelengths.
>>>>
>>>>I wasn't aware of that; I would have thought that UV would
>>>>penetrate better - increasing penetration with increasing
>>>>energy. Thanks for the info.
>>>
>>>UV doesn't go through glass very well either.
>>
>>True, but not really that simple. This thread prompted me to
>>do a bit of digging, since all my theoretical knowledge on
>>the subject dates back to my undergraduate courses (and as
>>an EE I never had occasion to follow up). I found this to be
>>a fairly good synopsis of the penetration properties of EM
>>radiation:
>>
>>http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/askasci/phy00/phy00890.htm
>
> It's all pretty messy, especially if you're talking
> biological material. There are hundreds of 'windows'
> where the EM radiation doesn't interact with much,
> and hundreds of 'closed doors' where it does. The
> diff between deep penetration and almost none can
> be just a tiny difference in wavelength.

Yep, that's the sense I got from what I managed to find with
a short search, and it even makes sense, given the large
number of interaction modes.

> On the whole though, 'short' EM - UV-A/UV-B/UV-C -
> expends most of its energy within a millimeter or two.
> It is immediately absorbed by proteins, fats, water
> and, most importantly, nucleic acids.

From what I read, while ordinary window glass is pretty much
opaque to UV-A, it's much closer to transparent to UV-B
(IIRC something like 60% transmission; don't recall the
thickness). Which pretty much sucks, since it's UV-B which
has the potential to cause the greatest harm.

> "They" are working on a sort of replacement for portable
> X-Ray equipment, using visible and near-IR light instead.
> While it is rapidly diffused by the tissues, SOME tiny
> fraction goes in quite a way, hits something, and then
> bounces straight back out again. Apparently if you've
> got incredibly good timers, you can flash a beam at
> tissue and then pick-out just the rays that bounced
> straight back. They went the shortest distance, ergo
> returned in the least time. There was some other neat-o
> trick for looking deeper and deeper and still picking
> out the correct reflections. The timescales are in
> picoseconds ... I doubt you're gonna buy one of these
> things for $19.95 on the Home Shopping Channel anytime
> soon, but it's a COOL concept.
>
> By using a tunable laser as the light source, they can
> increase the contrast between different kinds of tissues.
> For example, blood absorbs blue-green strongly, but not
> fat or water. Scanning at several frequencies in the
> blink of an eye, plus a little computing power to make
> sense of the data, and a useful picture of someones
> innards could be compiled without needing dangerous
> x-rays or expensive supermagnets. Not ultracrisp pics
> perhaps ... but consider the military, EMS and
> walk-in clinic markets. A lot better than just poking
> at someone and saying "Does that hurt ?" :)

Definitely a neat idea, assuming they don't need power
levels in the kW range to get usable results. ;-)
--

Bob C.

"Evidence confirming an observation is
evidence that the observation is wrong."
- McNameless
 
On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 21:28:08 GMT, bw@barrk.net (B1ackwater) wrote:

>On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 19:24:42 GMT, David Johnston <david@block.net>
>wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 13:17:42 GMT, bw@barrk.net (B1ackwater) wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>The producers, of course, believed that slavery and
>>>race issues would dominate affairs in a "CSA". In
>>>truth, slavery would have been phased out pretty
>>>quickly
>>
>>What's your definition of "pretty quickly"? I'm thinking maybe 50 or
>>60 years.
>>Just because there were problems doesn't mean that people
>>would abandon it easily. Just look how intractible things like
>>Communism turn out to be despite the problems they cause.
>
> We'll never know for sure ...
>
> Just fighting a war over it would tend to make
> people keep the institution they fought for,
> longer than if they perceived the war as being
> mainly over other issues (which there were ...
> 'states rights'

The only states rights at issue were slavery and the right to secede.
and northern tricks to reduce
> southern profits amongst them).
>
> I'd say 20 years until some slaveholders started
> freeing their chattel.

That would have been illegal.
 
David Johnston <david@block.net> wrote:

>On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 21:28:08 GMT, bw@barrk.net (B1ackwater) wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 19:24:42 GMT, David Johnston <david@block.net>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 13:17:42 GMT, bw@barrk.net (B1ackwater) wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>The producers, of course, believed that slavery and
>>>>race issues would dominate affairs in a "CSA". In
>>>>truth, slavery would have been phased out pretty
>>>>quickly
>>>
>>>What's your definition of "pretty quickly"? I'm thinking maybe 50 or
>>>60 years.
>>>Just because there were problems doesn't mean that people
>>>would abandon it easily. Just look how intractible things like
>>>Communism turn out to be despite the problems they cause.
>>
>> We'll never know for sure ...
>>
>> Just fighting a war over it would tend to make
>> people keep the institution they fought for,
>> longer than if they perceived the war as being
>> mainly over other issues (which there were ...
>> 'states rights'
>
>The only states rights at issue were slavery and the right to secede.

Significant, dontchathink ?

>>and northern tricks to reduce
>> southern profits amongst them).
>>
>> I'd say 20 years until some slaveholders started
>> freeing their chattel.
>
>That would have been illegal.

For awhile. As the war generation died off
however, things could change.

But we'll never know. That future is running in
some parallel quantum universe, beyond our reach.

However, a divided USA ... probably would have
fallen to some or another predator.
 

Similar threads

WorldNews
Japan logs ninth monthly price fall in November
Replies
0
Views
23
WorldNews
WorldNews
WorldNews
Emission probes could widen beyond Renault in France: Minister
Replies
0
Views
26
WorldNews
WorldNews
S
Golf-McIlroy out of Abu Dhabi Championship with rib injury
Replies
0
Views
27
Sports News
S
S
McIlroy out of Abu Dhabi Championship with rib injury
Replies
0
Views
30
Sports News
S
WorldNews
New testing of Ebola vaccine to start next month in Canada
Replies
0
Views
27
WorldNews
WorldNews
Back
Top