HAWK Aquisition by RoAF

No,I can't explain that.I was writing in a hurry probably.Since X-Ray ,radiowaves etc are all electromagnetic ones it makes no sense what I have writen. As for the "EM radiations are dangerous" part this is quite corect.However,thanks for confirming that RW are indeed dangerous.
Thanks.

PS: about the link I gave you,check section 2.3 :
"While the accelerator is the most obvious source of radiation at a facility,
there can be others, such as klystrons, experimental devices in other buildings,
or RF tests. These other sources can be much harder to control because the
health physicist may not know they exist, the way that the radiation is produced
may not be understood, or, the experimenter or user may not recognize that a
device produces radiation.
In general, whenever there is high voltage or RF power in a vacuum, x-rays
can be produced. This is true even though there is no heated filament or some
other obvious source of electrons. Since the physics is not well understood, some -.
anecdotal examples will show the severity of these radiation problems."

PPS: if you want to fool around with the fact that only cosmic ,gamma and X-ray radiations are the only one causing irradiation well,some people hurt themselves even watching the light or operating a MW oven.

PPPS:

I've stopped it. I know what I wanted to know.Don't bother anymore.

I have never said that all EM radiation is harmless. See for example my post of 27 Jul 2005. On the other hand, you seem to back up from your previous statement that all EM radiation is equally harmless. I hope you realised that it is not true. Only high intensity radio waves and even light (lasers) is known to be dangerous. Low intensity radiation in this frequency range has not been proven to produce dangerous biological effects. The huge difference is that the X-rays are dangerous irrespective of their intensity. Think that next time you are close to a source of ionising radiation irrespective of its strength.

I did. The key there (which you obviously overlooked) is "high voltage or RF power in a vacuum ". Again, high intensity and special conditions. I though we were speaking about ANY radio waves and the human body.

I am neither 'fooling around' (i.e., committing adultery), nor am I kidding you with these things. I only wanted to make you have a realist view of the situation, i.e., that there is a big difference between X-rays and other electromagnetic radiation. To end with a joke, following your reasoning the bed must be the most dangerous thing in the world since more people die in one than in any other place.

I see, when cornered, you give up without acknowledging your mistake. Over for me as well. I hope you have no hard feelings.

Actually I did.Your big ego obstructs your view to clearly read what I have wrote in my previous post.I don't have any hard feelings,I have no reason at all.As I said,I know enough now for further investigations in the matter if I please to do so.

Now,for the rest of your post (I'm quite lazy in quoting every phrase.That actually cost me and made some mistakes but no,that didn't cure it).Low intensity radiation has not been proven dangerous in the state we met them day bay day.However , everyone agree that in given circumstances they are as harmfull as any other one further on the EM spectrum scale.And I did not spoke about ANY RW as you suggested.I merely did a mistake mixing terms.Mistake which I aknowledged further.Sorry for not being clear/coherent.

PS:you have quite a funny way following someones reasoning.You know,a bed can be used for much more funny things instead of being used to die in.Think sleep if you can't imagine any other ways of using the forementioned object.

This post has been edited by Zayets on September 14, 2005 05:47 pm

My apologies then.

Don't worry, my imagination knows no boundaries. But you must acknowledge that sometimes it can be more exciting to "fall asleep" in other places than in bed.

I do not contest that.It happens few times when I was young and quite in form.Sleeping in a pub,for example,that's notheworthy.But then again,I know that I have abused my body in these establishments while I was younger.There's no need to repeat the same things now.Besides,that's off topic as anyone guessed it.

Zayets, avoid personal remarks. They are not tolerated here.

Thank you.

I agree. While the noise of a pub might seem disconcerting to many attempted to sleep, it could very efficiently dampen the "snoring". On the other hand, the whole atmosphere there is rather dangerous to health, so I am glad that you are OK. But do not give up sleep on the grounds of age. Sleeping will actually keep your body young. Be aware though of occasional naps at the wrong time or in unsafe places as they are extremely dangerous to health and pocket.

Please stay on topic.

I fail to see your problem.But then again ,probably you are right. Is all about personal remarks in this world.

This post has been edited by Zayets on September 15, 2005 05:32 am

I recommend you not to fail see the problem. If you can't help it it's your business, I just draw your attention on how things are going here.

You just made a personal remark.Is that wrong?No? Well then ...
Besides I'm quite tired of you picking always the same subject when there are more obvious "personal remarks". You become very predictable and quite annoying in your baseless afirmations/accusations.

http://www.defense-update.com/features/du-...ture-shorad.htm maybe you find your info from sites that state who classify the patriot pac-3 s being a shorad,or the slamraam. pantsyr is nota short or a medium range systme is more of a mix between them(missiles have a 20kms range not 12 as you stated) and the guns can engage targets at around 4000 ms >And the sa-9 is not a manpad of course i dont know where you got that,my writting style may have been bad but that doesnt show i confused a sa-9 for a manpad.'
And from now on before saying something act as a detective,check more sources before beiong sure that the pantsyr has only 12 kms engangement range with his missiles.
The closest time youve been to a shorad i asume was when you last searched on google about them.

The F-117 was downed by the yugoslavs with a modified SA-3.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2005-10...POE=click-refer