PartSkeptic’s Thread for Predictions and Other Matters of Interest

[RedStapler]

I have just done something that I have to post here.

It was 11 am and I am in good shape mentally and physically. I have an HP Pavilion dv9000. The power supply was stolen by a worker (along with two other old laptops). I tried to get a replacement, and even ordered one. When it was delivered, the plug was not the right size. I could not see a proper replacement on the internet. These things are very badly specified. An after-thought.

I saw a universal power supply at the hardware store and bought it. 100W with output switchable from 12, 15, 16, 18, 19, 22 and 24 volts - and a 5vdc USB port. The input was 110 vac to 240 vac and also 12 vdc from a car lighter socket. It had 8 different adapters.

So I tried the one that seem to be the right fit. The last thing I wanted was to break anything. I took the adapter out of the rubber holder and I was very happy that it fit relatively easily. I tried it two more times because I wanted to see if I could sense the fit of the inner pin. I also rocked to slightly and gently to feel the fit. Great.

I then assembled the adapter on the power supply, selected the correct voltage and then tested the adapter from voltage and for polarity with a voltmeter. All good.

And then the adapter would not fit. It seemed oversized. I went and got a set of drills and my vernier.

The inner pin was the the size of a 1/16inch drill bit. The outer sleeve of the adapter was 5.45 mm. The laptop socket sleeve was 4.95 mm.

How an earth did I fit a 5.54 mm plug into a 4.95mm hole?

It is possible the hole itself is 5.5 mm and the metal contact fingers are slightly less. I tapered the plastic on the adapter to see if that would help. But it seemed clear that the metal insert in the laptop is 4.95 mm. I have a 5.45 mm metal adapter hitting the 4.95 metal sleeve on the laptop.

Even pressing the vernier hard got me to 5.0 mm in any position.

My initial feeling was that I was hallucinating. But I know what I did. And I took it slow and carefully. Is this a glitch in reality?

So ironic that I have said that posters here are trying to fit a square peg in a round hole and here I fit an larger round peg in a smaller round hole. I thought about temperature difference but it would not accommodate such a difference. Besides both were in the study the whole time.

I can just imagine the responses. I can assure you it is not me messing with you. It might be God.

Dude, this isn't your personal blog.

 

[Pixel42]

I guess you forgot the effects of electrosmog on people.

The effects of electrosmog on people (if any) are what we are trying to establish. Many different ones have been reported. Your experimental design should specify in detail what effects your hypothesis predicts. Otherwise you can just claim whatever symptoms happen to occur as the ones you were expecting.

The test subjects should be over sixty.

Interesting. Why? I'm pretty sure many under 60s are amongst those who have claimed to be sufferers.

Tinnitus first. Then hearing loss. Then memory loss. Then disturbed sleep and bad dreams. Then headaches. Inability to concentrate. Some nausea and perhaps diarrhea. That would be enough for me. The symptoms would be clear enough toward the end. Then alternate the testing with two days on and two days off. Repeat five times. When the person has bad second on-days and good second off-days there is a distinct pattern tied to emfs. Maybe at the end of the three months there would be some convulsions, some hand shaking, some peripheral neuropathy.

Excellent, that answers my first question. So you're now about 60% of the way through designing your test.

If we really did it properly, there would be some performance testing and a brain MRI. And full blood tests. Before and after.

OK, that sort of answers my second question. 70, maybe 75% there.

Now comes the difficult one. Here it is again: "How would you establish whether anything that does happen is the result of the EMF?"

People have been displaying the symptoms you list since before EMF was invented, so they clearly have a great many causes. Suppose your sleeper gets a headache after a couple of days, say. How would you know they wouldn't have got one then anyway, regardless of your experiment?

ETA: OK, I guess the bit I just highlighted sort of covers that too. Obviously the sleeper would have to be blinded as to whether the EMF was on or off, so PS's test protocol would need to be tweaked accordingly (it would have to be randomly determined rather than every other day). But he's nearly there. Success criteria needs to be stated more rigorously if the results are to be statistically significant, probably several volunteers would be needed.

Do you really think that anyone would volunteer for such a test?

Sure, they do all the time.

 

[Mojo]

The test subjects should be over sixty.

Interesting. Why? I'm pretty sure many under 60s are amongst those who have claimed to be sufferers.

According to Wikipedia, some of the side effects of ciprofloxacin may be more likely in the over 60s.

 

[JayUtah]

I know that the Telco executive know there is harm.

You don't know any such thing.

That is why they would not do it.

No. A court properly laughed at a laughable request that the defendant must undertake experiments at the plaintiff's request to provide the evidence the plaintiff should have had in hand before going to court.

Are you prepared to do it?

Wow. There's shifting the burden of proof, and then there's flinging it haphazardly in all directions. There's only one person on the hook to prove your claims: you. If you can't or won't, then your claims deserve all the laughter they're getting.

 

[abaddon]

I have just done something that I have to post here.

It was 11 am and I am in good shape mentally and physically. I have an HP Pavilion dv9000. The power supply was stolen by a worker (along with two other old laptops). I tried to get a replacement, and even ordered one. When it was delivered, the plug was not the right size. I could not see a proper replacement on the internet. These things are very badly specified. An after-thought.

OK I know that is false. I order spares all the time and I know that if you hand over the correct spec, you get the right part. So, either you ordered the wrong thing, or you made this up.

I saw a universal power supply at the hardware store and bought it. 100W with output switchable from 12, 15, 16, 18, 19, 22 and 24 volts - and a 5vdc USB port. The input was 110 vac to 240 vac and also 12 vdc from a car lighter socket. It had 8 different adapters.

Those are OTC items and common as muck. In fact, I have two and there is no "switching" involved in them. One merely plugs them in and they automagically work out the input and output voltage required. It is a long time since I have even seen one with a manual selector.

So I tried the one that seem to be the right fit. The last thing I wanted was to break anything. I took the adapter out of the rubber holder and I was very happy that it fit relatively easily. I tried it two more times because I wanted to see if I could sense the fit of the inner pin. I also rocked to slightly and gently to feel the fit. Great.

OK you are having a giraffe, now.

I then assembled the adapter on the power supply, selected the correct voltage and then tested the adapter from voltage and for polarity with a voltmeter. All good.

Assembled? Seriously?

These devices are simple. Simply select the appropriate adapter from the selection provided and attach it to the end of the wire. One can hardly call that "assembly" unless one has a rather quixotic definition. "Plug it in" hardly seems like "assembly" does it?

And then the adapter would not fit.

Right, so you picked the wrong one. Go back and pick the correct one. These devices are supplied with DOCUMENTATION for that very purpose.

But no...

It seemed oversized. I went and got a set of drills and my vernier.

You went for a set of drills????????

The inner pin was the the size of a 1/16inch drill bit. The outer sleeve of the adapter was 5.45 mm. The laptop socket sleeve was 4.95 mm.

How an earth did I fit a 5.54 mm plug into a 4.95mm hole?

Let me guess, you used a hammer.

It is possible the hole itself is 5.5 mm and the metal contact fingers are slightly less. I tapered the plastic on the adapter to see if that would help. But it seemed clear that the metal insert in the laptop is 4.95 mm. I have a 5.45 mm metal adapter hitting the 4.95 metal sleeve on the laptop.

Yup, you used a hammer.

By filing it you potentially shorted out the PSU and totally invalidated any warranty you may have had.

Even pressing the vernier hard got me to 5.0 mm in any position.

Because you were using the wrong one. What part of this is challenging for you?

My initial feeling was that I was hallucinating. But I know what I did. And I took it slow and carefully. Is this a glitch in reality?

No this is an example of borking a simple task comprehensively.

So ironic that I have said that posters here are trying to fit a square peg in a round hole and here I fit an larger round peg in a smaller round hole. I thought about temperature difference but it would not accommodate such a difference. Besides both were in the study the whole time.

You picked the wrong terminator. Why can you not admit this?

I can just imagine the responses. I can assure you it is not me messing with you. It might be God.

Or it might be a failure of the RTFM procedure.

Look, I will make it easy for you. I have had...must be hundreds of these replacement PSUs through my hands at this point. It is a trivially easy task. I actually keep the superfluous adapters as spares. Seems odd, but has saved many a sinking laptop. All that has happened is that you picked the wrong adaptor, but rather than admit an error, you tried to force it to fit.

BY FILING IT DOWN.

Also, for some reason, you used a vernier. Why? These devices, even the one supplied with the laptop in the first place rely for their correct operation upon a ton of wiggle room. Precision is irrelevant and I have no idea why you think it does.

So some explanation.

The plug that goes from the PSU to your laptop (or any device, really) is cylindrical, a shiny metal cylinder. Actually it is two concentric metal cylinders separated by an insulator. One cylinder is positive, the other negative.

The socket on your device is the reverse. It has a central pillar (intended to contact the inner cylinder of the plug) and a spring contact intended to contact the outer cylinder of the plug.

Notice I said "spring". The outer contact of the socket is sprung so that it forces the inner cylinder of the plug to contact the inner pillar of the socket.

Anyone with a laptop can verify this right now simply by looking carefully at both plug and socket. In the socket, one will clearly see the pillar, and the outer spring contact. In the plug one will clearly see the concentric cylinders separated by an insulator. Usually black, sometimes blue, occasionally red.

For this to work, the plug MUST be smaller than the hole in the case of the device (not the socket itself) to allow that spring action to occur.

It is awfully common for a "customer" to select the adaptor that most tightly fits the hole in the chassis while not understanding that the slack is the very reasons it works at all. If one does that, then the socket pillar cannot contact the inner cylinder and nothing will happen. Rarely have I encountered someone filing it down to fit or similar. But it does generate some humour whenever it happens.

ETA: Since you claim to be an engineer of some sort, why is this a mystery to you?

 

[LongFuzzy]

. One merely plugs them in and they automagically work out the input and output voltage required.

I've never heard of auto configuring the output voltage. How does that work?
Do you have a link to one I could look at? I'm not saying your wrong, it's just I didn't know that could be done.

 

[p0lka]

Testing...
Would you be convinced that I am EHS if my tests showed that I can tell from the pain that I am being radiated? Or would you say I am lying or did not do the tests properly?

If your tests show that you can reliably know whether the wifi is on or off then that would lead to testing of a more specific nature, i'm intrigued to see where it leads.

What would you do if your tests show that you can't?

 

[EvilBiker]

I've never heard of auto configuring the output voltage. How does that work?
Do you have a link to one I could look at? I'm not saying your wrong, it's just I didn't know that could be done.

New to me too. I know switch mode supplies can take a very wide range on input voltages, but output autoconfig? I'm guessing a mistake, and if not, a revelation

Those old output-selectable supplies were notoriously badly designed. A single multitap transformer of dubious origins, multipole switch, cheap wiring, a couple of rectifier diodes and a smoothing cap. Show them any load close to 80% of max rating and they folded like a cheap suit.

 

[abaddon]

I've never heard of auto configuring the output voltage. How does that work?
Do you have a link to one I could look at? I'm not saying your wrong, it's just I didn't know that could be done.

Well as we sit right now, I am posting from my desktop. However, across the room there are two laptops running off generic Kensington PSUs and none of them apparently cares one ****. They just work. If motivated, I could explain exactly how it works, but I have insufficient motivation to explain it. Or even explore it. It works. I could swap the PSUs and be confident that both would happily continue to operate regardless. The explanation is horribly technical and extraneous to this thread. Ask yourself a simple question. If it were false, why would universal chargers even exist? This is, however, not something into which I want to invest a whole bunch of effort. I can suggest a bucket of different methods to achieve the result. It would mean nothing unless one analysed the particular case anyway.

This is a rabbit hole. Last evening, my phone announced that it was shutting down charging because it had detected moisture at the terminals. I knew that was utter BS, but my phone did not. Somehow, from a four pin charger that is incapable of transmitting anything much, my phone detected the presence of imaginary moisture on that very terminal.

 

[Hans]

I must have missed something along the way...why was the five-day course of cipro a requirement before the exposure to the radiation? And why would it prove anything? According to PS, they are "THEY!" so surely he wouldn't believe anything they (sorry, THEY) would say anyway.

Yeah the evil 'They'. Hey but there are only 127 of them in world....see link

https://www.familysearch.org/en/surname?surname=they

 

[LongFuzzy]

Well as we sit right now, I am posting from my desktop. However, across the room there are two laptops running off generic Kensington PSUs and none of them apparently cares one ****. They just work. If motivated, I could explain exactly how it works, but I have insufficient motivation to explain it. Or even explore it. It works. I could swap the PSUs and be confident that both would happily continue to operate regardless. The explanation is horribly technical and extraneous to this thread. Ask yourself a simple question. If it were false, why would universal chargers even exist? This is, however, not something into which I want to invest a whole bunch of effort. I can suggest a bucket of different methods to achieve the result. It would mean nothing unless one analysed the particular case anyway.

This is a rabbit hole. Last evening, my phone announced that it was shutting down charging because it had detected moisture at the terminals. I knew that was utter BS, but my phone did not. Somehow, from a four pin charger that is incapable of transmitting anything much, my phone detected the presence of imaginary moisture on that very terminal.

Sorry I asked.

 

[EvilBiker]

Well as we sit right now, I am posting from my desktop. However, across the room there are two laptops running off generic Kensington PSUs and none of them apparently cares one ****.

[BEGIN derail]

I'll rabbit hole briefly, because I believe you are wrong.

The term universal implies that a power supply is one that can be used in virtually all countries on the planet regardless of the regulatory requirements or input power format.

For eg, in the US, AC is 120V RMS @ 60Hz. In Europe, it's 230V RMS @ 50Hz.

"Universal" also applies with regard to meeting local safety and radio interference regulatory requirements. This is why one finds the terms UL, CE, FCC, and other such markings on the outer case of a power supply.

A switchmode universal power supply will handle any input from around 80V to 300V. However, the output voltage is not auto-adjusting - you still need to specify what voltage you require for your laptop. There are some standard voltages for laptops - a common one is 19V, for example.

I visited the Kensington site - not too much information, but I did notice from Amazon reviews that they have a couple of variants related to the laptop brand, which I would put down to output voltage supplied and connector type. (I could be wrong about the connector type - usually these things come with a variety of output connectors).

The connected device will regulate input current, but not voltage. If you put too high an input voltage in, you will stress input components and eventually release the magic smoke. If you're lucky, the connected device will sense this and shut down, though I don't believe the bog standard laptop has this capability. Too low an input voltage may work, but things will get erratic.

The proprietary USB power supplies (Apple-only or Samsung-only, for eg.) used the 2 data lines of the USB port to detect if the device could fast charge or not, simply by applying specific DC voltages to the data lines. Again, this is current adjusting, not voltage adjusting. The proprietary bit was bypassed a long time ago by chips like this, so most universal USB chargers nowadays can detect what device is attached and then apply the correct voltages to the data lines.

[END derail]

 

[PartSkeptic]

Dude, this isn't your personal blog.

Relevancy:
Emf cause harm and I suffer most days.
I am going to do a test. That requires a log of my health.
Laptop plug. An example of a glitch in reality - demonstrating the illusion of life, the possibility of miracles and of God.

 

[PartSkeptic]

The effects of electrosmog on people (if any) are what we are trying to establish. Many different ones have been reported. Your experimental design should specify in detail what effects your hypothesis predicts. Otherwise you can just claim whatever symptoms happen to occur as the ones you were expecting.


Interesting. Why? I'm pretty sure many under 60s are amongst those who have claimed to be sufferers.


Excellent, that answers my first question. So you're now about 60% of the way through designing your test.


OK, that sort of answers my second question. 70, maybe 75% there.

Now comes the difficult one. Here it is again: "How would you establish whether anything that does happen is the result of the EMF?"

People have been displaying the symptoms you list since before EMF was invented, so they clearly have a great many causes. Suppose your sleeper gets a headache after a couple of days, say. How would you know they wouldn't have got one then anyway, regardless of your experiment?

ETA: OK, I guess the bit I just highlighted sort of covers that too. Obviously the sleeper would have to be blinded as to whether the EMF was on or off, so PS's test protocol would need to be tweaked accordingly (it would have to be randomly determined rather than every other day). But he's nearly there. Success criteria needs to be stated more rigorously if the results are to be statistically significant, probably several volunteers would be needed.


Sure, they do all the time.

How is your memory? Do you live near a cell tower.

You are conflating two different tests.

One in which I personally demonstrate that there are effect to emf which I can sense. Mostly by a delayed headache.

The other was a test proposed to people in power who testify there is no harm. You are busy designing it to prove something. All I say it will demonstrate is that the subjects will stop the test because they feel ill.

You are putting you own stringent test requirements so that you can find fault with any positive test - -perhaps?

 

[PartSkeptic]

(snip all the obvious)

ETA: Since you claim to be an engineer of some sort, why is this a mystery to you?

I know all of what you said. But the hole is too small. Even if I used a hammer. The metal sleeve of the plug, sits on the outer rim of the laptop socket. The sprung contact arms are on the inside of the that metal socket sleeve.

I plan to get a 5.5mm tube and taper it down to 4.5 mm. Then see how far in it goes. That will tell me how much "give" is in the socket.

The puzzle is why it went in fairly easily, and then gave no indication of fitting at all. You claim to be smart. Use it to evaluate my posts for intelligence and sanity. I have found that not only dumb people are biased.

 

[PartSkeptic]

I've never heard of auto configuring the output voltage. How does that work?
Do you have a link to one I could look at? I'm not saying your wrong, it's just I didn't know that could be done.

Me neither. I am curious. It would have to have an exchange of intelligence first because simply raising the voltage slowly until some value of current does not seem possible. Maybe an overvoltage zener set to indicate a lower nominal value? Anyhow, we digress.

 

[Pixel42]

How is your memory?

Deteriorating as I get older.

Do you live near a cell tower.

I honestly don't know. I live in the country, so probably not.

You are conflating two different tests.

No, I'm clear which is which.

One in which I personally demonstrate that there are effect to emf which I can sense. Mostly by a delayed headache.

Yes, that's the one we've been waiting for you to do for over four weeks.

The other was a test proposed to people in power who testify there is no harm. You are busy designing it to prove something.

I realise your proposed test was theoretical, but that doesn't mean I'm going to let its deficiencies go unremarked.

All I say it will demonstrate is that the subjects will stop the test because they feel ill.

Such tests are always stopped if it becomes apparent that the participants are suffering ill effects from it. Whether that would happen with your proposed test could only be established with certainty if it was ever run. The precedent of similar provocative tests suggests it's unlikely that it would.

You are putting you own stringent test requirements so that you can find fault with any positive test - -perhaps?

A successful test is one which establishes the facts. A positive result (if the hypothesis is correct) and a negative result (if the hypothesis is incorrect) are both successful tests. A positive result (if the hypothesis is incorrect) and a negative result (if the hypothesis is correct) are both unsuccessful tests.

The stringent test requirements are essential for any successful test, as they ensure that investigators do not inadvertently fool themselves.

 

[Cosmic Yak]

The industry claims there is no harm. One cannot do tests that show there is no harm. A single test that does show harm is sufficient. I know that the Telco executive know there is harm. That is why they would not do it. Are you prepared to do it?

Let us design one to be built. It would mean three antenna. Straight, 60 degrees left and 60 degree right. This is to get the effect of multiple antenna an also reflections. Amplifiers. Then an arrangement to get random switching of the antenna so that there are periods where all are 4G, then 3G then 2G. And also combination of these. The period can be about 15 minutes each.

Send them signals that are pseudo cell signals. Each antenna would do a pseudo-random sequence of pulses of eight at powers levels that are maximum, 50% and 25 %. The peak power would represent 3,000 uW/sqm and the RMS power would be 1,600 uW/sqm when placed at 3 meters from the subject. The sequences should mimic talking to various cell phones simultaneously and changing as some go off and some go on.

The device would be on the whole time the person was sleeping. Also when at the office. The height should be near the ceiling aiming down.

This is what is not being tested in the laboratories. Since the industry say they are certain such level do not cause harm and that duration is not a factor I cannot see that they can refuse on the basis of no human experiments. If they are harmed then it is a dose of their own medicine.

Just wanted to point this out, from page 328 (No, didn't read it all! Just serendipity.) of your court documents:
You admit you are not sure what is causing the symptoms.
You report a number of pre-existing medical conditions, all of which could be the cause of your symptoms.
You produced no expert medical evidence to support your claims.
An electromagnetic field survey was carried out at your house. The levels were found to be 700 times lower than the recommended exposure level limit.


One more point: you are demanding that the Telko employees undergo a test in which they are exposed to the radiation from the towers for 3 months.
We already have such a test group: it's called 'everyone else in the world'. We are all exposed to EMF from cellphone towers, all day, every day. Only a tiny minority of people develop any kind of symptoms. This is why you need to do a test. You need to discover what is so different about you, that would produce these effects. As the vast majority of the world's population do not manifest any reaction at all, there must be some physiological difference in you. This can be isolated and identified, for your benefit and that of all of us.
Is that reason enough for you?

 

[PartSkeptic]

If your tests show that you can reliably know whether the wifi is on or off then that would lead to testing of a more specific nature, i'm intrigued to see where it leads.

What would you do if your tests show that you can't?

Okay. If the tests on the WiFi fail I would want to know why.

There is one factor that I am starting to realize might be at play. The emfs affect cells that are already compromised or are borderline dysfunctional. If I was to be in very good shape one day, I might not feel the effects. What I will be doing to get round this is that if I do not feel anything, I will stay longer until I am certain it is either on or off.

 

[Cosmic Yak]

Okay. If the tests on the WiFi fail I would want to know why.

There is one factor that I am starting to realize might be at play. The emfs affect cells that are already compromised or are borderline dysfunctional. If I was to be in very good shape one day, I might not feel the effects. What I will be doing to get round this is that if I do not feel anything, I will stay longer until I am certain it is either on or off.

In which case hospitals would be overrun with patients getting worse.
Has this happened?