Status
Not open for further replies.

IdleRich

IdleRich
But assuming it's an inverse square law, then 100m away it's decreased by 100 x 100 = 10,000. Ten to the 9 divided by 10 to the 4 is 10 to the 5... so I'm guessing that if you were on top of the pole they would only need to ramp it up one hundred thousand times give or take.
 

Mr. Tea

Let's Talk About Ceps
But assuming it's an inverse square law, then 100m away it's decreased by 100 x 100 = 10,000. Ten to the 9 divided by 10 to the 4 is 10 to the 5... so I'm guessing that if you were on top of the pole they would only need to ramp it up one hundred thousand times give or take.
I was working on the basis that a change from 100 m to 6 m (which is what m_b said) is more or less an order of magnitude change. But I don't know if you can even get within 6 m of the active part of the tower. They're normally quite high off the ground, for one thing, even assuming you can approach the base of the mast.
 

Mr. Tea

Let's Talk About Ceps
Well the null hypothesis is that mobile phone use is harmless, wouldn't you say?
Given that, you know, billions of people around the world use mobiles, and have done for years, and the epidemic of brain cancers we were warned about 20 years ago has singularly failed to materialize.
 

mixed_biscuits

_________________________
'G' stands for gravity: it means that your phone will work in your F15 as well as your F14 while you're loop-de-looping.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top