http://futurismic.com/2008/10/13/interesting-juxtaposition-of-emp-technologies/ Presenting the fact and fiction of tomorrow since 2001 Thu, 11 Mar 2010 21:50:40 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 http://futurismic.com/2008/10/13/interesting-juxtaposition-of-emp-technologies/comment-page-1/#comment-16565 Robert L Tue, 14 Oct 2008 19:10:06 +0000 http://futurismic.com/?p=4350#comment-16565 It's my understanding that an EMP is produced by any similarly large explosion. We (humanity) do not have a lot of experience with large explosions but an asteroid strike (or comet) can cause an EMP effect also. (Lewis 1997,1999) It’s my understanding that an EMP is produced by any similarly large explosion. We (humanity) do not have a lot of experience with large explosions but an asteroid strike (or comet) can cause an EMP effect also. (Lewis 1997,1999)

]]> http://futurismic.com/2008/10/13/interesting-juxtaposition-of-emp-technologies/comment-page-1/#comment-16560 Tom James Tue, 14 Oct 2008 09:47:01 +0000 http://futurismic.com/?p=4350#comment-16560 Thank you very much for clarifying the situation Robert. I will be more careful in the future. Thank you very much for clarifying the situation Robert. I will be more careful in the future.

]]> http://futurismic.com/2008/10/13/interesting-juxtaposition-of-emp-technologies/comment-page-1/#comment-16554 Robert Koslover Tue, 14 Oct 2008 01:22:18 +0000 http://futurismic.com/?p=4350#comment-16554 The Register article is misleading and you have unknowingly repeated some of their misleading information here. To clarify: EMP and HPM are not terms that are interchangeable as technologies, nor do they describe identical threats. The term EMP is normally used to denote the broadband, mostly sub-GHz pulses which are produced as a by-product of the high-flux blast of high-energy particles from a nuclear weapon interacting with the atmosphere at high altitude (often referred to in the past as "high-altitude electromagnetic pulse" or HEMP). These EM pulses can travel huge distances, while inducing very strong currents and high voltages on power lines and phone lines, damaging many, many kinds of equipment. In contrast, HPM refers to high power microwaves, which usually operate at frequencies above 1 GHz, and are produced with various specific types of devices that (more or less) are similar to old-fashioned vacuum tubes but with important technological improvements and customizations for extremely high-power pulsed operation. HPM devices are generally NOT powered by nuclear weapons. They also are generally effective only at short/moderate ranges, and thus such devices are unlikely to pose any kind of broad generalized threat to large communities, in stark contrast to nuclear-generated EMP. The Register article is misleading and you have unknowingly repeated some of their misleading information here. To clarify: EMP and HPM are not terms that are interchangeable as technologies, nor do they describe identical threats. The term EMP is normally used to denote the broadband, mostly sub-GHz pulses which are produced as a by-product of the high-flux blast of high-energy particles from a nuclear weapon interacting with the atmosphere at high altitude (often referred to in the past as “high-altitude electromagnetic pulse” or HEMP). These EM pulses can travel huge distances, while inducing very strong currents and high voltages on power lines and phone lines, damaging many, many kinds of equipment. In contrast, HPM refers to high power microwaves, which usually operate at frequencies above 1 GHz, and are produced with various specific types of devices that (more or less) are similar to old-fashioned vacuum tubes but with important technological improvements and customizations for extremely high-power pulsed operation. HPM devices are generally NOT powered by nuclear weapons. They also are generally effective only at short/moderate ranges, and thus such devices are unlikely to pose any kind of broad generalized threat to large communities, in stark contrast to nuclear-generated EMP.

]]>