Thanks all for your thinking.  Yes its getting OT.  I don't mind the
OTness but I would also like the T discussion to continue as well.


On Wed, Jan 30, 2008 at 05:47:42PM -0200, Marcus Andree wrote:
quoted text
> The condition your wife is subject to, IMO, is _very_ unusual and
> deserves better study...

About a year ago, there was a news item on CBC national TV news about a
fellow who had a seisure whenever a diesel-electric train went by.  He
had to move to a trailer in a field miles away from the nearest train
line and away from power.  I imagine he buys his propane in bulk (light,
heat, etc).  We contacted Dr. Havas at Trent U. who was interviewed on
the topic.  

Yes our problems go much deeper than just tolerating the computer but
this is something which I can chip away at.

quoted text
> I'm increasing the "off-topicness" of this thread, but Daniel is right.
> 
> If your wife is more sensitive to higher frequencies, it should be more
> easier to isolate her from electromagnetic fields. Lower frequency
> radiation, like the 50 or 60hz coming from our electrical power networks
> is more capable of penetrating metallic (or other conductive material) sheets.

She's also sensitive to lower-freq and even DC electric fields (e.g. a
battery with no external current flow) but in a different manner.  OTOH,
she got worse when they extended wireless internet and better cell
coverage out here (we're in rural south-eastern Ontario).

quoted text
> 
> So, it's probably more likely that she's sensitive to other classes of
> electrical
> devices, which should be given more attention... One thing that can
> be an issue is tje fact of digital circuits running at higher speed
> (gigahertz range)
> tends to consume more electrical power, raising the amperage running
> in your electrical wires, and, subsequently, the 50 or 60hz electrical field
> in close range.
> 

Another reason to use the VT520 (17 Watt) nearer to her and the server
farther away.

quoted text
> The digital watch clock is puzzling: surely the quartz cristal inside
> nearly every
> digital clock isn't in the gigaherts range AND they consume very low power...
> The proximity to her body can be a factor...
> 

It could also just be the battery.

Thanks,

Doug.