Talk:Extremely low frequency

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Resonant frequency of the ionosphere[edit]

In this galaxy long ago and far away, someone told me that military ELF communication frequencies were mostly multiples of 8 Hz, "because that is the resonant frequency of the ionosphere." The guy was not a crank but a cognizant radio engineer working for a government contractor. Some fun discussions we had around the table at tea breaks. (Blame the H-1B visa for the tea.)

Seeing RC activity on this article, I went looking, and found a nice article on Schumann resonancesWikipedia's W.svg which pretty much verifies that. Thanks for stirring it up, Cosmikdebris! Alec Sanderson (talk) 00:06, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

How to edit those articles? Lol Add that mind control can be accomplished by the usage of ELF because if one is unaware of being targetted you can easily let the target think that the stuff you say into that microphone are its own thoughts. 100% confirmed

This article is garbage[edit]

I see in the history that the entire article was constructed by 3 people wow lots of participation - most of it is worthless - don't even bother. It only takes one or two erroneous statements to discredit a scientific article, but this one is virtually all errors, I don't have time to cite them all but, for starters...and this is just an example of someone making inferences and citing them as facts... "Because they easily propagate through fluids such as the ocean, they've been used for submarine communications." - This is not correct- the reason they are used is because they have overall good propagation characteristics, both spatial and physical (ie interaction with other materials) propagation is proportional to frequency - the lower the frequency, the better the propagation overall. Even if the sub is above water low frequency VLF is still required. This person probably read the Wikipedia article on sub communication and just made this inference.

Second, the concern about ELF and cognitive effects has nothing to do with having to go as far as proving that mind control is possible, it is possible to create undesired cognitive effects by exposing a subject to high levels of ELF. This is absolutely unequivocal and can be understood via basic physics. Brainwaves are generated by our neural networks which acts as both an oscillator and antenna. This oscillating electrical circuit, would be sensitive to exposure at the resonant frequencies that it is generating, this is simple jamming in communications parlance. The question of whether or not mind control is possible is unknown and it seems clear that a high level of technological sophistication would be required along with a high level of understanding in the area of neuroscience and cognitive science. But to say that it is not possible to induce undesirable cognitive effects by exposing a subject to high levels of ELF is simply incorrect based on current research - and there is current research available at a high level for this. (ie the NIH here in the US).

Regarding people being targeted by ELF - ELF can be modulated in any higher frequency signal such as FM, Ghz cellular, satellite Ghz etc. Furthermore triangulation can be used to deliver radiation to create a standing wave (ie a hotspot where the field strengths are higher than normal) in an area whose minimum size is determined by the wavelength of the for the case of GSM cell phone frequencies which are between 1 and 2 Ghz, this corresponds to a wavelength of 1 to 2 feet and a corresponding standing wave which could be focused over and area corresponding to a sphere having a diameter of 1 to 2 feet, these are minimum sizes. As far as how to track an individual in order to keep the standing wave focused on the desired area (ie a persons skull) - if the person has a smart phone, and the operating system allows for the phone to be tracked over the network, then the position of the person would be known. Most smart phones have satellite and cellular tracking capabilities, if the operating system allows for it, as long as a battery and sim card are inserted in the phone, even if the phone is off, it would be possible to get a position fix on the phone corresponding to either 1-2 Ghz accuracy or in the case of satellite 10 Ghz accuracy ie within a precision in the inches range. Statistical analysis could of course be employed to determine the location of the persons skull in relationship to where the person likes to keep the cell phone most of the time. Beyond that a larger area could be tracked (say a sphere of 10 feet in diamter) by simply moving the hot spot around or using FM etc.

Finally it is stated that ELF (and this only applies to "true analog ELF" ie not ELF modulated in a higher frequency carrier or digitally generated ELF) antennas must be large installations due to the antenna requirements. While this was historically true for the US up until 2004 when the Clam Lake facility closed, it is not known what present day technology allows for. Suffice it to say that the Navy publicly stated that the rationale for closing the facility was that it was "obsolete and outdated". It is not known what technology the navy is currently using for VLF and ELF communications...but again, suffice it say that the signal can be generated using digital signal processing and provided the amplification process is precise enough there would be a reduction in the required minimum fraction of total wavelength required for the antenna size...the more precise the antenna or transmitter is constructed, the smaller it can be. I can provide plenty of references and will engage anyone who wishes to discuss the physics of these assertions. Also it is important to note that THIS ARTICLE DOES NOT MENTION THE NAVY YARD SHOOTINGS where the victim claimed he was being attacked by ELF radiation. (talk) 18:56, 6 May 2017 (UTC)PP

Place new sections/comments at the bottom, not the top. CorruptUser (talk) 20:30, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
The general motto of the Wikiverse - Don't complain about a page, do something.
The main questions - why are 'they' chasing people round with radio signals and how does this subject tie in with Project Blue Beam? And why not co-opt existing technology (eg targeted ads that 'follow' your recent searches). (talk) 21:09, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
At least we have extensive footnotes to non-insane sources. By contrast, I don't see ANY sources for the BoN nutty claims. Leuders (talk) 21:13, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
I presume you mean the other BoN. (talk) 21:25, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
You have contested absolutely not one single specific thing that I have said, its obvious that you can't, so you won't, but you will come back with some crybaby replies that are useless216.255.244.203 (talk) 21:31, 6 May 2017 (UTC)PP
@ Yes I meant the first BoN,, i.e. the fellow who is convinced Navy Yard shooting constitutes unassailable proof the government is attacking people with ELF. Leuders (talk) 21:34, 6 May 2017 (UTC)


Have 'they' co-opted the large scale array telescopes into their mis-focused weltanshauungs? (And they would not like that word either) (talk) 18:16, 1 August 2017 (UTC)


Can a dreadful pun be created using the Safety Elf from Health and Safety? Anna Livia (talk) 16:07, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

Wow, a Britticism even cosmopolitan world-traveled me had to look up --and yet still don't fully grok. I understand the health and safety/nanny state thing. But are there mythical Elf creatures involved? And how is all this connected to English Lingua Franca? Leuders (talk) 17:35, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
A triple word-play usage noting the incongruence of ELF, elf-away-with-the-fairies and 'Elf and Safety - but that there could be a partial overlap. Anna Livia (talk) 15:43, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

First ELF device?[edit]

Does James Tilly Matthews' air loom count as an early equivalent? Anna Livia (talk) 16:01, 22 December 2017 (UTC)