930 Forums
=> GENERAL DISCUSSION => Topic started by: Frank Gallagher on August 19, 2005, 01:56:00 pm
-
...try this one, it's worked everytime for me.
If you have a car that has remote locking, use it to activate the locking system. Keep doing this as you walk away from the car until you get to the point were you're so far from the car the remote won't work anymore (usually about 40-50 feet)....here's the weird bit.....now put the remote up to head, actually touching your head with the remote, and hit the button!!!! WHATTHEFUCKITSWORKINGAGAIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
How do it do dat????
-
Congratulations - you just gave yourself a tumor
;)
-
shouldn't you be watching the late late show or whatever other wholesome friday night activity they get up to on that emerald isle of yours? :)
Originally posted by O'Mankie:
...try this one, it's worked everytime for me.
If you have a car that has remote locking, use it to activate the locking system. Keep doing this as you walk away from the car until you get to the point were you're so far from the car the remote won't work anymore (usually about 40-50 feet)....here's the weird bit.....now put the remote up to head, actually touching your head with the remote, and hit the button!!!! WHATTHEFUCKITSWORKINGAGAIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
How do it do dat????
-
If I haven't got one from the mobile phone, then I'm immune to them....which brings me to a somewhat related subject.
BLUETOOTH! :mad: It may keep the tumor-growing mobile phone from my head but it has caused me to seek anger management counselling because Bluetooth is the technology equivelent of the Edsell! What a pile of steaming pooh those things are.. :mad:
-
wizard did it
-
Originally posted by god's shoeshine:
wizard did it
did what, and who's wizard?
-
Originally posted by O'Mankie:
...try this one, it's worked everytime for me.
If you have a car that has remote locking, use it to activate the locking system. Keep doing this as you walk away from the car until you get to the point were you're so far from the car the remote won't work anymore (usually about 40-50 feet)....here's the weird bit.....now put the remote up to head, actually touching your head with the remote, and hit the button!!!! WHATTHEFUCKITSWORKINGAGAIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
How do it do dat????
Obviously it gets a signal boost from that metal plate you've got in your head.
-
this is the part of the thread where you say you have to start wearing tinfoil on your head to keep out those harmful "rays", while carrying that jug of ripple in a brown bag.
-
Well, going by the responses, I've baffled the college educated self-proclaimed genius's....way to go on mum & dad's college tuition!!!!
-
O'Mankie, I'm glad to see that your car remote jump started your brain again. :p
Seriously, I would assume that the higher level has less interference from other vehicles and such which probably block or break down the signal.
But the real truth is, it's all those implants the aliens put in your head. Have they started talking to you yet and telling you strange little things like to go looking around the corner for that wee little pot of gold?
Eh, hem. I paid my own tuition. No help from Mom and Dad. And I'm not a genius.
-
Jag, put the remote at head height but not touching your head and it won't work.....let the remote actually make contact with your noggin and WOAH NELLIE!!! guess what????
-
I don't know the frequencies your remote works on, if it is high enough then you can get the reflection off your noggin' in phase with the other signal meaning that you have more RF in the direction of your car. That would be the most likely reason. If it is relatively low frequencies, then your antenna is way too short to be very effective (in the remote) and when held to your head, your body acts as a bit of antenna that works a lot better. A big part of transmitter strength has to do with the antenna and the antenna matching.
Problem is antennas are a complex subject and when combined with how your body reacts with RF you get really crazy stuff going on.
-
Do you have any old dental fillings?
-
Originally posted by O'Mankie:
Jag, put the remote at head height but not touching your head and it won't work.....let the remote actually make contact with your noggin and WOAH NELLIE!!! guess what????
what about when you stick it up your ass?
-
Originally posted by sonickteam4:
Originally posted by O'Mankie:
Jag, put the remote at head height but not touching your head and it won't work.....let the remote actually make contact with your noggin and WOAH NELLIE!!! guess what????
what about when you stick it up your ass? [/b]
That's what he does to get it next to his head.
-
Well, seemed like I stumped you all...even Mr. "I know everthing about everything" GGW.
It's all down to my extra sensory powers!
-
Originally posted by O'Mankie:
Well, seemed like I stumped you all...even Mr. "I know everthing about everything" GGW.
It's all down to my extra sensory powers!
Alright, Mankie, give me some time to sign on.
Your car alarm remote operates at a very low frequency and the human body actually acts as an antenna for low frequency singals. Not all signal transmissions are based on metal - some are based on heat, and for low frequencies like AM/FM stereo and old cordless phones, the heat from the human body actually acts as an antenna and strenthens your signal.
I'm surprised you just now discovered this. You don't have to touch your head either - you can simply put your finger across the front of your remote.
Take, for example, your FM tuner. With no antenna, you get very little recpetion. With a wire antenna, your reception increases depending on the length and access to open air signals. When you touch the antenna, your signal again increases because of your natural 98.6 body heat. The stronger the frequency, however, the less effect your body heat has on the signal. The AM signal is greatly magnified by touching the antenna, but your 2.4 GHZ wireless internet connection has almost no increased signal strength when you touch the antenna. Your old mobile phones (the StarTac being the classic example) operated at mostly 900 MHZ and if you touched the antenna you could use your body to act as a larger antenna then the little wire sticking out of your phone. Now they operate in the 2.4 GHZ stream because digital data travels faster at that frequency and touching the antenna has less of an effect.
Some companies are working on ways to access this natural conducted heat in the human body to send electrical signals and even data through the human body instead of wirelessly. For example, if you saw a movie poster, you could touch the screen and send local show times to your mobile device by touching it's sensor. It's much more user friendly then using bluetooth.
But don't knock bluetooth. Stuff is the bomb.
-
Originally posted by vansmack:
But don't knock bluetooth. Stuff is the bomb. [/b]
Sorry, still say I'm special!!!!
Maybe I just had bad luck with my bluetooth toy. It was crap....lose signal in mid-conversation, wouldn't turn on...then wouldn't turn off. Then it fell apart for no apparent reason. The O2 store replaced it for me but I haven't been arsed to give the second one a try yet, speaker phone is just as easy while driving actually, which is all I tried to use bluetooth for anyway.
-
Originally posted by O'Mankie:
Sorry, still say I'm special!!!!
As in "Special" Olympics....
-
Originally posted by O'Mankie:
Sorry, still say I'm special!!!!
Maybe I just had bad luck with my bluetooth toy. It was crap....lose signal in mid-conversation, wouldn't turn on...then wouldn't turn off. Then it fell apart for no apparent reason. The O2 store replaced it for me but I haven't been arsed to give the second one a try yet, speaker phone is just as easy while driving actually, which is all I tried to use bluetooth for anyway.
You are special in that you're a warm blooded animal. Cold blooded animals send very weak signals.
As for Bluetooth, I will grant you that manufacturers have been pumping out some crap hardware in feable attempts to keep up with demands. My first Motorola headset had to be taken back the next day, but my second one has been brilliant.
-
Originally posted by O'Mankie:
If I haven't got one from the mobile phone, then I'm immune to them....
Sorry Mank, but again, you're not that special. We're all immune to them so far:
Mobile phone cancer link rejected
Mobile phone use does not up the risk of cancer, at least in the first 10 years of use, the largest investigation to date shows.
Past studies had suggested an increased risk of acoustic neuroma - a tumour of the nerve connecting the ear and the brain - but others did not.
The latest Institute of Cancer Research work includes data from five European countries and more than 4,000 people.
Expert advice is still to limit mobile phone use as a precautionary measure.
There are more than one billion mobile phone users worldwide.
Longer follow up is needed to check that health problems do not arise with many more years of use, the researchers say in the British Journal of Cancer.
An independent group for the UK government, led by Sir William Stewart, that looked into the safety of mobile phones in the late 1990s also concluded mobile phones do not appear to harm health.
However, the group said that there was evidence that radiation from mobile phones could potentially cause adverse health effects and that therefore a "precautionary approach" to their use should be adopted.
Precautions
The government currently advises mobile phone users keep their call times short.
And children under the age of 16 should only use mobile phones for essential calls, because their head and nervous systems may still be developing.
The latest data from the UK, Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden, included 678 people with acoustic neuroma and 3,553 without this form of cancer.
This revealed no relation between the risk of acoustic neuroma and the number of years for which the mobile phones had been used, the time since first use, total hours of use or total number of calls.
It is important that researchers continue to monitor phone users over the coming years
Dr Julie Sharp, senior science information officer at Cancer Research UK
Nor was there any link with analogue or digital phones or whether or not a hands free kit was used.
On balance, the evidence suggests that there is no substantial risk of acoustic neuroma in the first decade of use, but the possibility of some effect after longer periods remains open, the researchers concluded.
Senior investigator Professor Anthony Swedlow said: "Whether there are longer-term risks remains unknown, reflecting the fact that this is a relatively recent technology."
Dr Michael Clark from the Health Protection Agency said: "This is good news but we still need to be a bit cautious."
Dr Julie Sharp, senior science information officer at Cancer Research UK, said: "This study provides further evidence that using mobile phones does not increase the risk of brain tumours.
"However, it is important that researchers continue to monitor phone users over the coming years as mobiles are still a relatively new invention."
A Swedish study identified an increased risk of acoustic neuromas among people who had used mobile phones for 10 years or more.
People have been concerned that the radiofrequency from phones might cause cancers, despite the absence of a known biological mechanism for this.
Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/health/4196762.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/health/4196762.stm)