The Natural Philosopher wrote
Rod Speed wrote
The Natural Philosopher wrote
Rod Speed wrote
The Natural Philosopher wrote
Rod Speed wrote
The Natural Philosopher wrote
MM wrote
Andy Dingley wrote
Adam Funk wrote

On a related note, is there a good & easy way to destroy data CDs? CDs or CD-ROMs?

If they're CD-ROMs, you can microwave them. You need to space
them apart if you're doing a batch (plastic toastrack, or else a $500 silicon wafer processing boat). You also
need to do them for
just long enough to nuke the data layer, but without cooking the plastic or there's a fume problem. For
regular industrial use I was able to use a cheap domestic microwave from Currys, but
had to mod it with a fixed timer and a single big push button.

CDs can't be nuked to reliably kill the data without getting
them hot enough to cause a fume problem. Shredding is easier, although you do need a hefty shredder.

I do not understand this penchant for microwaving CDs! Toxic, extremely obnoxious fumes will be released.

Absolute bull****.

Yes.

You simply dont understand: you are rapidly heating the
conductive metallisation which arcs and splits apart without
even getting the plastic hot.

It uses the properties of the microwave to put heat into conductors,

No, in fact they just bounce off those. Thats why alfoil on the
ends of say chicken chicken drumsticks stops the ends burning.

Microwaves (to heat) need to get absorbed by something.

Yes, but the destruction of CDs when done right isnt done by heat.

They 'bounce off' thick metal film because they do get absorbed,

They bounce off thick metal film even when there is nothing to
absorb them, like when microwave is empty and you only have the
thick metal walls etc there.

and that sets up currents that effectively cancel the EMF at that
point this reflecting them back with if you like a counteracting
EMF generated by the foil.

That utterly mangles what actually happens.

No, its a valid mathematical way of looking at it actually - and the
way that explains WHY a conductor 'reflects' incident radiation.

Nope.

In terms of a classical EMF model anyway. the same properties
undergo a transform into different equations in the quantum theory
of photon reflection.

You'll go blind if you dont watch out.

But then you didn't do honours in electrical sciences,

You have no idea what I have done.

No, but I have a very good idea from what you say what you have NOT done.

Wrong, as always.

so you woudln't probably have come across teh maths or that particular explanation.

Wrong again.

OK so you accept my explanation now?

Nope, it doesnt explain why the walls of the microwave dont heat up.

Otherwise your actual words say that you HAVE come across my explanation and its common knowledge,

Wrong, as always.

which again contradicts what you said earlier.

Wrong, as always.

You must learn to post properly Rod.

You really need to work on your bull****ting 'skills', BAD, gutless.

You really are not going to win trolling arguments

You wouldnt know what a real trolling argument was if one bit you on your lard arse.

if you fall into every single elephant trap set for you.

Juat another of your pathetic little drug crazed fantasys.

It just makes you look stupid and clumsy.

Thats the mirror you're looking at, stupid.

In spades with your silly **** about concrete.

Microwaves bounce around inside the microwave oven.

yes, and the reason why they do is because the walls are made of metal that is thick enough not to smoke.

They dont even get heated.

Well actually they do,

Nope.

just not very much ;-)

Not at all in fact.

They dont get absorbed by the ends of the chicken drumsticks that you have covered in foil just because they cant
get thru the foil and so whats under the foil doesnt get heated, and so doesnt burn.

correct, but the waves DO get absorbed by the *foil* SURFACE ...
and that's what MAKES the foil SURFACE a microwave reflector.

But there is no HEATING involved.

There is, again, some.

Nope. And you can prove that by putting the same sized bit in the oven not
around something that can conduct heat from where its being absorbed.

Just not very much as nearly all the energy does get reflected

In fact none of it in practical terms gets absorbed, so it doesnt get heated.

It has circulating currents induced in it that set up an opposing EMF that becomes the 'reflected wave'

That is why (in e classical model) reflection happens and not
absorption as it were, nevertheless nothing is a perfect reflector.
The energy that is lost - if its large enough, will heat the
'reflector' and destroy it.

Wrong, that foil does not get destroyed or even affected.

It would if you stuck it in front of a real he-magnetron on a military radar set.

Irrelevant to what happens in a microwave oven.

As it is it just gets a bit warm.

Nope, not warm at all. And thats trivial to prove, as I said.

You still get conduction of the heat thru the bone from the part of the drumstick that isnt covered in foil and so
is heated by the microwaves.

BUT that current itself does heat the foil a bit

Nope.

Yes. Put a mirror in the sun. It still gets hot.

And the walls of the microwave oven dont.

They do,

They dont.

but its only a piddling 800W magnetron and the surface is a relatively good conductor, and quite thick.

And if you put a small piece of alfoil in the microwave with
nothing in the oven that absorbs any microwaves, it doesnt
even get warmed at all.

Nice theory/claim, pity abou the real world.

If you think there is no loss of energy and no heating and can prove that the oven wall reflect 100% of the waves
there's another Nobel prize waiting for you.

Nope.

But my oven walls and perfectly smooth superconductors.

Try that again in english instead of gibberish.

Not as hot as a black plate, but it gets hot.

Because of the IR falling on it.

Exactly. IR ios very short waelength microwaves isn't it?

Nope.

Same for any reflector .

Nope, not with the walls of the microwave oven.

You are a card Rod! I love watching you making an asshole of yourself.

I did with your stupid stuff about concrete.

and if the foil is thin enough...

The reason you get a spectacular light show is the very thin foil getting vaporised by the currents that flow in
the foil because its an antenna.

if it absorbs no power than it wont - cant- get hot.

I never said it gets hot.

You are actually contradicting yourself Rod.

Nope.

Yes,

Nope.

because you said it absorbed power without getting hot

LIke hell I ever did.

and thats why it vapourises!

Everyone can see for themselves that you are lying.

Anyone who can make a metal vapour and strike arcs in it without it getting hot is in for a second Noble prize after
the superconducting microwave walls.

You'll end up completely blind if you dont watch out boy.

Nothing to do with heat.

so how do you vaporise metal without heat, Rod?

With the current flowing in it.

And what does current flowing through a metal do Rod?

When its as thin as that film, it doesnt heat it, stupid.

What is Ohms law, and what does it say?

Nothing like your mindless silly ****.

and where does the power lost in a resistor end up?

Nothing like your mindless silly ****.

Theres a Nobel prize waitng for you

Nope.

Its a bit like saying you want see a voltage drop across a straight piece of metal - well you wont until you have
a larger enough
current and a small enough piece of metal and then you have a fuse.

Cut thats current, not heat.

I squared R, Rod.

It doent get hot.

It doe get hot, child

You previously claimed the CDs dont, you pathetic excuse for a bull**** artist.

Do you have any basic knowledge of physics at all?

Yep.

Liar :-)

Leaves yours for dead in fact.

Concrete too.

CD metallization is thin enough to not withstand the currents
needed to reflect the microwaves without fusing - that's all.

Yes, and its not heat, its currents.

Oh Rod...purlease.

Down on your knees, boy.

reams of your puerile **** any 2 year old could leave for dead flushed where it belongs