XPost: sci.electronics.design
From: nospam@de-ster.demon.nl
Bill Sloman wrote:
> On 20/02/2026 9:35 pm, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > Bill Sloman wrote:
> >
> >> On 20/02/2026 7:41 am, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> >>> wBill Sloman wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On 20/02/2026 12:13 am, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> >>>>> Bill Sloman wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> On 19/02/2026 9:56 pm, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> >>>>>>> Bill Sloman wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On 19/02/2026 7:49 am, Ross Finlayson wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> On 02/18/2026 12:43 PM, Python wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> Le 18/02/2026 à 20:13, Ross Finlayson a écrit :
> >>>>>>>>>> ..
> >>>>>>>>>>> and, you know, magnetic monopoles, is widely employed
> >>>>>>>>>>> in medical imaging and the like.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> No.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Resonance imaging (NMR) is a thoroughly different mechanism
> >>>>>>>>> than Roentgen rays.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> But as the name implies, it's nuclei of the atoms involved that
> >>>>>>>> exhibit the resonance. It's a remarkably low energy effect, and you
> >>>>>>>> need remarkably high magnetic fields to get it to give you a
> >>>>>>>> detectable signal.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Nevertheless, it is easily demonstrated in the kitchen
> >>>>>>> with some simple electronics.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Sort of.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_magnetic_resonance
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> There are lots of different ways to exploit nuclear magnetic
resonance.
> >>>>>> The earth's magnetic field is high enough to let you devise
experiments
> >>>>>> that can demonstrate the effect on a kitchen table.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Nothing 'sort of'.
> >>>>> You -can- easily demonstrate the effect on the kitchen table.
> >>>>> (at audio frequencies) Wikipedia is right here.
> >>>>
> >>>> Yes, but we were talking about medical imaging, not nuclear magnetic
> >>>> resonance in general, and your assertion is the irrelevance here, as the
> >>>> text you snipped pointed out.
> >>>
> >>> Which 'we' dear Bill?
> >>
> >> If you can't work that out, you aren't worth talking to.
> >>
> >>> I replied to your
> >>> ===
> >>>>>>> But as the name implies, it's nuclei of the atoms involved that
> >>>>>>> exhibit the resonance. It's a remarkably low energy effect, and you
> >>>>>>> need remarkably high magnetic fields to get it to give you a
> >>>>>>> detectable signal.
> >>> ===
> >>> which is just plain wrong.
> >>
> >> In your ever-so-authoritative opinion.
> >>
> >>> As a matter of fact, zero to ultra-low frequency NMR
> >>> is a flourishing research field these days,
> >>
> >> It's cheap to do, so lots of graduate students get stuck with studying
> >> it. The results of their research don't seem to get published in
> >> high-impact journals.
> >
> > It is an interesting field of research,
> > because with all external fields screened out
> > you can investigate the spin-spin couplings. [1]
> > (among other things).
>
> That [1] implies that you meant to cite an example. What happened?
> You couldn't find one?
I deleted the anecdote, and forgot the reference to it. Here it is.
>
> And who is going to care about spin-spin couplings?
> I've seen some daft research projects but there's usually been at least
> the remote chance of some sort of real world advantage in prospect.
I see. You are one of those people with blinders on,
who can only see his own mightily interesting little field.
Jan
[1] I happened to know someone who worked in fundamental chemistry
doing C13 nuclear spin resonance in C13 enriched molecules,
to clarifiy chemical binding and structure.
(difficult, because the signal is inherently much weaker)
I would advise you not to tell her to her face about how irrelevant she
was.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
