I have no intention in arguing with you about this.
My opinion has not changed. The article is BS.
Electromagnetic Pulse is a impulse radio wave. It is created by a nuke (fission of fusion) but the impulse reaches past the blast area. Like all radio waves it decreases in field density as the wave moves form the source.
The problem for power systems is the energy is easily coupled to power lines. But the field density decreases rapidly.
Yes, small impulses will fry MOSFETS. I have fried them with just static discharge handling them.
So, I still maintain my original position.
You are correct!!! Bing Bing Bing... And I might add, it decreases with the square of the radius.
No argument, but I believe you will understand why I will stick original position to take the work of a actual nuclear scientist and study from Los Alamos over your observations. So I guess we agree to disagree.
“Electromagnetic Pulse is a impulse radio wave. It is created by a nuke (fission of fusion) but the impulse reaches past the blast area. Like all radio waves it decreases in field density as the wave moves form the source.”
Sit down son, and prepare to learn.
An EMP is caused by gamma rays impacting a layer of the atmosphere about 20km above the surface of the earth.
The nuclear explosion generates gamma rays that hit the layer of the atmosphere that is visible to the gamma rays. so in essence the “radio wave generating” portion of the EMP comes from a very very large area - effectively “Near Field” - and as you know, from your dad’s EE and his ham ticket, in the “near field” radio waves DO NOT decay in the manner of inverse square.
“The problem for power systems is the energy is easily coupled to power lines. But the field density decreases rapidly.”
Well yes and no. the problem for power systems is not just the RF energy coupling to the power lines, it’s also the later effects that deform the earths magnetic field - which has significant effects on operating transformers, for instance, that likely have been damaged by the initial radio pulse.
“So, I still maintain my original position.”
Your original position maintains it’s original incorrectness. You clearly do not know, but what is worse is that you do not know “with attitude”. Nobody should listen to anything you have to say on this topic.