h a l f b a k e r yBreakfast of runners-up.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
| |
A compact, lightweight, safe portable energy source with an energy density many orders of magnitude higher than anything your civilization currently posesses is the obvious deficiency. |
|
| |
// Setting aside 8th objection // |
|
| |
Deflect ... but how far ? The near field is in the millimetric range. You can nudge them away from the surface, but where do they go ? |
|
| |
Well, some of them will flow to the edges of the mask, and settle on the wearer's skin. If the wearer doesn't decontaminate prior to removing the mask, there's your infective agent, right there, waiting to make a move. |
|
| |
Better to try and permanently capture them. |
|
| |
There are actually two aspects to this. Firstly, protecting the wearer - and secondly, protecting others from the wearer. That means filtering airflow in both directions, something very few existing systems do. |
|
| |
At the price point where ubiquitous deployment is possible - just guessing, but maybe USD $1 per day - the available masks protect either the wearer or those around them, but not both. |
|
| |
What's the priority ? Protecting yourself, or protecting others ? |
|
| |
I came very close to posting an idea to put a streamer on
non-restrictive face coverings, to guarantee air is moving
out and in sufficiently and regularly. (Plenty of folk
complain that they have *cough* health concerns that
make masks unsafe for them.) You see them in stores that
sell fans and a/c units, as a visual aid to know what is
running and how briskly. Just saying. |
|
| |
Insofar as diamagnetic vapor distraction, can't you just
power up two rear-facing exhausts that drop pressure
within the mask enough to pull exhalations through a
filter? |
|
| |
// Ooh, do I get to say "setting aside 8th's objection" again? // |
|
| |
Whatever. Do what you like ... |
|
| |
<Folds arms, prepares for Major Sulk/> |
|
| |
Sulking is such a strange word. One of those odd ones that I
use about once every third decade. Thanks for reminding me
it's about time to use it again. |
|
| |
Perfect. Or "Super Sulkman"...Guardian of all the
whiners and criers. |
|
| |
"Sulkman" ? No, it just cries out for casting a female in the role. Lovely bit of gratuitously offensive gender stereotyping, too. |
|
| |
What would her sidekick be called ? |
|
| |
<Continues to pretend that [kdf] doesn't exist/> |
|
| |
The hydrophobicity of silk is useful in making masks, especially if
used in combination with other materials. |
|
| |
(Myself, I just drew a very complicated maze on my mask, so the
virus couldn't figure out how to get in. (Bwhahahaha! I cheated - I
didn't even leave a solution!)) |
|
| |
(Disclaimer - it doesn't work perfectly. I now have the virus...) |
|
| |
How exthactly doeth one clean one'th mathk you athk?
Well you jutht take it to a lab and rinth it out of courthe. |
|
| |
It could be possible to add a third inner layer to cheap two layer masks that is sort of like a 50% colander, holes big enough to let air pass in easily and comfortably with a 50% chance of blocking an outgoing particulate.
But if a mask already blocks 95%-75% of stuff then that is only a 97.5% effectiveness or a 87% effectiveness amount. |
|
| |
These are small water droplets we're worried about right? |
|
| |
So
how about we just all walk around with a head mounted fan
angled to blow them at the floor? |
|
| |
The power requirements for
that should be quite manageable in a battery backpack. |
|
| |
Because the stream of air pushed by the fan very quickly breaks down into turbulent flow, starting at the interface with the surrounding air, and scatters the droplets further than they might travel in still air under gravity. |
|
| |
Watch what happens when someone blows a jet of cigarette smoke from their lips, or your own breath on a dry, frosty day. The periphery whirls and churns and behaves in an unstable and entirely unpredictable way. |
|
| |
And it's not just airborne droplets you need to consider; it's surface contamination. |
|
| |
Simple, cheap fixes are almost - but not quite - worthless. You might get, at the very best, a 12% reduction in transmission, but the median figure is 8%; statistically, but not practically significant. |
|
| |
Aseptic procedures that will truly make a difference are complex, expensive, and impractical for the normal citizen. They require training, facilities, lots of disposable PPE (no re-using ANYTHING) and above all ruthless self-discipline and vigilance. For details, have a look at the protocols that Big Pharma uses for Good Manufacturing Practice in sterile manufacturing. Quite daunting. |
|
| |
// They require training // |
|
| |
Not a problem, had it, unfortunately I let them have the NBC
suite back when I left though. |
|
| |
// Protocols that Big Pharma uses // |
|
| |
Well aware, I've one of their latest training videos as it
happens [linky]. |
|
| |
Marvellous. He's perfectly safe in there ... |
|
| |
But we have Prior Art... <link> |
|
| |