/sci/ - Science & Math

>>12354516
they've been around for decades

>>12354516
seems plausible, microwave lasers exist and there are microwave 'windows' in the atmosphere where there is almost no absorption.

>>12354516
How would microwaves dispersed over large area affect water molecules that much?
Why wouldn't plants also cook?

Home microwaves are concentrated and directed at the food. Hence why a microwave spins so that one side doesn't get turned to mush.

>>12354516
>and made the Indian soldiers vomit
They're in their element
wtf are you doing china

>>12354545
targeted microwave laser or wide beam?

>>12354545
I'm pretty sure microwaves from a source would be affected by the inverse square law.
I guess if I wasn't phone posting I could calculate it assuming some frequency and source. If it was in all directions it would be 4piR.

However off the top my head the troops would have to be close, so like grenade distance. And it would have to be stationary as the power supply for such a device would be too large to package in something that small.

Not sure though.

>>12354561
Either or.
Microwave weaponry seems really limited. I even doubt that you could produce the right band waves to be absorbed by water to cause harmful heating over large distances.
Not to mention if it rains, really humid (like in south China) or if there is some other obstruction it's useless other than cooking some trees.

>>12354611
I've seen the use of american military DEW to start fires

Why specifically microwaves? There is no need to limit ourselves to that range of frequencies. There is also no need to assume that the energy beam will be very wide at the target. It is not entirely BS, such weapons already exist and have a variety of uses - crowd control, prevention of piracy at sea, the destruction of mines/IEDs, the destruction of missiles

>>12354617
At what distance roughly.
Like football field or penis distance.

>>12354545
>Hence why a microwave spins so that one side doesn't get turned to mush.
No, a microwave spins because of the interference patterns of the EM waves which leave part of the food cold.

>>12354516
They've been around since before WW2. The earliest real "microwave weapon" was the Japanese's "Ku-go" death ray.

See:
https://www.mediafire.com/folder/dj875cd10yb72/EMF
Top text file. Also the 1985 CNN electromagnetic weapons report, which was deleted from youtube. People like WR Adey and others are interviewed.

>>12354681
Where is the source location of the em and I assume the inside surface reflects the em?

>>12354702
The wave inside the microwave is stationary, and interferes with itself, causing part of the food not to get as much energy as other parts.
I have a microwave that doesn't rotate anymore, when I leave a chocolate tablet inside and turn on the microwave, the tablet only melt at specific locations.

>>12354516
>Just read this on dailymail
>How credible is it
let's put it like this anon. it might be true. but anyone who unquestioningly believes anything they read in the daily mail is a moron

>>12354722
So it produces a standing wave?
It oscillates between max amplitude and min.
I was not wrong, just incorrect.

>>12354516
I know the US has been experimenting with this for years, it is a real thing that they want to use for riots and stuff. Chinese could have just bought the designs like they usually do.

>>12354690
OP this anon is a well known crank on here. When you say the right words his schizophrenia kicks in

>>12354813
5g is not harmful?

>>12354813
>Don't look here!

>>12354733
That's why I doubt it. A "wave-like weapon" seems realistic enough, since we have EMPs. It's just that dailymail never had a good track record, since they just make shit up all the time.

Not terribly difficult to make one honestly. It's usually just a whole lot cheaper and effective to just shoot someone.