|
I have to disagree with you JR (that should shock him!)
It is not speculation or wishful thinking. Part of our role in the R&D process was to fulfill contracts to test and provide the data that proved that the sensors did what the manufacturers claimed, or did not do it, and to uncover any glitches or serious concerns. We used live field tests in abundance. Let there be no doubt, it is NOT speculation. The security and controls systems the DOD, the Navy, the Secret Service, Lockheed Martin, and many many others with high security needs base their systems on it.
Those ceramics affect the biological and chemical processes around them, or they would not work in the applications they are currently being used for. How can a ceramics sensor detect anything if it is encased in frost, calcifications, or deposits? It has to affect biological and chemical processes to be reliable in water and other extreme applications. Simple. How is that accomlished? By using ceramics that have FIR, IR, ferroelectric, dielectric, and piezo electric properties, depending on the application. Not sure why that is so hard for folks who claim to scientists to grasp???
We were contracted by government agencies checking the ceramics research work to help them decide what or if to purchase. We stood nothing to gain from either positive or negative findings, our next contract was secured only by finding the truth and being accurate with our data and reports.
Fact, the modern IR and FIR emitting sensors did not foul, even in EXTREME conditions over long periods of time. No other sensors we had ever seen were capable of that, as steve can probably attest (his experience on the other thread explains why folks were doing heavy duty research in that area).
Fouling sensors was a bad and costly problem for decades in security and controls applications. It resulted in costly breakdowns, critical systems failures, some of them catastrophic, irritating false alarms, costly processes and plants being shut down unecessarily, alarms which when ignored the one time it was real caused major problems.
Val is right about one thing, all things do emit FIR. The question is how much and at what frequency. That is why to a controls and sensor expert, the numbers on Momotaro's 'hype' were the exact right ones.
As for luke's comments, he has obviously not tried and tested both medias.
I am sorry dtbh, and do want to hijack your thread, but I think those making presumptuous and erroneous comments need to learn about it BEFORE making assertions (even the assertion that nothing is known for sure yet). Plenty is already known about it. In fact, there is so much known about it, the DOD, the Secret Service, the Navy, and others base many of it's security measures on it.
|