Everything you wanted to know about a microwave
The protective net of the microwave is of course designed to protect against the harmful radiation of the device, the microwave radiation. The radiation that hits the protective net is reflected back from the surface and goes back inside to continue the cooking process. The electromagnetic waves create an electric and electromagnetic field that moves "up and down" in an oscillatory manner. The structure of the oscillations was dictated by a set of four equations called Maxwell's equations, named after the Scottish scientist James Maxwell, who discovered the connection between the electric properties of the field and its electromagnetism. These equations state that radiation hitting a conductive surface will not pass to the other side.
If the surface is perforated, then for holes significantly smaller than the wavelength of the radiation, no radiation will still occur to the other side. More precisely, the electromagnetic field decays exponentially with distance from the hole. The choice of round holes is simply to insert as many holes as possible in a given area with space between them to block the radiation. In addition, a round hole has no preference in terms of the passage of radiation (because of the symmetries). It should be mentioned that when using a microwave oven, it is forbidden to insert metals, especially pointed and jagged metals (accumulations of charge are formed in the corners), or computer disks. When a wave enters a thin layer (like the layers that make up the coating of the disk), it gets confused and comes out "strengthened". There may be interesting phenomena such as lightning in all kinds of colors, thanks to the diffraction that the wave passes through at the exit (dispersion of the wave). The least interesting thing is that the microwave will burn.
Another fact about a microwave is that only water is heated in it. It can be said in general that microwaves affect only electrically charged particles. Water can accept the amount of radiation that a microwave provides and the others reject it. There are materials that a microwave passes through, metal in general reflects the wave, and other materials absorb the radiation to a small extent. A modern microwave uses waves with a frequency of about 2.4 GHz. That is, an electrically charged particle will oscillate 2.4 billion times per second (the petty people will say that for a frequency of 2.4 gigahertz it will change direction 4.8 billion times). Although the water molecule is not electrically charged, the molecule contains a dipole - its first end is positively charged and the other is negatively charged. The water mole dances 2.4 billion times, during which it rubs against other moles and creates friction that creates heat and warms the entire body.
It is allowed to put metal in the microwave. It is a fact that the grid on which the food is placed is metallic, but the metal must be rounded at the edges (so as not to accumulate many charges at the end points and create a current with the magnetron that creates the electromagnetic field in the microwave). The idea is this: if the field that is induced inside the device can conduct the electric charges inside the metal that you put freely - you and your device will be fine. If you have created bottlenecks for the chargers, get ready for action. As soon as the board designed to absorb the excess radiation is filled - there will start to be funny segments. First of all, the metal will heat up and burn, the fire will melt the thin connections (the grid) of the micro, and currents will be created as a result of the induction. Most likely, all this will not take long and the microwave will burn.
What is the difference between a microwave and an oven? A microwave affects only water, so its effect is similar to steam on laundry. It heats the water that spreads in the food and therefore creates a (not always pleasant) thinning effect. For borax it is good, for chicken a little less. In addition, a microwave heater is much more homogeneous than an oven. A final fact about it concerns the rotation of the tray. Why should the tray be rotated, after all it is round and symmetrical in all directions? The reason is that the radiation carries out constructive and destructive interference inside the microwave, depending on the structure of the food we put in. The colder areas have weaker heating.
In conclusion, it was said that there is no danger in standing near the microwave, even if it is asleep. Your kids are standing next to a device that is exactly the same as a micro, and it's called a CRT cathode ray tube on TV. The difference is that Yuval, who is confused by the children's programs, is transmitted to their skull without masking, without the protection of the microwave network. Although the TV has radiation protection, experts (not me) claim that this is the silent killer (for the old TVs, not LCD or plasma). you have been warned.
16 תגובות
We destroyed the protection panel of the microwave. The one attached to the hole in the wall... is it possible to continue using the device without this panel?
Is a protective net that has peeled off a little: a bubble of 1 cm has formed on its outer sides does not filter and is considered dangerous to use?
If you rely heavily on other sources on the Internet, you should mention them during the article, and at least at the end.
I'm sorry to disappoint
the facility or all other slanderers of any kind
I stumbled upon the site by accident
And I found myself reading the entire article with great interest.
Too high and scientific language would have put me off even in the first paragraphs
Yonatan, you wrote an eye-level article, straight to the point.
Align power
To Jonathan - extremism is almost always not the solution which is almost always found somewhere in the middle, since you are publishing a column consult an expert in the field, keep clear and clean language and everyone will be satisfied, right?
I actually enjoyed the article.
I removed his comments from the site because it does not respect me, this site, and certainly does not respect him. Even if I'm not as smart as him, that's no reason to show off.
Jonathan, you probably have someone ('the fixer') who is a little obsessed with you. He goes to the trouble of slandering you in every article you publish.
May my honorable father do us a great favor and free us from this punishment.
Happy holiday to everyone.
Good article!
I agree with the idea, at least in this case, a negative response as it would meet the mental needs of the commenter, and has nothing to do with the quality of the article.
To Jonathan
I think you write well. Although here and there there are errors, but overall the result is positive.
In the age of talkbacks, it's only natural that there will be negative and sometimes even insulting reactions, but you shouldn't take it to heart. If you got one negative comment out of every fifty readers (and I believe many more read this article) then that is a commendable mark.
To my father - it would be interesting, if possible, to put a counter of hits in each article.
I really enjoyed the article. The insult about the broken "facility" is out of place. The "fixer" bothers to read your articles and apparently his decline meets a mental need. Surrendering to the facility would be surrendering to all the low and spoiled among the readers.
Do not go! If you get excited about everyone who writes against you, you won't get far in any field. The only claim worthy of consideration is the language and wording. For this reason, it is important that you continue to write, that's the only way you can improve. And for everyone else, as long as you check your sources and make sure the information is correct as much as you can, you don't need to be moved by some detractors who are unable to provide a single explanation for their claims. Respond in style: nonsense!!!1! Or: hahahaha... that's not smart. So please, go ahead. I personally enjoy it.
Response to the facility:
Maybe correct me on a scientific level and not just slander? I know, I'm ignorant and with the country and don't know anything, but it's not my fault. I'm trying to learn from you know-it-alls, but I can't.
I'll tell you a little secret before the punchline: I didn't write anything myself. I do understand physics enough to answer the commenters, but I translated all the articles (pay attention to the boring background in my opinion) from websites on the Internet. Throughout my life I have been intrigued by many everyday questions and searched for answers. Weird huh? The idea that someone else has answers. Maybe try it yourself. In any case, the answers were written in excellent English by the best experts, otherwise I myself would not have been convinced by them. Unlike you, it is likely but not certain, I have an academic background in physics. Nevertheless, I copied all the questions with great precision from websites on the Internet, and readers are welcome to accept these websites from me.
To conclude: I thought I would be able to open up someone's curiosity, it turns out that I only managed to annoy people with my (broken I admit) Hebrew. I did not succeed because I encountered the stubbornness of omniscients. So here you have won: from next week you won't see any more of my annoying articles. And I can guess what your next victim will be, because you, the rednecks, can't do without the pint of meat. You will go to comment on ynet where all the linguistic pearl growers freely send people who all they wanted was to be a little more interesting in this world.
Thanks to the people who strengthened me on the site and who sent me intriguing and strengthening emails. The holes today are none (in Hirik), and I'm happy to be out. Hello.
It is appropriate and correct that whoever writes on a scientific website should do so in clear language
and will rely on facts, known and accepted correct facts and not suggestions pulled from a virtual sleeve,
In all of Jonathan's articles in recent weeks, two themes stand out
One is the author's sweeping disregard for scientific conventions at all
subject on which it was based and in all the examples in which it was set,
The second is the vague and unclear language,
Anyone who bothers and reads will find many examples.
So with apologies to your Honor, Jonathan Huel, please refrain from relying on
Subjects you do not understand because ignorance is not a flag worth waving
And try to write in language that is not vulgar, try to avoid street language
Or Serogin published the Jonathan dictionary,
Otherwise your articles are full of ridiculously written nonsense
What are you talking about? What is political in my words? Yuval Hambalal is the only children's program I know
"The difference is that Yuval, who is confused by the children's programs, is transmitted to their skulls without masking, without the protection of the microwave network. Although the television has radiation protection, those who understand nothing (not me) claim that it is the silent killer."
or! This is a real political protest.
Yoram Mizrachi should be quickly replaced by Mr. Yonatan Shanhav.