h a l f b a k e r yRecalculations place it at 0.4999.
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,
|
|
|
Please log in.
Before you can vote, you need to register.
Please log in or create an account.
|
This technology replaces hand sanitizers. My perception is that these are very rarely used, thus replacing them with some UV leds that can write sterilizing shapes on room surfaces like a nonvisible laser show would detect an absence of creatures then illuminate with sterilizing light all of the frequently
touched surfaces at the room.
If fewer than a person per 100 uses hand saniter stations, yet the laser sterilizes surfaces most of the time then the amount of transmissable disease is greatly reduced. Motion detectors would sense the abscence of living creatures.
There are a few side technologies if people really would like to sterilize their surroundings. The front door could have nonvisible yet UV fluorescent material that would leave detectable traces everywhere people touched to further guide the laser to zap areas to be sterilized.
UV bathroom sanitizer
Ultraviolet_20Bathroom_20Sanitizer
[po, Jan 25 2012]
[link]
|
| |
Better, just have a high flux of ionizing radiation. |
|
| |
Next on Hypersensational Intergalactic Media News: is your
hand-sanitizing UV laser giving you deadly skin cancer?
Stay tuned to find out our version of the truth! |
|
| |
//The front door could have nonvisible yet UV fluorescent material// |
|
| |
Now that sounds interesting: paint a surface with UV fluorescing paint, ie: when visible spectrum light is shone on it it emits UV which kills off surface bacteria. |
|
| |
The title is a little confusing; he's not suggesting sterilising hands with UV, but inanimate surfaces. |
|
| |
copper...last I heard the NHS were doing copper coated doorhandles, as a way of cutting down on bugs |
|
| |
// he's not suggesting sterilising hands with UV // |
|
| |
He's not? I wonder what gave me that idea... |
|
| |
// This technology replaces hand sanitizers. // |
|
| |
Quite so; hence my //confusing// comment. Self sufficiency may "replace" trains, but that doesn't mean it runs on tracks. |
|
| |
// when visible spectrum light is shone on it it emits UV which kills off surface bacteria. // |
|
| |
That would be a cool bit of photochemistry if you could pull it off. Capture a couple of visible light photons, and pump out a single more energetic UV photon ? Sort of paint-on LASER ? |
|
| |
Once you find a shortcut round the small problem of entropy, let us know. |
|
| |
I could call it "two photon absorption". |
|
| |
// Self sufficiency may "replace" trains, but that doesn't
mean it runs on tracks. // |
|
| |
I read the post again, and now see that my initial
impression was in error... but I'm still confused. |
|
| |
• Most people don't use the hand sanitisers.
• So get rid of them.
• But now there's germs on all the surfaces that the filthy humans touch.
• So irradiate those surfaces with UV
• But check that no-one is in the way first.
• And put powder that fluoresces (in UV? WTF?) on the door.
• Which will get on everyone's hands.
• So you can see where the filthy humans have spread their germs.
• And zap those places especially lots.
• Ah, the stink of clean! |
|
| |
That's nothing to do with the post ... you just need to ask your doctor to increase your medication again. |
|
| |
Why not sterilise the users instead? After a generation or two all your sanitary problems will be resolved. |
|
| |
Don't worry, folks, just testing my Borg trap. Still works! |
|
| |
Actually, 2-Photon would be the way to go on this
one. The far-red beams themselves would be
completely non-dangerous, but at 1um section at
focal point of the door handle or whatever, they'd
be lethal. |
|
| |
I mean the lasers would be phenomenally
expensive, the targeting impractically difficult to
achieve and the whole thing could be done much
better with a copper handle. But that's never
stopped anyone on here right? |
|
| |