Since water droplets, and hence exhaled particulates can be repelled by diamagnetism, why not create diamagnetic face masks?
What am I missing?... besides a higher education?-- 2 fries shy of a happy meal, Jul 28 2020 Protocols that Big Pharma use https://www.youtube...watch?v=6W8kIRgIbZsLatest training video. [Skewed, Jul 30 2020] Coronavirus Zorb™ Coronavirus_20Zorb_99Be Very Afraid... [8th of 7, Jul 30 2020] 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.-- 8th of 7, Jul 28 2020 // Setting aside 8th objection //
<derisive sniff/>-- 8th of 7, Jul 28 2020 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 ?-- 8th of 7, Jul 28 2020 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?-- reensure, Jul 28 2020 // Ooh, do I get to say "setting aside 8th's objection" again? //
<passive-aggressive>
Whatever. Do what you like ...
</passive-aggressive>
<Folds arms, prepares for Major Sulk/>-- 8th of 7, Jul 28 2020 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.-- blissmiss, Jul 29 2020 Perfect. Or "Super Sulkman"...Guardian of all the whiners and criers.-- blissmiss, Jul 29 2020 "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/>-- 8th of 7, Jul 29 2020 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...)-- lurch, Jul 30 2020 How exthactly doeth one clean one'th mathk you athk?Well you jutht take it to a lab and rinth it out of courthe.-- 2 fries shy of a happy meal, Jul 30 2020 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.-- beanangel, Jul 30 2020 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.-- Skewed, Jul 30 2020 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.-- 8th of 7, Jul 30 2020 // They require training //
Not a problem, had it, unfortunately I let them have the NBC suite back when I left though.-- Skewed, Jul 30 2020 // Protocols that Big Pharma uses //
Well aware, I've one of their latest training videos as it happens [linky].-- Skewed, Jul 30 2020 Marvellous. He's perfectly safe in there ...
But we have Prior Art... <link>-- 8th of 7, Jul 30 2020 random, halfbakery