The skull bone's connected to the RF output jack...

[Charlie in Dayton]

Now just an electromagnetically radiatin' minute... (http://www.aolvideoblog.com/2007/05/08/boost-your-car-remote/)

Is it my imagination, or is this dude claiming that his oral cavity acts like a dish antenna at RF frequencies?

If so, could I position the antenna of my Alinco DJ596MkII under my chin, point my face at the sky, and work the appropriate satellite off my molars?

Something here indicates decomposition in Denmark...

[Tanstaafl]

Well, I've seen some very strange things affect antenna operation, for good and for bad, so I wouldn't dismiss it entirely. Capacitive coupling to a large object can have unexpected consequences.

But no, even under the best of circumstances it won't let you get a satellite signal that way. :(

[skeptigirl]

Well let's go test it. Surely I'm not the only one who will be reporting back to this thread. Great science project for the kid's science fair.

How about this video that was on the Youtube list when I looked at yours?

http://www.metacafe.com/watch/524517/double_your_gas_mileage_2x/

Is it safe to try the acetone in the gas tank or will it wreck the car? It looks pretty intriguing. I'll do some more Net surfing on that one and get back to you. If it amounts to anything I'll start a new thread.

[skeptigirl]

Well there is this on the acetone that essentially repeats and elaborates on the youtube video,
http://www.pureenergysystems.com/news/2005/03/17/6900069_Acetone/

and this on MSNBC claiming Tom and Ray from Car Talk discredit the claim.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18909941/

Guess if it was true there would be more people out there using it. Or should I go see what Conspiracy Forum threads there are on this one?
:tinfoil

[BenK]

Is it safe to try the acetone in the gas tank or will it wreck the car? It looks pretty intriguing. I'll do some more Net surfing on that one and get back to you. If it amounts to anything I'll start a new thread.


Mythbusters tried this and found the difference negligible but slightly worse than regular gas. I don't know what concentration they were using though. I wonder what his gauge is measuring, as I recall Mythbusters used a small container as the tank and ran it dry.

[skeptigirl]

Quick check on the car lock, it worked the same whether I used the regular point at the car or pointing it under my chin with 2 trials. It was chilly and I wasn't prepared for a more extensive test including holding the remote with the flat portion aimed at the car instead of the front as one would normally aim it.

So in the pilot study, it failed. I'll leave more testing up to someone else. Chances are these guys will be lta'so reading about the fools who fell for it.

:D

[skeptigirl]

Mythbusters tried this and found the difference negligible but slightly worse than regular gas. I don't know what concentration they were using though. I wonder what his gauge is measuring, as I recall Mythbusters used a small container as the tank and ran it dry.
Interesting. I'll have to see if there's anything on the web site with the concentrations. The in-depth article above has a graph showing when you get diminishing returns so it does matter.

Of course I can also try it on my son's old beater car, 1989 Acura. Might be interesting. Think I'll read a bit more first.


As far as the damage to the car goes, mentioned in the MSNBC link, I don't know about that. They say acetone is a slovent. Well, d'uh, what do they think gasoline is?

Acetone might take paint off faster but if there are any parts that dissolve in acetone in your fuel system, wouldn't gas eventually dissolve those parts as well?

[Tanstaafl]

I wouldn't expect any two brands of key remotes to work the same way in terms of proximity to a human body. These types of effects tend to be highly individualized.

I remember a portable radio I had years ago, that had marginal reception. I kept moving the whip antenna around to different positions, and some worked a little better than others. But it always worked best when I was touching the antenna. I was finally able to get almost as much signal by attaching an extra wire to the end of the antenna and attaching the other end to the wall.

I would imagine a small remote lock device would probably really, really like to have a larger antenna if it could. The body of the person holding it could serve that purpose in some cases.

[SYLVESTER1592]

Mythbusters tried this and found the difference negligible but slightly worse than regular gas. I don't know what concentration they were using though. I wonder what his gauge is measuring, as I recall Mythbusters used a small container as the tank and ran it dry.

I also remember a mythbusters episode where they checked if your molars could function as an antenna (according to a myth started by Lucille Ball): myth busted

As far as an increased range for your car remote by using your head goes; Maybe it's more reflection of the signal so the intensity of the signal increases...? Just guessing here... I don't really know.

SYL :)

[skeptigirl]

I wouldn't expect any two brands of key remotes to work the same way in terms of proximity to a human body. These types of effects tend to be highly individualized.

I remember a portable radio I had years ago, that had marginal reception. I kept moving the whip antenna around to different positions, and some worked a little better than others. But it always worked best when I was touching the antenna. I was finally able to get almost as much signal by attaching an extra wire to the end of the antenna and attaching the other end to the wall.

I would imagine a small remote lock device would probably really, really like to have a larger antenna if it could. The body of the person holding it could serve that purpose in some cases.
You are describing the fact the body increases the size of the antenna. That differs from sending a signal.

[skeptigirl]

...

As far as an increased range for your car remote by using your head goes; Maybe it's more reflection of the signal so the intensity of the signal increases...? Just guessing here... I don't really know.

SYL :)But you are hypothesizing the reason before it has been determined the thing actually occurs.

[Ivor the Engineer]

This (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passive_radiator) and this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Body_capacitance) may have something to do with it.

[Ove]

Interesting. I'll have to see if there's anything on the web site with the concentrations. The in-depth article above has a graph showing when you get diminishing returns so it does matter.

Of course I can also try it on my son's old beater car, 1989 Acura. Might be interesting. Think I'll read a bit more first.


As far as the damage to the car goes, mentioned in the MSNBC link, I don't know about that. They say acetone is a slovent. Well, d'uh, what do they think gasoline is?

Acetone might take paint off faster but if there are any parts that dissolve in acetone in your fuel system, wouldn't gas eventually dissolve those parts as well?


Different dissolvents doesn't nescessarily dissolve the same things. There is a reason for why you use Turpentine for some things and Acetoen for other things. Gasoline is mainly effective in dissolving oil (hey it's refined oil right ;) )
so there might very well be some things in your car that would dissolve using acetone. Some gaskets for inst. but off course that wouldn't be an instant effect.

I believe that most engines can run on any flammable liquid, some liquids better than others off course. :) and acetone is highly flammable. I know some millitary engines are designed to run on anything from paraffine to aether.

[Soapy Sam]

AETHER?????

Luminiferous or otherwise?:eye-poppi

[Tanstaafl]

You are describing the fact the body increases the size of the antenna. That differs from sending a signal.

How so? That's what the antenna does. The original part, plus the human body part.

[slyjoe]

What Tanstaafl asked - transmission, reception, no difference.

[Lensman]

An antenna that is particularly good for reception will also be particularly good for transmission, I'm an Electronics & Radio Tech.

The best performing antennae are constructed to be an exact, even fraction of a wavelength, eg, half-wave, quarter-wave etc., at a specific frequency. An antenna built to work best at 30MHz would be 5 metres long for a half-wave antenna or 2.5 metres long for a quarter-wave antenna, this also means that a 30MHz quarter-wave antenna would work well as a 60MHz half-wave antenna.

Antennae can also be constructed in multiples of a wavelength, but are only really practicable at extremely high frequencies, eg., a 2 wavelength antenna for 30MHz would be 20 metres long.

At the frequencies used by remote locking fobs, the human body would act as a multiple wavelength antenna, I don't know how many multiples as I'm not sure of exactly the frequencies used.

[skeptigirl]

How so? That's what the antenna does. The original part, plus the human body part.
Sorry, thought about it after but can't edit my post. I was thinking of the antenna only as a receiver. Then I passed by the kid's remote controlled cars and noticed there were antennae on both ends of the equation.

So, did anyone else collect any experimental data on the remote lock?

[Ove]

AETHER?????

Luminiferous or otherwise?:eye-poppi

Hehehe i'm Danish :) i meant ether (Diethyl)