[SML] OT: Everything You Know About Faraday Cages Is Wrong

[Dave Tosti-Lane]

In the comments, someone points out that the example from the lectures
was not intended to correspond to faraday cages, but to a grid of
parallel conducting wires, where it remains entirely correct.

"If you use his answer to solve a different problem, it's your
mistake, not Feynman's. Note that the whole Volume II Chapter 7
doesn't contain the word "cage" anywhere. This problem isn't meant to
be equivalent to the cage in any way."

That doesn't detract from the interesting observation about wire size
in a cage, or the practical applications in our world, but it does
illustrate the perils of taking pot-shots at Feynman-level thinking to
make one's paper seem more important.

Dave Tosti-Lane

On Mon, Aug 1, 2016 at 7:24 PM, Drew McCarthy via Stagecraft
<stagecraft at theatrical.net> wrote:
> "Now Feynman is a god, the ultimate cool genius. It took me months, a
> year really, to be confident that the great man’s analysis of the
> Faraday cage, and his conclusion of exponential shielding, are
> completely wrong."
>
> It turns out that the *thickness* of the elements of the wire cage are
> more important than the spacing, which explains why parking garages
> are often better Faraday cages than elevators.
>
> The moral of this story: if everyone assumes that there's a good
> theory for something, but nobody can actually find it worked out in
> detail, there's a good chance that there actually isn't one.
>
> https://sinews.siam.org/DetailsPage/TabId/900/ArtMID/2243/ArticleID/757/Surprises-of-the-Faraday-Cage.aspx
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> For list information see <http://stagecraft.theprices.net/>
> Stagecraft mailing list
> Stagecraft at theatrical.net
> http://theatrical.net/mailman/listinfo/stagecraft_theatrical.net