It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Do Cameras Emit Radiation?

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 7 2007 @ 11:14 PM
link   
I am not the sharpest tool in the shed, so please help.

I would think that all cameras would given Newton's action/reaction law of motion. That is, the camera must emit radiation before it captures light. Am I wrong?



posted on May, 7 2007 @ 11:37 PM
link   
Other than being a body radiating infrared heat energy and reflecting some light (like everything else), a camera doesn't emit anything special unless you are using a flashbulb.



posted on May, 8 2007 @ 12:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by djohnsto77
Other than being a body radiating infrared heat energy and reflecting some light (like everything else), a camera doesn't emit anything special unless you are using a flashbulb.


djohnsto77, thank you. What do you mean by a camera that "doesn't emit anything special"? Any excellent sources?



posted on May, 8 2007 @ 12:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by GreatTech
What do you mean by a camera that "doesn't emit anything special"?


I mean nothing other than any object made out of similar materials.

No source really. The camera aperture opens briefly to expose light-sensitive film to the light coming in from the lens that chemically changes the film to capture the image. Nothing is emitted from the camera unless you are using a flash.





[edit on 5/8/2007 by djohnsto77]



posted on May, 8 2007 @ 12:10 AM
link   
My door cameras have infrared emitters around the lens so they can see in the dark.
I guess that's a form of radiation.

Being electronic, they must have a small electromagnetic field around them.
And they do transmit an RF signal to a base station.


But if you're thinking something more sinister, it's just not the case, your smoke detector is more radioactive than almost anything else you'd have in your house.



posted on May, 8 2007 @ 12:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by anxietydisorder
But if you're thinking something more sinister, it's just not the case, your smoke detector is more radioactive than almost anything else you'd have in your house.


Nothing sinister. I believe the camera is one of the best inventions in history. I was just wondering that if we were on camera for 3 trillion years, would we end up like an H-bomb victim (just joking).

djohnsto77, are cameras completely harmless or almost completely harmless to one's health? Could they, if strategically used, actually enhance one's health?

Anybody have statistics and information on the health-related effects of cameras (historically or currently)?



posted on May, 8 2007 @ 12:57 AM
link   
I doubt camera use affects one's health either way.



new topics

top topics



 
3

log in

join