what is HAARP?? is it a weapon, intel listening, weather control or whatever device

originally posted by: Bedlam

originally posted by: Semicollegiate
HAARP is more like gunpowder than a gun.

The weaponizing of gunpowder advanced over centuries. Physicists are still improving firearms.

HAARP was an opportunity to

1) learn the ropes of interference between adjacent and synchronized broadcasted power signals. The transmitters were normal omnidirectional antennas.

HAARP didn't use omnidirectional antennas. But phased arrays are pretty well understood. That part wasn't experimental at all. Straightforward engineering.

2) study and chart various atmospheric phenomena. Including the mass and usefulness of the ionosphere.

The "mass" of the ionosphere was never a thing that was investigated, as far as I'm aware. The dynamics of it were.

3) study and chart various frequency specific phenomena. Microwaves heat water without heating most containers directly. Other frequencies probably have various effects.

Again, not particularly. Microwaves heat water because of dielectric heating. It's not particularly frequency specific - if you want to optimally spin water molecules, 95GHz or so is a lot more efficient. But 2.45GHz was high enough to work well and was in an unused band and easy to design for. 95GHz is not.

I meant omnidirectional as in contrast to a dish or other antenna that emits the antenna's energy in a specific direction.

HAARP antenna's were like normal radio or walkie-talkie antennas that emitted radio energy in every direction, more or less. HAARP antennas were not directed individually towards a target.

The Phased Array is a technique directed towards a goal. The phased array's goal is to detect the direction, distance, and speed of an unknown moving object. To do that the phased array is coordinated to broadcast and receive a wave front oriented like an expanding sphere from the antenna array. The broadcast pattern resembled a sphere or a surface.

HAARP had the potential to do that Phased Array task, or some thing in some ways opposite. HAARP could overlay signals to achieve a higher energy at some predetermined point.

HAARP was not only a Phased Array. HAARP has many antennas firing at slightly different times, which means antennas firing out of phase with near by electrical fields. As you know, two antennas firing 180 degrees out of phase will cancel each other out. Lesser angles of phase difference cause lesser amounts of negation, but some amount of wasted energy to phase negation is always there. HAARP might have showed which materials and methods were the most efficient and practical for various combinations of interference and energy throughput.

With directional antennas the phase energy overlap waste would be lessened.

In addition to the single point effect, HAARP could vary the amplitude of its signal, which is the basis of claims about 6hz or 12hz waves, or ELF waveforms.

Inertia, mass, cohesion forces and negative or positive feedback phenomena inherent to the ionosphere or whatever particles and fields might be up there can be summarized as mass. They can be used to do this or that, keeping in mind the limit on total energy imposed by the small number of molecular particles about the Ionosphere.

Microwaves heat water because of dielectric heating.

I didn't know that. Thanks a lot

Electron clouds emit and receive EMR energy, so even nonpolar molecules could at the very least have static electricity type effects done to them.

Most molecules in the Ionosphere are Ions, and therefore highly receptive to electromagnetic manipulation.

originally posted by: pfishy
a reply to: Bedlam

As far as the C3I interdiction/assurance, how so?

Well, that was what kicked the whole thing off. They were trying to investigate ducting, sporadic-E, meteor bounce and whatnot as a way to improve/assure long range communications that were perhaps less detectable between points A and B, since you don't have ground wave with those, or at least as much.

There was also the entire 'what happens if a nuke goes off upstairs' issue, with data from ARGUS illustrating some things that needed to be studied further. One reaction was a push to design something like GWEN that took decades to kick off. Another was "how can we cause this cool effect that cuts off sat links?"

So, the opening topics of interest involved creating and collapsing communications ducts, plasma mirrors, and ways to enhance the ionosphere over your enemy's position to cut off his sat links. In the middle, you got some interesting work from Helliwell in Siple Station that showed some other things you could do with the general technique. So eventually it hit critical mass and the brass forked over the money for it.

Later, it turned out that there were other handy things you could do, like futzing SAR images with it. That's real popular now.

originally posted by: Semicollegiate
I meant omnidirectional as in contrast to a dish or other antenna that emits the antenna's energy in a specific direction.

HAARP antenna's were like normal radio or walkie-talkie antennas that emitted radio energy in every direction, more or less. HAARP antennas were not directed individually towards a target.

Individual IRI antennas were dipoles. Dipole antennas are directional, just not very.

The Phased Array is a technique directed towards a goal. The phased array's goal is to detect the direction, distance, and speed of an unknown moving object. To do that the phased array is coordinated to broadcast and receive a wave front oriented like an expanding sphere from the antenna array. The broadcast pattern resembled a sphere or a surface.

Not at all. A phased array's 'goal' is to take several antennas which would have limited directionality otherwise, and make them into a directional antenna by changing the phasing (and sometimes amplitude, but not with the IRI) of the individual antennas in the array.

One would get an "expanding sphere" from a monopole, or one end of a dipole. You wouldn't get that out of the IRI unless you intentionally set it to do that by cranking all the phases to 0. Even then, it would be a lumpy looking sphere. There wouldn't be any use for that.

HAARP had the potential to do that Phased Array task, or some thing in some ways opposite. HAARP could overlay signals to achieve a higher energy at some predetermined point.

The entire raison d'etre for HAARP's existence is to do that, so this is a bit like saying the ocean has the potential to be wet. A phased array's very intent is to "achieve higher energy at some predetermined point", that being the goal of a directional antenna system. I think you have some basic misconceptions about antennas that is hindering you here.

HAARP was not only a Phased Array. HAARP has many antennas firing at slightly different times, which means antennas firing out of phase with near by electrical fields.

That's the very definition of a phased array.

As you know, two antennas firing 180 degrees out of phase will cancel each other out. Lesser angles of phase difference cause lesser amounts of negation, but some amount of wasted energy to phase negation is always there. HAARP might have showed which materials and methods were the most efficient and practical for various combinations of interference and energy throughput.

As I said before, phased arrays are a long known thing, reduced to engineering as far back as the 40s. We were flying phased arrays on planes in WW2, see also: Luis Alvarez.

In addition, phased arrays don't lose real energy to the off-axis areas, the energy shows back up in the main lobe. But the math is past what's useful to post on ATS.

With directional antennas the phase energy overlap waste would be lessened.

Phased arrays are directional, it's the only reason to have them. And as I said, the off-axis areas don't lose real energy.

In addition to the single point effect, HAARP could vary the amplitude of its signal, which is the basis of claims about 6hz or 12hz waves, or ELF waveforms.

Yes, you could modulate the beam. No, that's not where the ELF came from. Modulation isn't signal, which is a confusing thing to most laymen. I can modulate the hell out of a signal with a 12Hz input, and you don't suddenly get 12Hz radio waves from it.

Depending on the effect you wanted, you could induce ELF by wobbling the electrojet (two ways at least), or by using cyclotron resonances on field lines.

Inertia, mass, cohesion forces and negative or positive feedback phenomena inherent to the ionosphere or whatever particles and fields might be up there can be summarized as mass.

No, no they can't. Mass is mass. Inertia is not mass, and can't be summarized as mass. Particles HAVE mass. Fields do not. This part is totally off.

Electron clouds emit and receive EMR energy, so even nonpolar molecules could at the very least have static electricity type effects done to them.

That would be one effect you could NOT do. EM fields do not convey charge.

Most molecules in the Ionosphere are Ions, and therefore highly receptive to electromagnetic manipulation.

That's the entire point. HAARP's effects were limited mostly to what you could do with free electrons. It couldn't directly ionize gas. So, the ionosphere and inner magnetosphere was pretty much the target.

So did the military nerf and neuter HAARP before turning it over to UAF? Did they take away all the death ray and weather changing abilities of it?

I wonder if it can still cook a frozen burrito though...

It's only a few hours away, maybe I'll make a road trip and ask for a tour.

"So...where's the button to make a hurricane or the button to make people hear things and zap people?"

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
So did the military nerf and neuter HAARP before turning it over to UAF? Did they take away all the death ray and weather changing abilities of it?

I wonder if it can still cook a frozen burrito though...

It's only a few hours away, maybe I'll make a road trip and ask for a tour.

"So...where's the button to make a hurricane or the button to make people hear things and zap people?"

Maybe when UAF has free reign, you can go visit more often than when it was partially military. If you're technical, you'll like it.

The amps get plenty warm enough to warm up frozen burritos. Especially in the spring. Or you could use the exhaust manifolds on the diesel gennies.

I wonder if UAF will have to meet Clean Air Act restrictions? That was the clincher when the military ditched it.

Just for fun, some old antenna pattern simulations of the IRI at various frequencies and pointing angles I had lying around on an old laptop...

a reply to: Bedlam
It might be a good (if futile) point to point out that the shape of the lobe is defined by a minimum (and arbitrary) signal strength. Lest some be led to believe that the beam is "focused" in any manner.

It isn't. It spreads, and loses power density according to that same rule. Phasing limits the spread as compared to spherical propagation but it does spread.

originally posted by: Phage
It isn't. It spreads, and loses power density according to that same rule. Phasing limits the spread as compared to spherical propagation but it does spread.

Sure. Any transmission spreads. But the IRI is pretty decent, and you get to crank a really nice antenna gain factor into the signal strength equations.

Which is why the ERP numbers were in the gigawatts while the total power output was in the megawatts.

You did get lots of sidelobes, however, especially in low band with a maximum deflection angle. Alas.

a reply to: Bedlam
Yeah. But the charts makes it look sort of like the signal gets focused to a point. It doesn't.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Bedlam
Yeah. But the charts makes it look sort of like the signal gets focused to a point. It doesn't.

Actually explaining it is tough without math. However, for the brave, here is a nice simple explanation...

I thought this was an interesting program! H2 sometimes has some good shows on it, at least they try to get the word out to the public. . . .