At 12:44 AM 12/1/97 -0500, Nick Demos wrote:
>> From: Denys P. Beauchemin <[log in to unmask]>
>> It's the other way round.  Charles Proteus Steinmetz did a lot of work
>with
>> AC current.  DC is more conducive to electrocution (no pun intended.)
>>
>Maybe in Canada, but not in the good old USA. Here yhey use AC to eltrocute
>criminals (not necesarily Canadians (-:)).

Given enough electricity, it will indeed kill.  I have to agree with
Denys tho, DC, or direct current can be more deadly at lower voltages than
AC.  Its because DC does 'not let go', like the alternating wave of
AC current.

Most of us have probably been 'poked' by 110-120 volt AC; especially if you've
ever changed an outlet, etc.  Certainly it startles you, and hopefully you
weren't
grounded, or in water, or chances are you wouldn't be reading this...!  But
because
of the Alternating Current wave, you're able to quickly release it
(generally!).

If you grew-up on a farm with electric fences they are generally 32 volt DC
current.
Getting ahold of one of these is generally harder to let go, because there
is no alternating wave.  It tends to 'grap on' to you and hold-on. Touching
one of these tends to cause one to really jump backwards, hence why they
use DC.

I'd much rather handle 110V AC than 32V (or higher) DC.  110V DC would be
wicked!



/jf
                              _\\///_
                             (' o-o ')
___________________________ooOo_( )_OOoo____________________________________

  Yesterday (Sun), in 1782 - The British and American signed the preliminary
                             treaty to end the Revolutionary War
            Today, in 1955 - The Montgomery Alabama bus boycott began.

___________________________________Oooo_____________________________________
                            oooO  (    )
                           (    )  )  /
                            \  (   (_/
                             \_)