Human conduction to fry fish - hoax or not???

[Susan]

Hi,

I was having this conversation with my friends the other day, he saw
some guy on TV, he was touching some power source with 1 hand, and
holding a fish on the other, and his feet were standing on ground
(i.e. he's connected to ground). When they start the power source,
the fish starts frying and he was OK (now this is not the part we're
arguing about). So we started arguing, I was saying, since he's
connected to ground through his feet, there should be minimal (if not
none) current flow through his other hand that's holding the fish,
since it's an open node, there is not return path, so there should be
no current flow to that arm (i.e. I'm viewing the human body as a 5
way circuit, 4 limbs, and your head all connected together to a common
node, your body, so 1 hand and the 2 legs form the complete path for
current flow, and there should only be current flow in this path, as
the other branches are not connected to a return path for the
electrons to flow, now I know I'm making a lot of assumptions about
the human body, and I'm assuming limbs work the same way as a copper
wire, in that electrons can only flow 1 direction in it in any 1
time), hence I was arguing the fish should not be fried, there should
be a charge build up on the fish, but since the fish is not connected
to a return path, there should be no current through it. This made
sense to me, but my friend did mention something that got me pondering
as well, as we see on TV (urban legend or not, I don't know), when
people get electrocuted, their hair is all buffed up, meaning there
was current flow into their head (possibly via the veins? bloody is
liquid, so it's conductive right?), but then, this would throw my
theory off, hence, I'm here to look for an answer.

Taking this further, so suppose someone grabs onto a floating power
source (say a broken transmission line), as long as his feet (or any
body part) are off the ground, he won't be electrocuted (much like the
bird on a transmission line...not yet anyway, but as soon as he steps
back onto ground, it'll get really interesting...speaking of which,
how do the birds discharge themselves without getting electrocuted?),
is this correct?

Thanks,
Keith

 

Larry Brasfield wrote:

"Susan" <liaaba@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1a0b6eef.0504180838.601ae044@posting.google.com...
Hi,
Hi, Susan or Keith.

I'm using my girlfriend's account, so this is Keith, not Susuan.

I was having this conversation with my friends the other day, he
saw
some guy on TV, he was touching some power source with 1 hand, and
holding a fish on the other, and his feet were standing on ground
(i.e. he's connected to ground). When they start the power source,
the fish starts frying and he was OK (now this is not the part
we're
arguing about). So we started arguing, I was saying, since he's
connected to ground through his feet, there should be minimal (if
not
none) current flow through his other hand that's holding the fish,
since it's an open node, there is not return path, so there should
be
no current flow to that arm

That's right. Such a demonstration would
have to be a hoax.

(i.e. I'm viewing the human body as a 5
way circuit, 4 limbs, and your head all connected together to a
common
node, your body, so 1 hand and the 2 legs form the complete path
for
current flow, and there should only be current flow in this path,
as
the other branches are not connected to a return path for the
electrons to flow, now I know I'm making a lot of assumptions about
the human body, and I'm assuming limbs work the same way as a
copper
wire, in that electrons can only flow 1 direction in it in any 1
time),

That model is good enough for the present purpose.

So does this mean that under normal (real) circumstances, the person
will get electrocuted and the fish will remain untouched? If so, does
that mean whenever a person gets electrocuted, whichever body parts are
not connected to the ground or not part of the path to ground, they
will remain unelectrocuted?

hence I was arguing the fish should not be fried, there should
be a charge build up on the fish, but since the fish is not
connected
to a return path, there should be no current through it. This made
sense to me, but my friend did mention something that got me
pondering
as well, as we see on TV (urban legend or not, I don't know), when
people get electrocuted, their hair is all buffed up,

That is a requirement of Hollywood physics, not
the physics that govern in the real world. Also,
any electrical phenomenon must involve visible arcs
curling all over the place in Hollywood physics.

meaning there
was current flow into their head (possibly via the veins? bloody is
liquid, so it's conductive right?), but then, this would throw my
theory off, hence, I'm here to look for an answer.

Stick with the physics you learned in school or
textbooks and pay no attention to TV or movies.

Taking this further, so suppose someone grabs onto a floating power
source (say a broken transmission line), as long as his feet (or
any
body part) are off the ground, he won't be electrocuted (much like
the
bird on a transmission line...not yet anyway, but as soon as he
steps
back onto ground, it'll get really interesting...speaking of which,
how do the birds discharge themselves without getting
electrocuted?),
is this correct?

Roughly true. However, at high enough voltage,
(which is lower as frequency increases), enough
current can flow capacitively to be dangerous.
The best rule is: Stay away from high voltage lines.

So how does the bird discharge themselves after leaving the
transmission to avoid getting electrocuted? Or do they?

Thanks,
Keith

You're welcome.

Thanks again, I'm gladly my knowledge acquired through my electronics
classes are not failing me.

--
--Larry Brasfield
email: donotspam_larry_brasfield@hotmail.com
Above views may belong only to me.

 

Larry Brasfield wrote:

liaaba@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1113853100.364776.71430@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Larry Brasfield wrote:
"Susan" <liaaba@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1a0b6eef.0504180838.601ae044@posting.google.com...
Hi,
Hi, Susan or Keith.


I'm using my girlfriend's account, so this is Keith, not Susuan.

Hi, Keith.

I was having this conversation with my friends the other day, he
saw
some guy on TV, he was touching some power source with 1 hand,
and
holding a fish on the other, and his feet were standing on
ground
(i.e. he's connected to ground). When they start the power
source,
the fish starts frying and he was OK (now this is not the part
we're
arguing about). So we started arguing, I was saying, since he's
connected to ground through his feet, there should be minimal
(if not
none) current flow through his other hand that's holding the
fish,
since it's an open node, there is not return path, so there
should be
no current flow to that arm

That's right. Such a demonstration would
have to be a hoax.

(i.e. I'm viewing the human body as a 5
way circuit, 4 limbs, and your head all connected together to a
common
node, your body, so 1 hand and the 2 legs form the complete path
for
current flow, and there should only be current flow in this
path, as
the other branches are not connected to a return path for the
electrons to flow, now I know I'm making a lot of assumptions
about
the human body, and I'm assuming limbs work the same way as a
copper
wire, in that electrons can only flow 1 direction in it in any 1
time),

That model is good enough for the present purpose.


So does this mean that under normal (real) circumstances, the
person
will get electrocuted and the fish will remain untouched?

If the power source had enough voltage relative to earth,
and the victim had conductive enough shoes and stood on
conductive earth, then I would expect the victim to get a
very bad electrical shock. And if it killed him, he could
be said to have been electrocuted.

If so, does
that mean whenever a person gets electrocuted, whichever body parts
are
not connected to the ground or not part of the path to ground, they
will remain unelectrocuted?

Electrocution applies to the whole organism. (It
either lives or dies.) But current sufficient to cook
flesh or disrupt heart or nervous system activity, at
line frequencies, pretty much has to flow through
ohmically connected circuits. So the person in the
hoax was not prone to having his fish-holding arm
shocked.

hence I was arguing the fish should not be fried, there should
be a charge build up on the fish, but since the fish is not
connected
to a return path, there should be no current through it. This
made
sense to me, but my friend did mention something that got me
pondering
as well, as we see on TV (urban legend or not, I don't know),
when
people get electrocuted, their hair is all buffed up,

That is a requirement of Hollywood physics, not
the physics that govern in the real world. Also,
any electrical phenomenon must involve visible arcs
curling all over the place in Hollywood physics.

meaning there
was current flow into their head (possibly via the veins? bloody
is
liquid, so it's conductive right?), but then, this would throw
my
theory off, hence, I'm here to look for an answer.

Stick with the physics you learned in school or
textbooks and pay no attention to TV or movies.

Taking this further, so suppose someone grabs onto a floating
power
source (say a broken transmission line), as long as his feet (or
any
body part) are off the ground, he won't be electrocuted (much
like the
bird on a transmission line...not yet anyway, but as soon as he
steps
back onto ground, it'll get really interesting...speaking of
which,
how do the birds discharge themselves without getting
electrocuted?),
is this correct?

Roughly true. However, at high enough voltage,
(which is lower as frequency increases), enough
current can flow capacitively to be dangerous.
The best rule is: Stay away from high voltage lines.


So how does the bird discharge themselves after leaving the
transmission to avoid getting electrocuted? Or do they?

Birds that live when landing on power lines do not
complete a circuit. Their feet are shunted by a fat
piece of copper so little voltage appears between
their feet. And little current flows through their legs.
What little capacitively conducted charge they may
have, if they depart the line not at a voltage zero
crossing, is small compared to the what you have
likely experienced when you shuffle across a nylon
carpet in your rubber shoes and touch a grounded
object.

Finaly question, I heard of this exploding squirrel story, about a
squirrel running on a transmission line, accumulating charges along the
way and when it stepped off the transmission line (to something that
was grounded, ie, a wall or something), it exploded because of
electrical shock and it brought down an the transmissione line. Now I
don't know if that was just another urban legend, but if it was indeed
true, how could the squirrel avoid such an explosion?

I've seen the remnants of a crow that landed in the
wrong place on a power pole transformer. That
bird did not avoid getting electrocuted.

...
Thanks again, I'm gladly my knowledge acquired through my
electronics
classes are not failing me.

There is not a lot of foolishness in the hard sciences.

--
--Larry Brasfield
email: donotspam_larry_brasfield@hotmail.com
Above views may belong only to me.