|
Post by pocoloco on Jan 20, 2009 21:22:26 GMT -5
"Morgellons fibers,fibrils,filaments" or whatever one wishes to name them are reported to often react to ultraviolet radiation; to fluoresce. Let this be a place where we can discuss this phenomenon as it relates to Morgellons.
|
|
|
Post by pocoloco on Jan 20, 2009 21:51:36 GMT -5
When stimulated by radiation in the band of frequencies known as ultraviolet, outer shell electrons of some atoms jump back and forth to the next lower electron shell concurently releasing a photon of light in the visible range of colors.
The broad range of UV light is generally divided into two ranges of frequencies: Short wavelength and Long wavelength. Each have somewhat differing effects on materials. The short wavelength will cause some materials to react that are non-reactive to the long wavelength radiation and vice versa. Some materials react to both. "Blacklights" for fluorescent posters is usually of the long wavelength spectrum. Both are present in Sunlight. It is the short wavelength radiation which provides a tan/sunburn.
I believe the Wood's Medical Lamp generates both short and long wavelength UV.
If you've ever tried to tan indoors in front of a large living room window, you've discovered that glass blocks UV radiation. I believe the same is true for most if not all plastics. This doesn't mean that some glass and some plastics don't fluoresce; they often do.
|
|
|
Post by pocoloco on Jan 20, 2009 21:55:16 GMT -5
Now lets consider some statements in the well known report by the University of Northern Arizona:
II. Discussion
A: Fiber Analysis
Fibers, upon inspection, were found to be fluorescent. The pictures (Figure 1A, 1B) show both a fiber and a hair sample from the same patient observed under white light and a Hofstead filter (with 365 excitiation). The fibers were visualized in scintillation vials with a Innotech detector, showing fluorescence with both a Hofstead filter (460 nm)and a green fluorescent filter (SYBR Green, 557 nm) upon excitation at both 305 and 365 nm. The fluorescence ceased after the illumination was extinquished. A single fiber is shown in Figure 1C.
|
|
|
Post by pocoloco on Jan 20, 2009 22:06:27 GMT -5
Am I the only one having trouble with this report? I can't get past this first paragraph!
Did the sample react to short-wavelength UVL? How about long-wavelength UVL? (UVL=ultraviolet light).
The last sentence tells us the sample didn't display the phenonum of Phosforesence.
|
|
|
Post by pocoloco on Jan 20, 2009 22:29:57 GMT -5
Here's my most significant problem with this report: Specimens are sent to me from all over the country and I have personally collected specimens over a five state area: no specimens collected since 2003 react to UVL in my lab. Prior to that a variety of orange filament not seen recently and a very long clean-white to straw colored monofilament were brightly fluorescent; the first extremely bright orange and the latter extremely bluish white. Heaven only knows where these materials came from (certainly not a hot water heater) but they can still be found in just about anyones carpet. Look with a long wavelength lamp.
|
|
|
Post by aqt on Jan 21, 2009 6:19:56 GMT -5
OK, it's 6:15 am and my neighbors must think I'm nutz!!
I have shut out all lights in bedroom and placed a black light bulb in the lamp.
I waved it over the carpet on floor. What I saw were several fiberballs that glowed white under the black light. Some of these fuzzballs look white and some look grey to the naked eye.
Also found a single orange fiber....visible to the naked eye that did not fluoresce.
will post pics of what I find
aqt
|
|