Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

The MET report & the origins of the 1j figure

  • 04-09-2013 9:08am
    #1
    Lemming
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,148 ✭✭✭✭


    Hi guys,

    I'm trying to locate the figure given that will penetrate the human eyeball by the MET study, on which the 1j figure was based as a recommended safe power limit.

    Does anyone know the figure off the top of their head? Any link to the original MET report would also be useful.


Comments

  • #2
    sharpy2010
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,113 ✭✭✭sharpy2010


    Lemming wrote: »
    Hi guys,

    I'm trying to locate the figure given that will penetrate the human eyeball by the MET study, on which the 1j figure was based as a recommended safe power limit.

    Does anyone know the figure off the top of their head? Any link to the original MET report would also be useful.

    There was a thread here a few months back on the topic of the 1j ( yes another one!) and I think it was fayer who said the actual limit was 1.3 j to penetrate the eye. Now don't quote me on the fact fayer said it as im not 100% it was him but I am 100% that's it's 1.3 j though


  • #3
    OzCam
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,045 ✭✭✭OzCam


    House of Commons, Home Affairs Second Report.

    Paragraph 26.


    See also this post for a handy summary.


Advertisement