top 94 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 82 points 8 months ago (51 children)

Ok but for real, that wouldn't work, right? How would them holding it complete the circuit? The circuit is just gonna be from one screw to the top of the pole back through another screw, not the part the person is holding.

  • source
  • hideshow 51 child comments
  • [–] 22 points 8 months ago (5 children)

    I mean, a car battery isn't going to do anything even if you could complete a circuit. You can just grab the terminals on a car battery, 12V isn't high enough to be noticeable on dry skin.

    You'd want to solder on the hot lead of an extension cord hooked up to 120 if you wanted to make sure they never touch that pole again.

    Disclaimer: don't do this, it'll probably kill.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 19 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    A electric horse fence is a better option. Will zing you but isn't lethal and also has an intermittent current. Specifically designed to be touched by living things without harm. But stay away from cattle fencing, that can kill someone with a heart condition.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 0 points 8 months ago

    You would have to try pretty hard to kill yourself with a hotwire even if you had a heart condition. Like lay on your side on the ground and grab the hotwire so maybe the circuit went through your heart and not entirely followed the shortest path to ground along your side.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    I think there is potential for some non lethal zapping if done right (one terminal to the poles other to ground)

    Your skin is where most of the body's resistance is, and electrocution / shock can occur at much lower voltages if applied internally/ to a cut.

    There's an urban legend about a navy Electrical engineer stopping his heart by trying to measure his internal resistance with a voltmeter- he stabbed one probe into each of his thumbs and the portion of a single volt the meter uses to test resistance going across his heart was enough to cause afib.

    Now, with pole dancing, theres some potential, for a sweaty bikini to make contact with both an electrified pole and the interior of the dancer's labia, conducting enough electricity to impart a noticeable shock.

    No matter the voltage though, I think the main problem is the body being part of the least resistive, or any, path to ground. Unless the screws holding the bottom of the pole also protruded through the downstairs neighbor's ceiling, and you run the negative wire out your window and into theirs, connecting both ends of the pole to the battery....

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago (1 child)

    Even if you had wires on both ends of the pole, nothing would go into the person because the path of least resistance would be the pole. You would have to energize the pole and directly connect the person to the other wire in order to complete the circuit. Then the resistance of the human body becomes an issue, and using this paper as a reference, the worst case scenario of internal body resistance is ~300 ohm, and the threshold for immediate cardiac symptoms is ~100 mA.

    Then, 12V / 300 ohm = 40 mA. So closer than I’d like, but probably not fatal even in the absolute worst case scenario where there is no electrical resistance provided by the skin and a direct electrical path through the heart.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago

    I was thinking no fatal but feel able. Seems like I was way overestimating the ability of sweat as a saline solution conductor to pull power away from the pole and create a shock on the bits below though.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 42 points 8 months ago* (31 children)

    You can short the terminals on a car battery with your body with no issue (there's a theory that that's why you see it in movies so much - if anyone actually tries it the studio isn't giving them an idea that actually works. Same with duct-tape gags and chloroform), but it might melt the hardware and set the floor on fire which would be fun! What they should really do is connect a HV source and charge up the pole. Won't cause any lasting harm, but hopefully it'll convince them they drove a screw through a live wire.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 31 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 8 months ago (30 children)

    Who the hell told you you can short a car battery with your body? You absolutely can’t.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 30 child comments
  • [–] 22 points 8 months ago* (7 children)

    You definitely can. As in you can grab both terminals and not be injured.

    Source: am high level electrical engineer.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 8 months ago (3 children)

    That's not a short, by definition.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    Isn't it? You're shorting the battery terminals by connecting them directly, it's just a shitty wire lol

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    The body is a resistor, limiting the fire of the system in the same way if a lamp would be in the circuit.

    A short is a circuit with ideally no impedance, there isn't an ideal circuit and one can debate how much resistance would invalidate the term 'short circuit' so both of you might be right.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 7 points 8 months ago* (21 children)

    Just checking: Is this a semantic argument about my use of "short"?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 21 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 8 months ago (12 children)

    Did you mean short circuit the battery using your bare hands?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago (11 children)

    I meant contact both terminals at once with your bare hands.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 8 months ago (10 children)

    But that won’t short circuit it is my point

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago (6 children)
  • [–] 3 points 8 months ago* (5 children)

    A short circuit is when you provide a path for electricity to travel directly from A to B.

    You can't do this by touching the battery terminals because your dry skin won't transmit the electicity. You're just touching battery terminals.

    If you hold a AA battery in between your finger and thumb, you're also not short circuiting it. You're just holding it by its terminals.

    But if you hold an unfolded paperclip to both sides, you are shorting it. The electricity can travel through the paperclip.

    If you hold a nine volt battery against your dry palm, it's not a short circuit. But if you hold it against your tongue, it is a short circuit because the electricity can travel through your (wet) tongue. You can feel the difference.

    As far as I know, there is not a large population using "short circuit" the way you were (just touching a battery terminals).

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (4 children)

    No, there is absolutely current flowing when you touch both terminals, it's just an incredibly tiny amount. You can do the math yourself and see, it's a basic application of Ohms law. The formula is (I=V/R). The reason you feel the tingles from a 9 volt you lick vs one you touch with your finger is that the resistance is much lower when licked, allowing more current to be produced - but the resistance is not infinite when you touch it with your finger, it's just high enough that you do not notice the tingling from the small amount of current that results from a circuit with such high resistance (also it travels across the surface and on a much less sensitive part of your anatomy etc. etc.)

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    Shorts are unintended low impedance paths.

    it's just an incredibly tiny amount

    Indicates you are not describing a short.

    Sure, there is technically current flowing, but it is small enough to be considered an open circuit for engineering purposes. There is leakage current for every insulator, we don't call it a short.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

    (I'm sorry I hate doing these point by point breakdowns, it lacks narrative structure and flair, but I'm tired...)

    but it is small enough to be considered an open circuit for engineering purposes.

    The current flowing when you complete the circuit with with your hand is about 0.2 miliamps (measured at ~47,000Ω resistance so I rounded to 50k). If any engineer is considering that an open circuit they should be driven through the streets in a waymo I would very much like to see the application in which they consider that an open circuit because none is springing to mind (outside of clear outliers like some of the really weird switches used in high voltage electronics which I can't even remember the names of).


    Shorts are unintended low impedance paths.

    That is one type of short, yes, however if we look at the closest thing we're going to find to a broadly accepted formal definition (the one from wikipedia:)

    A short circuit is an abnormal connection between two nodes of an electric circuit intended to be at different voltages. This results in a current limited only by the Thévenin equivalent resistance of the rest of the network which can cause circuit damage, overheating, fire or explosion.

    We can see that it is not actually a requirement to have a circuit with low/no impedance; it's just a common form a short takes. The actual requirement is a circuit with lower impedance than the intended circuit. This makes sense of course: a short across a signal wire is obviously not going to dump the full potential of an entire system, only that portion which provides current to the shorting circuit. It would similarly still be considered a short if the conductor shorting the signal wire were a high-impedence resistor that was causing a false signal - so long as it's enough to trip whatever sensor is at the other end, it would be a fault caused by a short circuit. In the case of a car battery, the leakage current is part of an absurdly low current circuit (something like 30 picoamps) which you are shorting when you make contact with the terminals. The difference between a circuit with kilohms of resistance and one with near gigaohms of resistance is phenomenal.

    However at the risk of still being right, let me say that this is an incredibly pointless semantic argument to be having. Yes, technically, you are shorting the battery. In a more formal setting I probably wouldn't have phrased it like that in an effort to stave off the chance of a tedious argument like we're having right now; however this is a shitpost community so I figured brevity instead of defensive technical clarity was the ideal course of action.

    Misjudged that one, didn't I.

    (Edit: clarity, removed horny joke. This is no joking matter.)

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago (1 child)

    Cool, til. I guess it is semantic then wether a short is low-resistance or any connection.

    Iirc, even the air has a resistance value, so that would imply that all batteries are shorted at all times which doesn't seem useful for the English language.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago*

    A quite reasonable argument could be made that a battery simply sitting around is only connected to one circuit (itself thru the air) and thus there's not an "unintended" one it's also connected to that could be considered a short - but really, my unstated point this whole time is that this is not a usefully rigorously defined term. The definition on wikipedia is as close as we'll get, and it's extremely broad by it's nature.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 8 months ago (7 children)

    The way you worded it makes it sound like it's very easy to short a battery with your body, not that attempting to short a battery will cause "no issue" because it won't actually work.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 8 months ago* (6 children)

    I'm aware - I very intentionally spared everyone the lecture on the mechanics of how this works because it is, on the whole, very boring. However if we really wanted to get into the boring technical details nobody but us cares about then yes, you are indeed shorting the battery, it's just for a ludicrously small amount of current. Ohms law (I = V/R) gives us that.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    Oooh, because we're too dumb to understand the finer details of electrical engineering, is that it? IS THAT IT?

    Because yeah I am too dumb to understand even the coarser details of electrical engineering.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    Thing is, you also called it "shorting" the battery. Usually a short is an unintended, unsustainable low resistance path.

    While your body may technically close the circuit, calling it a short makes it sound like an actual electricution risk. That combined with the unclear "no issue" usage made it pretty confusing, I thought you had no idea what you were talking about until I saw your reply.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    It's just the common parlance. I wouldn't have done this were it a more technical setting, but this is a shitpost community - so I'll just have to beg forgiveness for my imprecision. Fortunately, should anyone go to test this by fondling their car's terminals, no harm will befall them due to my lack of strict accuracy in the description here (though they might get rebuffed by their car if it's not in the mood).

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 8 months ago (10 children)

    For someone to get electrocuted, the current needs to flow through their body. Electricity always follows the path of least resistance, so there's basically no way to do that from upstairs.

    If you attach both terminals of the battery (or a stripped extension wire) that wouldn't do it. Assuming the pole is conductive, the electricity would just go into the screws, into the pole, across to the other screw and out. If the pole isn't conductive it would probably do nothing at all. Maybe the floor is conductive, in which case it would go into the screw, through the floor/ceiling and out the other screw. There's just no way to do it where the electricity flows from a screw, down the pole, into the body of the pole dancer, then somehow back out and up to the battery.

    Even if the person who owned the stripper pole wanted to electrocute themselves it would be difficult. Assuming the pole is conductive, if you attached one electrode near the ceiling and one near the floor, the electricity would just flow through the pole. It wouldn't make a detour to go through the body of the pole dancer. You'd basically have to clip one side of the battery to your toe, the other side to the stripper pole, and then grab the pole with your hands. And, even then, it might not do it -- you'd have to have sweaty hands and toes to make the path through your body conductive.

    I really hate the movie trope where people can get electrocuted by stepping into a puddle that has something electricity-related in it. It's almost as bad as the trope that you get blasted backwards if you're hit by a bullet / shotgun blast.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [+] 8 points 8 months ago (10 children)
  • [–] 5 points 8 months ago (4 children)

    You've put a worrying amount of thought into this.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [+] 4 points 8 months ago (4 children)
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago (3 children)

    Do you really? It seems like you don't actually understand, because this won't work.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [+] 1 point 8 months ago (3 children)
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago (2 children)

    I don't need to, because I know how electrical circuits work. I don't think you do. But, go on, explain why I'm wrong.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] 1 point 8 months ago (2 children)
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago (1 child)

    I'll answer that for you, but first tell me what the (typical, average, ballpark) resistance of a human body is.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [+] 1 point 8 months ago (1 child)
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago

    So, a fair estimate for a human body's resistance is about 1000 Ω. That's a case when the hands are sweaty, or there's an open wound, or other cases where the skin isn't acting as a massive resistor and blocking any current from flowing.

    According to this chart, a 16 gauge sheet of metal is about 1.5 mm thick. A 22 gauge is about 0.76 mm thick. I'm going to go in metric since everything is so much more straightforward.

    So, 9 feet long is about 3m long. Apparently stripper poles typically come in 38, 45 and 50mm diameters, so, let's go for the smallest one to have the highest possible resistance. So, 38mm diameter means a circumference of 0.038 * Pi = 0.12m. So, the area of the pole is its circumference multiplied by its thickness, or about 0.12 * 0.00076 = approx 0.00009 m^2 (9*10^-5 m^2).

    To calculate the resistance of something you need its resistivity. This table gives resistivities for common materials. Aluminum is listed at 2.82×10−8 Ωm. To calculate the resistance given the resistivity, cross-sectional area and length you plug the values into:

    R = ρL / A

    R = 3E-8Ωm * 3m / 0.00009m^2 = 3E-8 * 3 / 9E-5 = 0.333 E-3 = 3E-4Ω

    Or, about 0.3 milliohms, or 300 microohms.

    As a check, you can compare it to the resistance of a wire. Another chart gives the resistance of wires of various gauges at 1000 ft, or approx 300m. So, a 3m length of wire is going to be roughly 1/100th of that resistance. The values in the chart are on the order of 1 ohm at 300m, so 0.01 ohms (10 milliohms) at 3m. Of course, wires are much thinner than a whole pole, but wires are also designed to be good conductors, but 0.3 milliohms vs. 10 milliohms seems like we're in the right ballpark. So, even if the neighbour was dangling from a length of AWG 14 wire, and it was somehow not breaking, even then she'd be in no danger of electrocution.

    This is all just back of the envelope estimation, but we're talking 6 orders of magnitude difference in resistance. No matter what the pole is made of, or how thin it is, it's still metal, and metal has much lower resistance than flesh. The current is going to stay in the pole, and the pole dancer is in no danger.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago (3 children)

    What makes you think that will work? That sounds like a very complicated way of just connecting the common to live with no human in the loop.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    Ikr, this at least makes the pole get hot because current is actually running through part of it.
    But at no point is a human part of the path of least resistance for the electricity.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [+] 0 points 8 months ago (1 child)
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago

    Ok, you're still failing here. The water content of a human body is irrelevant. A large contact area is irrelevant.

    Let me make it easier for you. As I'm sure you know, to be electrocuted an electrical current needs to flow through someone's body. What part of the neighbour's body is the current going to enter, and which part is it going to leave?

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago

    Does this work by creating a resistance in the wire (zig zags) so that anywhere you touch on the pole causes you to become the path of least resistance? I'm just having a hard time following but it intrigues me

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 3 points 8 months ago

    Nah, that wouldn't. But if you connected just the hot line (right eye of the outlet smiley face) that would do it. Wouldn't recommend it because you could kill them by electrocution or kill even more people with a fire.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 34 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    Sure, if you want the battery to short out and start a fire.

    Cut the tips off then drill out the screws so they break off the next time they use it

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [+] 30 points 8 months ago (6 children)
  • [–] 19 points 8 months ago (5 children)

    That only solves your problem. It doesn't add problems for the perpetrator, which is the only thing we are concerned with here.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago

    Cut the hands off the downstairs neighbour with it. Now they don't need a stripper pole. Pole gets removed and everything goes back to normal (after all the court cases and prison time etc).

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 29 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    A car battery would do shit all. Dry skin potential point is like 65V.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 28 points 8 months ago (8 children)

    How thin would your floors and ceilings need to be for this to be real?

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 8 months ago

    I got drill bits that can go pretty deep. The reason this shit doesn't happen to professionals like myself is that I am scared of electricity and power tools and have no clue what I'm doing and have people do it for me.

    SMH

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 10 points 8 months ago (3 children)

    My browser history now includes several Amazon listings for stripper poles.

    I have learned that:

    1. The listing ALWAYS calls them "dancing poles" but Amazon knows what you mean,

    2. About half of them are sold as "unisex" even though all of the photos of them in use show women,

    3. Only some require drilling into the ceiling. The few that do ship with screws or lag bolts that are approx. 2 inches in length and come with drywall anchors.

    So, if installing any of the poles from Amazon's first page of results, your floor would have to be approximately 1.5 inches thick.

    If the downstairs apartment had no ceiling treatment and you looked up at joists and subfloor, you might get here if she decided to attach between the ceiling joists. In a typical residential structure with a drywall ceiling, you'd need lag bolts some 10 or 12 inches long to reach through the plate of the pole, 3/4" of drywall, 8 or 10 inches of floor system depending, 3/4" of subfloor and 1/2" of flooring.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    Excellent answer.

    I suspected the same, but metrically.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 23 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    Hammer and punch them back down. Or drip lube down the bolts so it makes the pole unusable.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 13 points 8 months ago

    Make friends with the legends who live downstairs.

  • source
  • [–] 9 points 8 months ago* (2 children)

    Ah btw, if there's resistance while drilling a hole for a ceiling lamp, stop.
    Could be a heating pipe, with decades old heating sludge.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 8 months ago

    Running a sufficient amount of electricity through it may turn it into a heated rod.

  • source
  • [+] 10 points 8 months ago (1 child)
  • [–] 6 points 8 months ago

    Did you mean kV? I don't know if 40kHz is high enough, but I know at some point it doesn't even shock anymore, just burns. Hence you can take a screwdriver in your hand, and get it close to high frequency Tesla coil / slayer exciter circuit (not that I know the difference) and have it flow through you no problem, just if you touch the spark directly it burns.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 8 months ago

    Yeah my landlord wouldn't be too happy.

  • source
  • [–] 13 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    Disagree. DC current will seek the path of least resistance, and will not go down the pole.

    I'm unsure if this is an apartment, but I would start by reaching out to the landlord and say your lights have been acting up whenever they are using it. Maybe say your electric bill has been higher, maybe stage that a little bit by simply leaving a light on for a month. Have them inspect the floor damage too.

    Once they leave, I would install cannibalize a power cable, plug it into the wall and hook the hot wire up to one of the screws.

    The benefit of using AC, is that it is less likely to take the path of least resistance and travels as waves back and forth, doesn't necessarily matter if they are grounded or not, they will feel it, likely marginally lower since it is also going into everything their 8ft pole is touching.

    ...I don't know why I'm on a villain arc this morning.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 8 months ago

    Small correction- AC power doesn't "travel in waves". It just oscillates up and down with respect to its reference, and same with its current with respect to its impedance. Just looks like a wave if you look at its position over time.

    With a completed circuit with low impedance, it would trip your breaker. With completed circuit with large enough impedance to not trip breaker, it might burn your apartment down in a number of ways. Could also kill neighbor if they are somehow making a return path, as current disrupts your nervous system where once they get caught in the shock they lose control of their muscles and are held in the current unable to let go, electrocuting them until death. If insulation is high enough to effectively be an open circuit, your neighbor on the pole wouldn't know it was electrified in the same way a bird sitting up on a power line doesn't have a clue its anything but a normal wire in the air. Largely depends on how the pole is installed and if its touching any metal or electrical wires where it is mounted on top, bottom, or both. Also if neighbor is ground level or if another apartment beneath them. A lot of variables create.a lot of possible outcomes.

    Would not recommend, lot of risks with little to no chance of any reward

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago*

    Step one of leaving a light on for a month might be a big hole in this plan those days. Electricity diff would be like a dollar or 2 at worst because bulbs are like 12 watts now. If the temperature went up by a couple degrees one day the AC would make it fluctuate just as much as that and you wouldn't even notice on a bill

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 8 months ago

    Frangible nuts. Get the load onto the nuts instead of the floor/ceiling. Wait until the neighbour is in the middle of something very physical, then blow the charge allowing the bolts (screws) to slip.

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 8 months ago
    load more comments
    view more: next ›