3 ms·
There is some more info from David Swenson: http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?s=b06561cd9b21d94322e22d4b0705566f&p=4212704&postcount=22 http://b
by yread 15y ago
There is some more info from David Swenson:
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?s=b06561cd9b21d94322e22d4b0705566f&p=4212704&postcount=22 http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?s=b06561cd9...
key quote:
> I think the best explanation has to do with the film being at or vaery near the theoretical charge density limit and just the right combination of resistance between the person and floor. With the electric field at its maximum at the center of the tent formed by the film, the conductive body (person) approaching the center was actually pinned to the floor. Had the floor been more conductive, the person would have been closer to ground and probably would have received a massive shock from a propagating brush discharge. But being isolated from ground, no charge separation occured resulting in the electrostatic "pinning" effect.
- viraptor 15y agoFrom the article: "He could lean all his weight forward but was unable to pass." With that one, I imagine if his shoes were stuck to the ground, he'd just fall down, or at least noticed the resistance came from the shoes rather than body.