AC vs DC: The Lethal Debate of Constant Voltage

  • Thread starter Thread starter hellraiser
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the lethality of AC versus DC electricity, with a focus on current rather than voltage as the primary danger. It is noted that while AC can drop to zero, DC provides a constant voltage, leading some to argue that DC is more lethal. However, it is emphasized that the current passing through the heart is what typically causes fatal outcomes, with certain levels of AC being particularly dangerous due to their potential to induce heart fibrillation. The Van de Graaff generator example illustrates that high voltage with low current can be less lethal. Overall, DC is considered safer compared to AC in terms of electrical shock risks.
hellraiser
Which one is more lethal?
AC or DC.
The value of AC rms is given to be equal to DC.
I think it ought to be DC because it would provide constant voltage. but in case of ac it drops to zero sometimes. I would have exprimented but... :smile:
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Think about what is dangerous. Is it the voltage or the current that kills you?
 
it is the current that kills
 
That's an interesting question. Here some info you might find useful
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_shock"
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't know what this question is specifically asking? Dead is dead, no matter what killed you...

-Dan
 
The van der graff generator kids play with in high school uses thousands of volts with a tiny current.
 
Certain AC current levels cause heart fibrilation (higher levels cause a heart contraction and release,as in a de-fibrilator, not fibrilation) , if the current passes through the heart. That is what usually does the killing. DC is way safer in comparison.
 
Back
Top