3
\$\begingroup\$

This sounds like a strange question (it is) but, from a purely biological standpoint, why is the measured resistance across my hands (I measured 120k\$\Omega\$) so much less than across my face? I thought to ask this because the distance across my face is much less than my arm span.

More specifically, what makes the tissue in my face so much more resistant to charge (ion) flow than my entire arm-span?

P.S. I used a standard multimeter with resistance set at 2M\$\Omega\$ to get my readings - across my face doesn't even give a reading (too much resistance)

\$\endgroup\$
3
  • \$\begingroup\$ I am more resistive than you across my hands. Mine is 1Mohm :) \$\endgroup\$ Commented May 13, 2016 at 5:19
  • 8
    \$\begingroup\$ You don't have an air gap between your ears do you? ;-) \$\endgroup\$ Commented May 13, 2016 at 5:20
  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ @RogerRowland Quite possibly :) \$\endgroup\$ Commented May 13, 2016 at 5:20

4 Answers 4

0
\$\begingroup\$

Hopefully this helps: Because resistance is proportional to material length and inversely proportional to cross sectional area (see below), I think it's safe to say that because your face has significantly lower cross-sectional area compared to your arm-span (probably by a couple orders of magnitude) that the length difference is negligible.

\$ R = \rho * \frac{L}{A_c} \$

Added to that (like what others have said before) a 'sweaty' surface like your hands likely gives excellent probe contact, while the less-moist (and hairier) surface of your face gives less complete contact.

All these factors result in much higher resistance across your face compared to your arm-span

\$\endgroup\$
1
\$\begingroup\$

Your skin surface resistance is what varies greatly. It will be affected by things like sweat, salt, and skin oils.

edit:

Skin oils can add a more resistive layer.

edit:

Try different distances in the same parts and like distances in different parts.

\$\endgroup\$
1
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Could you please be more specific about the effects of oils from a chemistry standpoint? I understand how sweat (and salt) must allow for more conductance, but not less :) \$\endgroup\$ Commented May 13, 2016 at 5:25
0
\$\begingroup\$

As Skaperen says it is all about the skin resistance. With an electrode in the meat under the skin, the resistance across the body will be much lower.

My theory is that you are able to obtain more contact pressure holding the meter probes in your hands, than when pressing them to your face.

Rather have someone else poke you with the probe, in the same way, in different places.

You could also put one probe in your mouth, which would be a low resistance connection to your body, and you'd have your hands free to probe all around.

Doing this, I think you'll find it's only the skin type and pressure that matter, not the distance across the body.

\$\endgroup\$
2
  • \$\begingroup\$ I think I get it - do you mean that more 'meat' under the skin gives less resistance (greater cross-sectional for current area 'n all that) \$\endgroup\$ Commented May 13, 2016 at 6:04
  • \$\begingroup\$ Well all meat is full of slightly salty water. Resistance will be a few kOhm. The MOhm readings are from the insulating layer of dry skin. \$\endgroup\$
    – tomnexus
    Commented May 13, 2016 at 11:01
0
\$\begingroup\$

Is it possible that since there is likely more skin oils on your face, and more sweat on your hands that the results were affected?

\$\endgroup\$
1
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ I would agree, but that doesn't explain why the resistance is high even after testing on a clean "surface" (face) :) \$\endgroup\$ Commented May 13, 2016 at 6:09

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.