@NickAlexeev Yes, but that wasn't part of the original question. It was added as a comment several hours later, when you asked for it.

And knowing the the context still didn't change the technical nature of the actual question.

@DaveTweed I agree that the context of the question remains constant, and didn't change from the time it was posted till now. But it's TV show that is the point of departure for the question.

The question had confused some of our members, and they have labeled the question as an XY problem. The question lacked context.

To clarify this, I've asked the O.P. "what are you trying to accomplish?" The O.P. immediately brought up the TV series.

The O.P. isn't designing a defibrillator, neither he is a user of defibrillators. It's important that the users who will read the question in the future understand what the O.P.'s point of departure was. This is why the edit about the TV series should be included in the text of the question: it should have been there from the beginning.

Yes, but none of this means that it would have been appropriate to migrate it to a site about movies.

That's the part that blew everyone away.

@DaveTweed He is asking about a movie.

He is asking about the real-world plausibility of a concept seen in a movie.

two question, then

(1) Do you think that was a good question (especially in its original form) ?

(2) Should the edit explaining that the TV show is the context for the question be added ?

(1) Not a great question, but an OK question, considering that it comes from a non-engineer.

(2) Yes.

@DaveTweed Regarding (2), I'll put that update back. If passerby rolls it back, I'll lock the question. Or, perhaps, you lock it preemptively.

OK,sure.