If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Bad Astronomy and Universe Today Forum > Space and Astronomy > Conspiracy Theories
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 15-November-2004, 01:30 PM
Jairo's Avatar
Jairo Jairo is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: São José dos Campos, São Paulo, Brazil
Posts: 104
Send a message via MSN to Jairo
Default Old question about radiation

You should have answered that many times... but what are the estimated levels for radiation absorption outside Van Allen belts?

I got some values from here, but they just talk about galactic cosmic rays. Are they close?

Thanks.
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 17-November-2004, 07:08 AM
nomuse nomuse is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Berkeley, CA
Posts: 1,313
Send a message via AIM to nomuse
Default

As you've probably gathered from even a little reading, there isn't such a thing as "amount of radiation."

Much depends on the energy levels, kind of sheilding, kind of particle, time of exposure. For instance, you could stand near a pile of depleted uranium in total comfort. If you were daring, you could even EAT a handful. Most of the energy is released via Alpha particles that have too little oomph to penentrate your skin. But if you got any DU in your bloodstream, the stuff has a nasty habit of collecting in a few places so it can irradiate some of your internal organs at close range.

Cosmic rays get mentioned a lot because their energies are very high; they can slam through light shielding and in metals give rise to secondary radiation (as I understand it...feel free to correct me, fellows!) The sun is better behaved, except during flares where the kinds of particles released changes and the amount increases radically.
__________________
"You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 17-November-2004, 09:34 AM
Glom's Avatar
Glom Glom is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: University of Birmingham
Posts: 6,649
Send a message via MSN to Glom
Default

DU perhaps isn't the best example. It is very long lived. It is chemically useless to the body and so doesn't get absorbed. The result is that you'd have to eat a fair bit of DU before you suffered any ill effects. Radio-iodine, now that's a different story.
__________________
Freedom For Fission A breath of fresh Iodine-131
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 17-November-2004, 03:33 PM
Jairo's Avatar
Jairo Jairo is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: São José dos Campos, São Paulo, Brazil
Posts: 104
Send a message via MSN to Jairo
Default

Hi,

I was talking about the estimated absorbed dose. Things like how much REM/year for an light shielded craft. Sorry if I wasnt clear enough.

I the meanime, I found some texts on internet that say something about those levels. They match with the 0.3 - 1 Sievert/year that the first text talks about. It seems that galactic cosmic rays are the only thing that matters if there is no SPE taking place.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 17-November-2004, 03:47 PM
JayUtah's Avatar
JayUtah JayUtah is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,471
Default

That seems about right to me; most of the materials I use are graphs for certain kinds of exposures behind certain types and thicknesses of materials. That's really the kind of information we're interested in as engineers, but it doesn't mean much to someone who isn't contemplating building something. The numbers vary greatly depending on what conditions the compiler of the data has assumed. However, designing for longevity on the scale of years requires us to consider solar events, and so the average exposures according to many sources includes predicted numbers and strengths of these events.
__________________
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams
Clavius Moon Base
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 22-November-2004, 09:07 PM
calliarcale calliarcale is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Twin Cities, MN
Posts: 475
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Glom
DU perhaps isn't the best example. It is very long lived. It is chemically useless to the body and so doesn't get absorbed. The result is that you'd have to eat a fair bit of DU before you suffered any ill effects. Radio-iodine, now that's a different story.
I always understood that uranium, like other heavy metals was toxic and caused damage to the nervous system entirely apart from any possible radiation. But I could definitely be wrong.
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 22-November-2004, 09:55 PM
Damburger Damburger is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Leicester
Posts: 1,096
Default

Strontium-90 is a nasty one. Its a beta emitter that is chemically similiar to calcium, so it gets taken into your bones, and irradiates your bone marrow. Its a common component of radioactive fallout.

But anyhow - I was under the impression that the Apollo craft passed through the belts very quickly, minimising the dose received by the astronauts.
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 23-November-2004, 05:44 AM
PhantomWolf's Avatar
PhantomWolf PhantomWolf is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Lost Deimos Moon Base
Posts: 5,629
Send a message via ICQ to PhantomWolf Send a message via AIM to PhantomWolf Send a message via MSN to PhantomWolf Send a message via Yahoo to PhantomWolf
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by calliarcale
I always understood that uranium, like other heavy metals was toxic and caused damage to the nervous system entirely apart from any possible radiation. But I could definitely be wrong.
It is toxic, in large amounts it will cause kidney failure rather than nervous system damage though.
__________________
Howling from the Shadows

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. --- JayUtah

You can't reason an irrational person out of an irrational belief. --- Noclevername

Apollo: The History and the Hoax
Enter the World of Athran
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old 23-November-2004, 06:43 AM
JayUtah's Avatar
JayUtah JayUtah is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,471
Default

The different metals, chemically speaking, have different properties. Some, like plutonium and those other mentioned, behave like mercury and other heavy metals and stay in the body for long periods of time. Uranium, however, is eliminated and does not accumulate forever. It's still dangerous while it's in there, but the chemical effects are less pronounced. Yes, it would cause kidney failure (chemically) if ingested in sufficient quantities.
__________________
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams
Clavius Moon Base
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT. The time now is 01:50 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
LinkBacks Enabled by vBSEO 3.0.0
©  2006 Bad Astronomy and Universe Today