|
Post by rodin on Sept 10, 2010 7:19:01 GMT -4
|
|
|
Post by Jason Thompson on Sept 10, 2010 8:03:44 GMT -4
Rodin, do you have any idea of the quantitative data that accompanies this image? I suggest you look it up. The fact that gamma rays are being emitted does not mean they are being emitted at dangerous levels.
As a hint, look at the background of that image, which still shows lots of gamma radiation from the surrounding space.
|
|
|
Post by Cavorite on Sept 10, 2010 8:15:43 GMT -4
Also, you may want to look up this thing known as the inverse square law. If a candle held 10cm from my eyes appears brighter than a blast furnace at 1km, does that mean I could stand 10cm from a blast furnace with no ill effects?
Are you abandoning your previous threads? Since your return from your holiday you seem a lot less interested in putting forward arguments you are willing to debate as opposed to random anthill-kicking.
|
|
|
Post by AtomicDog on Sept 10, 2010 8:19:18 GMT -4
|
|
|
Post by randombloke on Sept 10, 2010 8:19:42 GMT -4
Interestingly, the caption for the Rodin's otherwise unsourced image at a different wiki-based encyclopaedia is much more informative:
It even includes a reference to the actual source. How about that.
|
|
|
Post by capricorn1 on Sept 10, 2010 8:20:39 GMT -4
|
|
|
Post by Cavorite on Sept 10, 2010 8:27:42 GMT -4
Interesting, capricorn1. I just assumed that the brightness was an apparent versus absolute magnitude thing. Is that still a contributing factor, though? How would an equidistant moon and sun compare? I haven't found any answers in the googling I've done so far. I would have thought that the corona would generate at least some gamma radiation.
|
|
|
Post by PhantomWolf on Sept 10, 2010 8:28:13 GMT -4
Besides, if the moon was a lethal emitter of Gamma Rays, we'd already be dead long before going there because the Earth isn't protected from Gamma Radiation.
|
|
|
Post by Cavorite on Sept 10, 2010 8:30:15 GMT -4
Well, the atmosphere counts for something. Life on the ISS would be a bit more exciting, though.
|
|
Bob B.
Bob the Excel Guru?
Posts: 3,072
|
Post by Bob B. on Sept 10, 2010 8:40:11 GMT -4
Gamma rays, yes. Lethal, no.
|
|
|
Post by AtomicDog on Sept 10, 2010 8:46:06 GMT -4
Gamma rays, yes. Lethal, no. Hulk Smash!
|
|
|
Post by tedward on Sept 10, 2010 9:12:19 GMT -4
Righto Mr Rodin. When Mr Armstrong stepped out, what dosage did he get?
|
|
|
Post by rodin on Sept 10, 2010 9:23:16 GMT -4
I looked to quantify the radiation but initial searches did not offer this info. As regards the fact space also shows some CMB-type residual gamma radiation fair enough. But the Moon is showing as a bright source. Inverse square law yourself all the way to the surface and the radiation could be significant Interesting about the Sun absorbing its own gamma radiation
|
|
|
Post by rodin on Sept 10, 2010 9:24:33 GMT -4
Well, the atmosphere counts for something. Life on the ISS would be a bit more exciting, though. What about the Van Allen belts also?
|
|
Bob B.
Bob the Excel Guru?
Posts: 3,072
|
Post by Bob B. on Sept 10, 2010 9:28:51 GMT -4
Well, the atmosphere counts for something. Life on the ISS would be a bit more exciting, though. What about the Van Allen belts also? What point are you trying to make and the VARB?
|
|