Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics > #690604

Re: Particle physics 2

Show all headers | View raw

On 6/14/2018 11:42 AM, Volney wrote:
> On 6/14/2018 11:06 AM, Edward Prochak wrote:
>> On Wednesday, June 13, 2018 at 4:55:59 PM UTC-4, numbernu...@gmail.com
>> wrote:
>>> Obviously, cosmic rays are not propagating through 1800 meters
>>> of bed rock.
> 
> Obviously, actual measurements show that cosmic rays actually do go
> through substantial distances of bedrock. When actual data conflicts
> with one's hypothesis or belief, it's the belief that is wrong, not the
> measured data. Otherwise that is denial of reality, and denial of
> reality (delusions) is often considered a symptom of insanity, not science.
> 
>>> So it is questionable if cosmic rays are actually
>>> propagating through your body. How do you know if it is background
>>> radiation. Get background radiation or more like underground radiation.
>>
>> A good question. but consider:
>> if it is background radiation, at 1800 meters, the radiation will come
>> from all directions because the source is the surrounding rock.
>>
>> if it is cosmic radiation (particles), there is a preferred direction
>> from above.
>>
>> when tests are done, there is indeed an excess coming from above.
>> That excess increases as the testing is done close to the surface.
>> And even greater excess from above for tests done at higher elevations
>> (mountain tops).
>>
>> This is opposite what would happen if the source is the bedrock.
>> On the mountain tops the bedrock is below, so the particle direction
>> would be up not down.
>>
>> Since the observations shown the direction coming from above,
>> then we can rule out background radiation.
> 
> Yes that is something that confounded early radiation experimenters.
> They wanted a place with a low background level for more sensitive
> experiments. They knew rocks contained radioactive elements, so they
> figured things would work better if they did their work on mountaintops
> or balloons. To their surprise, the radiation _increased_. And it was
> coming from above, even to a large extent on the surface of the earth or
> below ground.

http://rocketsetc.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/hab2-geiger2.png

https://meteolcd.files.wordpress.com/2015/10/dose_rate_versus_altitude.jpg

http://www.ansto.gov.au/cs/groups/corporate/documents/stillimage/mdaw/mda5/~edisp/acs017612.jpg

Back to sci.physics | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Re: Particle physics 2 numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2018-06-13 13:55 -0700
  Re: Particle physics 2 Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-06-14 08:06 -0700
    Re: Particle physics 2 Volney <volney@volney.invalid> - 2018-06-14 12:42 -0400
      Re: Particle physics 2 Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-06-14 11:52 -0500
        Re: Particle physics 2 Volney <volney@volney.invalid> - 2018-06-14 13:04 -0400
          Re: Particle physics 2 Volney <volney@volney.invalid> - 2018-06-14 13:08 -0400
            Re: Particle physics 2 Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-06-14 12:40 -0500
              Re: Particle physics 2 benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-06-14 16:01 -0400
            Re: Particle physics 2 Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-06-15 05:39 -0700

csiph-web