Notices
Results 1 to 23 of 23

Thread: Radio Active Isotopes In My Day

  1. #1 Radio Active Isotopes In My Day 
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,178


    In my day these higher elements were radio active Isotopes. Other standard elements could be radio active because of isotopes if they contained these large isotope elements in trace or contaminant quantities.

    Basically Carbon 14 was carbon that had some trace, rare earth elements in it.

    This is how I was taught, and how Isotopes at one time were understood. I know this is an old table however it was the only one I could find to show, the list of Isotopes. As it was in the beginning.

    What made these large elements Isotopes, was there size verses the radiation here on Earth.

    It was highly suspected that if these elements were out further away from the sun in a naturally colder place. Less radiation from the Sun. They would not emit radiation. Uranium would just be like lead.

    So they were considered somewhat unstable, not really elements. Because they could never totally isolate them. From other elements. And they did try.

    The contaminants proved to be more eventful, or more important to the Uranium's behavior then the mass of Uranium.

    So I just posted this, thought you might like to get another perspective on this. I was taught by Universal Scientists that radio active contaminants are what causes the lower elements to become radio active.

    Some elements like carbon can actually create a place to fusion up elements to Actual large Isotope elements.

    Elements like Iodine and carbon were made radio active and used for special purposes in medicine and science. However these were called Isotopes of whatever element they were. This was bad policy.
    But it was understood at the time, that contaminates present were causing the radiation. The regular elemental substance was used because the body would pull or push, that normal elemental chemical, along with the poison pill, the giant radio active element, to a desired organ. Either as a treatment or to x-ray the organ. And highlight that organ.

    Time goes by and the next generation just hears about this. They use it in medicine and it is called Iodine 11D2, they do not know what that means anymore. It just meant that there was a specific amount of unknown radio active substance in the iodine.

    Scientists were losing their ability to purify elements. They were losing their ability to classify the contaminants, and destroy the radio active contaminants. And decided on calling them variations of the elements themselves. This was criminal. Because they were just elements that contained atoms in the Isotope group. Often along with massive amounts of oxygen.

    Great German and American scientists begged us not to play with the isotopes, and not to use them in manufacture. Because it was apparent that these isotopes were finding there way into many chemicals. That they were never found in before. Many supplies showed trace emissions where no emission was present.

    There are ways to destroy radioactive particles. But it is not easy to decontaminate a planet.



    Sincerely,


    William McCormick


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,822
    What's a Universal Scientist?


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,178
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370
    What's a Universal Scientist?
    http://www.anl.gov/Science_and_Techn...rs/unisci.html


    Unfortunately, the information I have about them currently that is on the web, is that Enricho Fermi, was the last Universal Scientist. He was not even a good Universal Scientist.
    He stole the name Universal Scientist, with the money and backing of the United States Government. This fool, started the end of Universal science, by selling out.

    Real Universal Scientists practiced science right up to 1973 in the United States, when their understanding of the atom was band by law, in school.

    Einstein wrote President Roosevelt a letter about Enricho Fermi, and Enricho's experiments with Uranium. And how they were showing the possibility for use in large quantities to create large amounts of power. Or even in very large quantities a bomb.

    He warned the President we should start our own, Uranium project. What a fool.

    http://www.anl.gov/Science_and_Techn...s/aetofdr.html

    We already had weapons that made these look like children's toys. We were not wanting for super weapons of global destruction. Lord knows Germany went through much agony creating pinpoint weapons of destruction. Rather then to violently strike out with super weapons.

    Sincerely,


    William McCormick
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,822
    Well, Billy, I sure would like to know who the universal scientists were who taught you that Carbon 14 is only radioactive because it has some trace rare earth elements. They would be laughed out of the room.

    In my day, we have instruments that can tell you exactly what radioactive nuclides are in a sample based on their characteristic radiation spectrum.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,178
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370
    Well, Billy, I sure would like to know who the universal scientists were who taught you that Carbon 14 is only radioactive because it has some trace rare earth elements. They would be laughed out of the room.

    In my day, we have instruments that can tell you exactly what radioactive nuclides are in a sample based on their characteristic radiation spectrum.
    With contaminates, it is hard to tell. Because they are few and far in between. If you are so sure of your contaminants you could get them out.

    There is no variation of any element. That is what I am trying to say. You are just reading radiation from a few radioactive atoms of radio active elements contained in your carbon. So I am also saying you do not know how to tell what the contaminates are in your carbon.

    So many people think there is different kinds of Uranium. When there are really just different contaminants in different grades of Uranium.

    Sincerely,


    William McCormick
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Moderator Moderator Dishmaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Heidelberg, Germany
    Posts
    1,624
    Quote Originally Posted by William McCormick
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370
    Well, Billy, I sure would like to know who the universal scientists were who taught you that Carbon 14 is only radioactive because it has some trace rare earth elements. They would be laughed out of the room.

    In my day, we have instruments that can tell you exactly what radioactive nuclides are in a sample based on their characteristic radiation spectrum.
    With contaminates, it is hard to tell. Because they are few and far in between. If you are so sure of your contaminants you could get them out.

    There is no variation of any element. That is what I am trying to say. You are just reading radiation from a few radioactive atoms of radio active elements contained in your carbon. So I am also saying you do not know how to tell what the contaminates are in your carbon.

    So many people think there is different kinds of Uranium. When there are really just different contaminants in different grades of Uranium.
    Contaminants don't explain anything. And surely they don't explain the different versions of radio activity. Where do these alleged contaminants come from? What about Tritium, the heaviest isotope of hydrogen? This can be produced in a pure form. How do you hide impurities in a radio active gas? By the way, the deuterium and tritium isotopes of hydrogen could be measured in interstellar gas clouds.

    Just to for those who want to know the commonly accepted concept about radio activity: Isotopes are variants of atoms having the same nuclear charge, but a different mass (can be measured both and independently). The additional mass stems from additional neutrons in the nucleus. At some point, when the number of neutrons gets to big, the nucleus can become unstable and break into pieces of new atoms/elements. As a by product, you can get additional bits like free neutrons, alpha particles (helium nuclei) and gamma radiation (high energy photons). The product material can be measured as well, confirming the concept. Beta radiation consists of electrons or positrons emitted from the nucleus, where neutrons are transformed into protons and vice versa. All these reactions must comply with various conservations rules like particle conservation (particles and anti particles), charge, and others.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Port Saint Lucie, Florida
    Posts
    135
    Quote Originally Posted by Dishmaster
    At some point, when the number of neutrons gets to big, the nucleus can become unstable and break into pieces of new atoms/elements.
    What defines the mass an element can obtain before coming unstable? I.e., why can hydrogen only have one neutron stably (Deuterium) before becoming radioactive (Tritium)?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,178
    Quote Originally Posted by Dishmaster
    Quote Originally Posted by William McCormick
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370
    Well, Billy, I sure would like to know who the universal scientists were who taught you that Carbon 14 is only radioactive because it has some trace rare earth elements. They would be laughed out of the room.

    In my day, we have instruments that can tell you exactly what radioactive nuclides are in a sample based on their characteristic radiation spectrum.
    With contaminates, it is hard to tell. Because they are few and far in between. If you are so sure of your contaminants you could get them out.

    There is no variation of any element. That is what I am trying to say. You are just reading radiation from a few radioactive atoms of radio active elements contained in your carbon. So I am also saying you do not know how to tell what the contaminates are in your carbon.

    So many people think there is different kinds of Uranium. When there are really just different contaminants in different grades of Uranium.
    Contaminants don't explain anything. And surely they don't explain the different versions of radio activity. Where do these alleged contaminants come from? What about Tritium, the heaviest isotope of hydrogen? This can be produced in a pure form. How do you hide impurities in a radio active gas? By the way, the deuterium and tritium isotopes of hydrogen could be measured in interstellar gas clouds.

    Just to for those who want to know the commonly accepted concept about radio activity: Isotopes are variants of atoms having the same nuclear charge, but a different mass (can be measured both and independently). The additional mass stems from additional neutrons in the nucleus. At some point, when the number of neutrons gets to big, the nucleus can become unstable and break into pieces of new atoms/elements. As a by product, you can get additional bits like free neutrons, alpha particles (helium nuclei) and gamma radiation (high energy photons). The product material can be measured as well, confirming the concept. Beta radiation consists of electrons or positrons emitted from the nucleus, where neutrons are transformed into protons and vice versa. All these reactions must comply with various conservations rules like particle conservation (particles and anti particles), charge, and others.
    There is no such thing as tritium. You have some chemical composition and probably radio active contaminants.

    They make ammonia by combining nitrogen and hydrogen, under extreme heat and pressure. They fusion the hydrogen to the nitrogen and create oxygen. That is why ammonia in my area was always NO2, until 1992-1993 when I removed most of the containers from schools, public and private schools, all marked NO2.

    I thought that they would replace them with new bottles, to my horror even Mallincrodt started selling it as NH3.

    You really do not get how easy it is to make poison radio active gas from minute quantities of radio active material and hydrocarbons? It is possible to chain, react hydrocarbons, up in elemental number, to higher radio active elements. Using a radio active catalyst and heat.

    That is why all our stuff is not supposed to have radio active substances in them. Because they can under the right circumstances chain react. Creating massive amounts of radio active gas. Massive amounts from almost nothing.




    Sincerely,


    William McCormick
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    956
    Why is this thread in the Physics section? It should be in Pseudoscience!

    EDIT: It’s now in Pseudoscience, thanks to Ophiolite.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    My Computer
    Posts
    52
    Quote Originally Posted by William McCormick
    There is no such thing as tritium. You have some chemical composition and probably radio active contaminants.

    Sincerely,


    William McCormick
    Tritium is a key element is the fusion reactor being built in france, how can it not exist? Also where do you get this 'contaminants' from?
    ~Edd
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Forum Masters Degree SuperNatendo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Nashville, TN USA
    Posts
    505
    trituim is a hydrogen atom with one electron, one proton, and two neutrons. It is also used in the Hydrogen Bomb.
    "It's no wonder that truth is stranger than fiction. Fiction has to make sense." - Mark Twain
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Instow, Devon, UK
    Posts
    99
    Wm is also a rare isotope of raw stupidity, it can only be found occasionally and has very few uses.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,178
    Quote Originally Posted by Tenacity
    Wm is also a rare isotope of raw stupidity, it can only be found occasionally and has very few uses.
    I am stating for the record there is no such element as tritium. There are no such things as neutrons.

    Whatever they are putting into their reactor is unknown to them. It may work out just fine it may Chernoble, or Three Mile Island.

    Sincerely,


    William McCormick
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,178
    Quote Originally Posted by JaneBennet
    Why is this thread in the Physics section? It should be in Pseudoscience!
    To keep anyone from reading your post, and believing it is addressing truth, I am tempted to send the topic to the pseudo science thread.


    http://www.Rockwelder.com/WMV/Geiger.wmv

    For years I had all kinds of people, "Experts" say, "Noway. Those thoriated tungstens are not dangerous. Barely even radio active. You need a special Geiger counter to even detect them. No way one of those old national defense Geiger counters could even detect them".

    Fortunately I was brought up by a family that worked in a company that practically pioneered the use of Tungsten in TIG welding. And I was given special instruction on safe handling of them.
    They can create massive amounts of radio active gas. If you are not aware of how.






    Sincerely,


    William McCormick
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Forum Professor serpicojr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    JRZ
    Posts
    1,069
    Quote Originally Posted by William McCormick
    Chernoble
    I can overlook certain spelling mistakes, but come on, how can you attempt to spell Chernobyl and not spell check it? This just shows you don't even try.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    956
    Quote Originally Posted by serpicojr
    Quote Originally Posted by William McCormick
    Chernoble
    I can overlook certain spelling mistakes, but come on, how can you attempt to spell Chernobyl and not spell check it? This just shows you don't even try.
    I nominate William McCormick for the Chernobel Prize in Physics (and Spelling).
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Forum Professor serpicojr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    JRZ
    Posts
    1,069
    Don't you mean Psychics?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,178
    Quote Originally Posted by serpicojr
    Quote Originally Posted by William McCormick
    Chernoble
    I can overlook certain spelling mistakes, but come on, how can you attempt to spell Chernobyl and not spell check it? This just shows you don't even try.
    I truly do not care about how it is spelled. I wish I could care. You knew what I meant. I have a lot of things to do, and I really did not think that would cause a confusion grouped in with Three mile Isle.

    It shows you I am not perfect.

    What happened is proof of what George Washington said. "Nothing deserves your utter most patronage more then the promotion of science and literature. Knowledge is in every country the surest basis of public happiness."



    Sincerely,


    William McCormick
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    Forum Professor serpicojr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    JRZ
    Posts
    1,069
    I agree, your meaning was clear, there was no confusion. That is not the issue. Rather, it is that we can ascertain from the details that you pay them no attention.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #20  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,178
    Quote Originally Posted by serpicojr
    I agree, your meaning was clear, there was no confusion. That is not the issue. Rather, it is that we can ascertain from the details that you pay them no attention.

    I calculated that to be a good trade off. Of my time and the purpose of what I wrote.

    Now I am off, I can enjoy a few minutes before I go to bed.



    Sincerely,


    William McCormick
    Reply With Quote  
     

  22. #21  
    Moderator Moderator Dishmaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Heidelberg, Germany
    Posts
    1,624
    Quote Originally Posted by William McCormick
    Quote Originally Posted by Tenacity
    Wm is also a rare isotope of raw stupidity, it can only be found occasionally and has very few uses.
    I am stating for the record there is no such element as tritium. There are no such things as neutrons.

    Whatever they are putting into their reactor is unknown to them. It may work out just fine it may Chernoble, or Three Mile Island.
    How do you explain that this allegedly non-existing Tritium has only a single electric nuclear charge, but is three times heavier than normal hydrogen?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  23. #22  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    My Computer
    Posts
    52
    Quote Originally Posted by William McCormick
    I am stating for the record there is no such element as tritium. There are no such things as neutrons.

    Whatever they are putting into their reactor is unknown to them. It may work out just fine it may Chernoble, or Three Mile Island.

    Sincerely,


    William McCormick
    At least there is evidence to support the theories of neutrons and other elements unlike your theoretical crap.

    Also it cannot go wrong, they have been doing the same experiment in Nottinghamshire for the past year or so now. Everyday they would run the reactor to test it. The only use small amounts of tritium at a time so if anything does go wrong, it doesn't go horrible wrong.
    ~Edd
    Reply With Quote  
     

  24. #23  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,169
    Thanks to JaneBennet for pointing out much earlier that this belongs in pseudoscience.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •