Fukishima

Has science taken a wrong turn? If so, what corrections are needed? Chronicles of scientific misbehavior. The role of heretic-pioneers and forbidden questions in the sciences. Is peer review working? The perverse "consensus of leading scientists." Good public relations versus good science.

Moderators: MGmirkin, bboyer

Locked
goldentree
Posts: 24
Joined: Thu May 05, 2011 8:26 am

Fukishima

Unread post by goldentree » Thu Aug 15, 2013 10:25 am

I am gathering as much information as I can about radiation. Since EU theory occasionally defies convention I thought I would ask if electric principals of radiation are well understood. I am definitely a lay person.I am not getting a lot of concrete information. Anyone else seeing blurbs like these popping up around the web? http://enenews.com/ As I search through blogs I find are outdated hyperbole that doesn't reflect TEPCO's most recent admissions.. It seems it's all just opinions. How does radiation travel? Is Fukishima as ominous as RECENT statements coming out of TEPCO indicate?

User avatar
GaryN
Posts: 2668
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:18 pm
Location: Sooke, BC, Canada

Re: Fukishima

Unread post by GaryN » Thu Aug 15, 2013 12:05 pm

I think the first thing you should do is research enenews. My results seem to indicate it should be called the Nuclear Inquirer, but maybe you'll find more than I could. As in all cases involving nuclear matters, it is very controversial and highly emotional. I do think though that you should watch or listen to talks by Galen Winsor before you settle on any opinion, as he is the 'straight goods' as far as I can determine.
In order to change an existing paradigm you do not struggle to try and change the problematic model. You create a new model and make the old one obsolete. -Buckminster Fuller

User avatar
D_Archer
Posts: 1255
Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 4:01 am
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Fukishima

Unread post by D_Archer » Fri Aug 16, 2013 3:30 am

goldentree wrote:I am gathering as much information as I can about radiation. Since EU theory occasionally defies convention I thought I would ask if electric principals of radiation are well understood
There is also good radiation > http://www.angelfire.com/mo/radioadaptive/inthorm.html

As for the science itself, radiation are particles, but they impact our cells because the particles are larger. We are continually impacted by photons but they are too small too cause damage, the harming radiation particles are bigger (ions) and when the dose is high enough, will do damage (it disrupts normal cell workings, by damage on a molecular level).

Regards,
Daniel
- Shoot Forth Thunder -

goldentree
Posts: 24
Joined: Thu May 05, 2011 8:26 am

Re: Fukishima

Unread post by goldentree » Mon Aug 19, 2013 12:39 pm

Thanks so much to both of you. I will look into both references.

User avatar
D_Archer
Posts: 1255
Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 4:01 am
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Fukishima

Unread post by D_Archer » Wed Aug 21, 2013 1:50 am

As for the EU and radiation. I am not sure to what electric principals you are referring to. EU does have something to say on decay rates, mainstream has proven that decay rates vary with the seasons and EU says that decay rates are not reliable because cataclysmic events (CME's, planetary discharges) can also influence decay rates.

Kind regards,
Daniel
- Shoot Forth Thunder -

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests