Indeed, the longer the half-life the more stable and thus the less radioactive. Saying something is worrisome because it has a half-life of millions of years is just the kind of arguments ignorant anti-nuclear people make.
Well said Rob. 👏 People used vodka as prophylactic medication against radiation. Get accurate health statistics with that as a confounding variable. Listing deaths as heart attack or related is still technically accurate. Chernobyl is a terrible lesson. Don't buy a Lada and engineer your reactors properly. That and good staff. The sort who Don't see bolts as optional extras, or pulling too many control rods as a brilliant idea etc... Chernobyl was becoming a tourist attraction before unruly neighbours made things tougher. The dust is the ongoing danger. Stay out of the Jupiter laboratory basement.
Veritassium once did a "special" on TV about uranium and nuclear energy. It tried to seem balanced but his conclusion was it wasn't worth it - and he completely failed to understand it correctly, while fearmongering all the risks. I considered it a "sellout" video and never watched him again (including on YT). The last thing we need, is science presenters spreading lies based on their own biases. I'm sure he set things back quite a bit just on that stunt alone.
Robert BTW neutrinos have a rest mass. Small but they have a 3D property, three dimensional mass with expression of gravity and the passing of time. Unlike a 2D photon that is massless and experiences 0 expression of time between creation and arriving at the speed of light at any future destination. Neutrinos cannot travel at C without shifting the relative frame or applying infinite energy to accelerate it. At which point the neutrino would also express infinite mass and zero time. Photos arriving can drop out of c and form a particles at discreet energy levels.
Annihilation positron electron form 2 dimensional gamma photons of specific energy of the mass, no gravity, no time and travelling at c. 3D particles to 2D photons.
Cherenkov radiation isn't particles exceeding c as such. First the passing of light through a mass medium slows as observed through water 💧 the c of particles within space-time has still not exceeded c only relative c. I hate the description of particles exceeding c.
I have my own theories Hayes, R. (2021) A Standard Model Neutrino Mechanism. Journal of Modern Physics, 12, 1475-1482. doi: 10.4236/jmp.2021.1211089. www.scirp.org/journal/paperinformation.aspx?paperid=111678
@@robertbhayes5039 l know your paper. Hence some of my random access comments and questions. I feel that you need to rethink the fundamentals of your arguments. IMHO space-time exploded into two universes connections via zero-time boundaries. Missing antimatter etc. Time reverse but only relative to our frame. Induced uncertainty, still with wave function summing.
@@robertbhayes5039 I also think a model more likely Kerr spacetime singularity with rotation at each boundary not static such as within a Schwarzschild (non-rotating) spacetime.
Indeed, the longer the half-life the more stable and thus the less radioactive. Saying something is worrisome because it has a half-life of millions of years is just the kind of arguments ignorant anti-nuclear people make.
Well said Rob. 👏
People used vodka as prophylactic medication against radiation. Get accurate health statistics with that as a confounding variable. Listing deaths as heart attack or related is still technically accurate. Chernobyl is a terrible lesson. Don't buy a Lada and engineer your reactors properly. That and good staff. The sort who Don't see bolts as optional extras, or pulling too many control rods as a brilliant idea etc...
Chernobyl was becoming a tourist attraction before unruly neighbours made things tougher. The dust is the ongoing danger. Stay out of the Jupiter laboratory basement.
Veritassium once did a "special" on TV about uranium and nuclear energy. It tried to seem balanced but his conclusion was it wasn't worth it - and he completely failed to understand it correctly, while fearmongering all the risks. I considered it a "sellout" video and never watched him again (including on YT). The last thing we need, is science presenters spreading lies based on their own biases. I'm sure he set things back quite a bit just on that stunt alone.
Robert BTW neutrinos have a rest mass.
Small but they have a 3D property, three dimensional mass with expression of gravity and the passing of time. Unlike a 2D photon that is massless and experiences 0 expression of time between creation and arriving at the speed of light at any future destination. Neutrinos cannot travel at C without shifting the relative frame or applying infinite energy to accelerate it. At which point the neutrino would also express infinite mass and zero time. Photos arriving can drop out of c and form a particles at discreet energy levels.
Annihilation positron electron form 2 dimensional gamma photons of specific energy of the mass, no gravity, no time and travelling at c. 3D particles to 2D photons.
Cherenkov radiation isn't particles exceeding c as such. First the passing of light through a mass medium slows as observed through water 💧 the c of particles within space-time has still not exceeded c only relative c. I hate the description of particles exceeding c.
I have my own theories
Hayes, R. (2021) A Standard Model Neutrino Mechanism. Journal of Modern Physics, 12, 1475-1482. doi: 10.4236/jmp.2021.1211089.
www.scirp.org/journal/paperinformation.aspx?paperid=111678
@@robertbhayes5039 l know your paper. Hence some of my random access comments and questions. I feel that you need to rethink the fundamentals of your arguments. IMHO space-time exploded into two universes connections via zero-time boundaries. Missing antimatter etc. Time reverse but only relative to our frame. Induced uncertainty, still with wave function summing.
@@robertbhayes5039 I also think a model more likely Kerr spacetime singularity with rotation at each boundary not static such as within a Schwarzschild (non-rotating) spacetime.