Author Topic: Radiation  (Read 328833 times)

Offline gillianren

  • Uranus
  • ****
  • Posts: 2181
    • My Letterboxd journal
Re: Radiation
« Reply #1560 on: April 08, 2018, 02:06:21 PM »
I am truly at a loss to understand what you are going on about.  I surely know that mean is the sum divided by the quantity while median is the middle data point when all data is arranged in numerical order.  Where the distinct challenge lies in grasping the concept of a logarithmic graph and it's purpose which as an english major I am sure you did not spend a lot of time studying the concept but is is great to see you bring your journalistic prowess to bear on this sticky problem.

For the love of Gods, why does everyone assume English majors are all journalists?  Those are journalism majors.  I write nonfiction, for the most part, mostly about film--which is how I know what I've repeatedly told you about how faking the Apollo footage is literally impossible even today.

So let's do a little thought experiment, Tim.  Let's say that it is, as you've been told, impossible to fake the Apollo footage.  The only way to get it to look the way it does is in a place with 1/6 Earth gravity, in near-vacuum, with no ambient humidity.  So.  Knowing that the film is not possible to fake, why is the answer to the fact that you think the numbers don't make sense not "you don't understand what the numbers are telling us"?
"This sounds like a job for Bipolar Bear . . . but I just can't seem to get out of bed!"

"Conspiracy theories are an irresistible labour-saving device in the face of complexity."  --Henry Louis Gates

Offline Jason Thompson

  • Uranus
  • ****
  • Posts: 1597
Re: Radiation
« Reply #1561 on: April 08, 2018, 02:09:38 PM »
Now should you convert the raw data into logarithmic data then you are simply doing what plotting on a logarithmic graph would do.

Here;s the same comparison. Arithmetic plot on the left, coverted to log scale on the right, log data conversion on the left on an arithmetic scale. Yes, the curve is the same shape as the unconverted data on the log scale, but the numbers are utterly different.
"There's this idea that everyone's opinion is equally valid. My arse! Bloke who was a professor of dentistry for forty years does NOT have a debate with some eejit who removes his teeth with string and a door!"  - Dara O'Briain

Offline timfinch

  • Jupiter
  • ***
  • Posts: 865
  • BANNED
Re: Radiation
« Reply #1562 on: April 08, 2018, 02:11:47 PM »
Maybe this will solve the issue for all except Abaddon who is mentally challenged.  I f you label the minor graduation on your chart and they are equally spaced then the only way the data can match up is if you convert it into a log.  if the minor graduation are at logarithmic intervals then your graph is indeed a logarithmic graph.  So mark the minor graduation on the CraTer data and we will all be happy.  Set them at 1/10 intervals then I have a problem with that and with you.  Capiche?

Offline Luke Pemberton

  • Uranus
  • ****
  • Posts: 1823
  • Chaos in his tin foil hat
Re: Radiation
« Reply #1563 on: April 08, 2018, 02:15:39 PM »
Maybe this will solve the issue for all except Abaddon who is mentally challenged.

Are you prepared to retract that slur on another member of the forum?
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former - Albert Einstein.

I can calculate the motion of heavenly bodies, but not the madness of people – Sir Isaac Newton.

A polar orbit would also bypass the SAA - Tim Finch

Offline nomuse

  • Jupiter
  • ***
  • Posts: 859
Re: Radiation
« Reply #1564 on: April 08, 2018, 02:16:44 PM »
I find myself wondering if Tim even knows what a log is.

Offline timfinch

  • Jupiter
  • ***
  • Posts: 865
  • BANNED
Re: Radiation
« Reply #1565 on: April 08, 2018, 02:17:49 PM »
I am truly at a loss to understand what you are going on about.  I surely know that mean is the sum divided by the quantity while median is the middle data point when all data is arranged in numerical order.  Where the distinct challenge lies in grasping the concept of a logarithmic graph and it's purpose which as an english major I am sure you did not spend a lot of time studying the concept but is is great to see you bring your journalistic prowess to bear on this sticky problem.

For the love of Gods, why does everyone assume English majors are all journalists?  Those are journalism majors.  I write nonfiction, for the most part, mostly about film--which is how I know what I've repeatedly told you about how faking the Apollo footage is literally impossible even today.

So let's do a little thought experiment, Tim.  Let's say that it is, as you've been told, impossible to fake the Apollo footage.  The only way to get it to look the way it does is in a place with 1/6 Earth gravity, in near-vacuum, with no ambient humidity.  So.  Knowing that the film is not possible to fake, why is the answer to the fact that you think the numbers don't make sense not "you don't understand what the numbers are telling us"?
Gillianren, you are like that wild eyed spectator, who after watching a magician perform a magic trick is convinced that because she knows of know way to accomplish the feat then it truly must be magic.  To you I say nay, moose breath.  If a thing can't be then it isn't.  It doesn't matter that I know how the trick is performed, all I need to know is that it can't be done and as a consequence it must be a trick.

Offline Jason Thompson

  • Uranus
  • ****
  • Posts: 1597
Re: Radiation
« Reply #1566 on: April 08, 2018, 02:18:13 PM »
Maybe this will solve the issue for all except Abaddon who is mentally challenged.  I f you label the minor graduation on your chart and they are equally spaced then the only way the data can match up is if you convert it into a log.  if the minor graduation are at logarithmic intervals then your graph is indeed a logarithmic graph.  So mark the minor graduation on the CraTer data and we will all be happy.  Set them at 1/10 intervals then I have a problem with that and with you.  Capiche?

Tim, I have already drawn the minor divisions on my own plot of the CraTer data on a log scale and the whole thing matches the CraTer graph from the website.

You are proposing a situation where leaving off minor divisions on the y-axis leaves the scale ambiguous. This is just not true. If the powers of 10 are equidistant it is a log scale, because the other kind of scale you talk of simply is not used.
"There's this idea that everyone's opinion is equally valid. My arse! Bloke who was a professor of dentistry for forty years does NOT have a debate with some eejit who removes his teeth with string and a door!"  - Dara O'Briain

Offline Luke Pemberton

  • Uranus
  • ****
  • Posts: 1823
  • Chaos in his tin foil hat
Re: Radiation
« Reply #1567 on: April 08, 2018, 02:20:07 PM »
If you label the minor graduation on your chart and they are equally spaced then the only way the data can match up is if you convert it into a log.

Why do you insist that the data has to be converted. A log scale is arranged on the major units by an increasing order of magnitude, and the data plotted against the scale. The data is not converted. You simply did not read the graph properly, and are using this to try an weasel out of your schoolboy error.

Quote
So mark the minor graduation on the CraTer data and we will all be happy

Did that for you about 800 posts ago, and showed at solar max the dose fell below the threshold value you set, refuting your claim.

Quote
Capiche?

Is that a model of car made by Ford in the 70s and 80s?
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former - Albert Einstein.

I can calculate the motion of heavenly bodies, but not the madness of people – Sir Isaac Newton.

A polar orbit would also bypass the SAA - Tim Finch

Offline timfinch

  • Jupiter
  • ***
  • Posts: 865
  • BANNED
Re: Radiation
« Reply #1568 on: April 08, 2018, 02:21:26 PM »
Maybe this will solve the issue for all except Abaddon who is mentally challenged.  I f you label the minor graduation on your chart and they are equally spaced then the only way the data can match up is if you convert it into a log.  if the minor graduation are at logarithmic intervals then your graph is indeed a logarithmic graph.  So mark the minor graduation on the CraTer data and we will all be happy.  Set them at 1/10 intervals then I have a problem with that and with you.  Capiche?

Tim, I have already drawn the minor divisions on my own plot of the CraTer data on a log scale and the whole thing matches the CraTer graph from the website.

You are proposing a situation where leaving off minor divisions on the y-axis leaves the scale ambiguous. This is just not true. If the powers of 10 are equidistant it is a log scale, because the other kind of scale you talk of simply is not used.
Why do you think there is log graph paper and arithmetic graph paper?  The magic is in the graduations.
« Last Edit: April 08, 2018, 02:23:32 PM by timfinch »

Offline timfinch

  • Jupiter
  • ***
  • Posts: 865
  • BANNED
Re: Radiation
« Reply #1569 on: April 08, 2018, 02:22:57 PM »
Can we please get back to the Lunar Hoax?  This basic math stuff is so boring.

Offline molesworth

  • Mars
  • ***
  • Posts: 323
  • the curse of st custards
Re: Radiation
« Reply #1570 on: April 08, 2018, 02:23:35 PM »
In a more serious vein, thanks for finding these Luke.
Concentrations of Thorium and Uranium from Granitic Rocks in NW Spain

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048969705002032

Uranium concentrations in the rock varied between 5.3 and 27.7 mg kg-1 and Thorium concentrations from 5.5 to 50.7 mg kg-1

Concentrations of radioactive elements in lunar materials

https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1029/97JE03267

...

Returning to my previous question :
When was the risk of dust inhalation quantified?  i.e. was it before or after any of the Apollo missions?  And please don't just copy and paste a wall of text as a reply...

Also, what is the calculated risk from brief periods of inhaling dust, as in the typical stay of an Apollo mission, as opposed to long-term colonisation?
Tim, you fobbed me off, suggesting I google the answers to these questions myself.  I admit I haven't spent much time on it - at this time of year weekends are taken up more by boat maintenance than anything else - but I haven't found the information I wanted.  Luke has provided some relevant information however.

Since you apparently do have information on the risks and likely doses from short-term dust inhalation, as opposed to the dangers of long-stay colonisation, perhaps you can indulge me and at least post the references to it?  If dust inhalation over a few days is extremely dangerous, then what medical effects would you expect to see in Apollo astronauts if they were on the moon?

Does anyone ever read the articles?  It clearly states :
The lunar geochemical component KREEP contains trace amounts of the radioactive elements Thorium and Uranium. Regolith dust formed from this rock is a serious health hazard.

The radiation given off is Alpha particles (helium nuclei) and they do not penetrate very effectively. The direct radiation is stopped by any pressure vessel wall and even a well designed layer of spacesuit material. The problem is that if the dust is ingested into the human body, the particles will lay directly on lung or intestine tissue and are carcinogenic. Ingestion of the dust must therefore be rigorously limited.  How can it be more plainly stated.  If you are looking for an amount in grams then I have no answer but consider this article:  Apollo Chronicles: The Mysterious Smell of Moondust01.30.06
Long after the last Apollo astronaut left the moon, a mystery lingers: Why does moondust smell like gunpowder?
Moondust. "I wish I could send you some," says Apollo 17 astronaut Gene Cernan. Just a thimbleful scooped fresh off the lunar surface. "It's amazing stuff."

Feel it--it's soft like snow, yet strangely abrasive.

Taste it--"not half bad," according to Apollo 16 astronaut John Young.

Sniff it--"it smells like spent gunpowder," says Cernan.

How do you sniff moondust?

Apollo 17 astronaut Gene Cernan rests inside the lunar module Challenger. There are smudges of dust on his longjohns and forehead.
Every Apollo astronaut did it. They couldn't touch their noses to the lunar surface. But, after every moonwalk (or "EVA"), they would tramp the stuff back inside the lander. Moondust was incredibly clingy, sticking to boots, gloves and other exposed surfaces. No matter how hard they tried to brush their suits before re-entering the cabin, some dust (and sometimes a lot of dust) made its way inside.

Once their helmets and gloves were off, the astronauts could feel, smell and even taste the moon.
https://www.nasa.gov/exploration/home/30jan_smellofmoondust.html

Sorry, but that is not an answer to the question, or a suitable reference to proper research.  The "article" you quote from is a wiki page discussing the risks to people staying on the Moon for long periods, and doesn't discuss the risks to short-stay missions similar to Apollo.

I also asked for something other than a copy and paste response, but that seems to be your only method of debate.  I wonder if you even read the information you so glibly post...

I will repeat the question, in case you missed it - please provide a reference to information (preferably peer-reviewed research) on the risks of exposure to, and inhalation of, lunar surface dust, including KREEP-type materials, over short, medium term and longer duration missions.  It would also be useful, and relevant, to know the expected cancer rates for Apollo astronauts based on their documented exposure levels.


[ I'll also note that when I was doing my PhD research <redacted> years ago, my supervisor would have laughed me out of his office if I'd presented him with a couple of abstracts and a graph.  Research meant finding, reading and understanding multiple papers on the topic (image analysis and feature partitioning), following references, implementing algorithms, reproducing results etc. etc. ]
« Last Edit: April 08, 2018, 02:29:04 PM by molesworth »
Days spent at sea are not deducted from one's allotted span - Phoenician proverb

Offline Luke Pemberton

  • Uranus
  • ****
  • Posts: 1823
  • Chaos in his tin foil hat
Re: Radiation
« Reply #1571 on: April 08, 2018, 02:23:44 PM »
Why do you think there is log graph paper and arithmetic log paper?  The magic is in the graduations.

....but you don't convert the data to plot the data. You simply plot the data against the divisions set by the scale. Jason has shown you very well that changing scale changes the shape of the graph, but the data remains identical. There is no magic transformation of the data.
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former - Albert Einstein.

I can calculate the motion of heavenly bodies, but not the madness of people – Sir Isaac Newton.

A polar orbit would also bypass the SAA - Tim Finch

Offline Abaddon

  • Saturn
  • ****
  • Posts: 1131
Re: Radiation
« Reply #1572 on: April 08, 2018, 02:23:52 PM »
Maybe this will solve the issue for all except Abaddon who is mentally challenged.
Hurling insults is the last resort of the defeated. Thank you for admitting that.

I f you label the minor graduation on your chart and they are equally spaced then the only way the data can match up is if you convert it into a log.
And if you label the axis "sausages" you can measure the speed of light in rashers per furlong. Be pretty stupid to try to do so, no?

if the minor graduation are at logarithmic intervals then your graph is indeed a logarithmic graph.  So mark the minor graduation on the CraTer data and we will all be happy.  Set them at 1/10 intervals then I have a problem with that and with you.  Capiche?
Yes, we understand that you have no clue how graphs, scales and 3 dimensions actually work. We definitively established that pages ago. Try to keep up.

Offline nomuse

  • Jupiter
  • ***
  • Posts: 859
Re: Radiation
« Reply #1573 on: April 08, 2018, 02:26:29 PM »

Gillianren, you are like that wild eyed spectator, who after watching a magician perform a magic trick is convinced that because she knows of know way to accomplish the feat then it truly must be magic.  To you I say nay, moose breath.  If a thing can't be then it isn't.  It doesn't matter that I know how the trick is performed, all I need to know is that it can't be done and as a consequence it must be a trick.

Bolding mine.

You have to be careful of us liberal arts majors, too. We tend to see patterns others would prefer remain hidden. That brings me up to five "tells" and the smell of socks is now overpowering.

Offline Abaddon

  • Saturn
  • ****
  • Posts: 1131
Re: Radiation
« Reply #1574 on: April 08, 2018, 02:28:19 PM »
Can we please get back to the Lunar Hoax?  This basic math stuff is so boring.
Yes, we can do so as soon as you realise that your head is on a trajectory with your butt. You simply know that you have been found out and that your knowledge is found wanting. You will do and say anything to dodge the fact.

We can move along to your next crank belief as soon as you concede this crank belief.

ETA: "This basic stuff" is boring to you because you simply don't grok it.
« Last Edit: April 08, 2018, 02:30:44 PM by Abaddon »