On 29/08/2012 18:35, Jo Stein wrote:
On 29.08.2012 15:30, Martin Brown wrote:
On 29/08/2012 13:00, Jo Stein wrote:
...
What is you weight. I can compute similar figures for you. It is a
very simple formula given on page 133 in this book:
http://searchworks.stanford.edu/view/8819091

I could have scanned the page for you. Here follows the same page
in Norwegian as I am sure that a smart guy like you will be able to
tell where Thormod Henriksen and David H. Maillie went wrong:

They didn't say that. Although the way they are presenting the data
on p133 is confusing for non scientists and you have comprehensively
demonstrated your cluelessness in referencing it with wonderful
aplomb.

They guesstimate the number of *ionisations* caused by all natural
radiation by taking the annual dose energy and dividing into it the
energy needed to ionise air of 34eV. This is *very* misleading.**

You are 100,000x less radioactive than this crazy description
implies!

The distinction is between radioactive disintegrations per second and
the number of electronic ionisations caused by the fast particle
track. The latter is a larger number but not to quite the extent they
claim.

A single alpha particle will cause a fair number of ions to be formed
before running out of steam. A penetrating hard X-ray may go right
through without causing more than a handful of events with its energy
largely unchanged. The body is not opaque to all natural radiation.

I presume they have an axe to grind as the presentation on p133 is
bordering on dishonest.

Here I found the digital version of the norwegian book:
http://www.mn.uio.no/fysikk/tjeneste...skap/straling/
Why dont you write your correction in more detail and send it to the
authors?

I am a friend of Per Wethe and will send your comments to him.

Go ahead. Send it. Their book needs a corrigenda.

Be sure to include the drivel that you have written so that they can see
why my criticism of this badly written page is justified.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown