I understand the really hot ones - why I didn't get them- were the deck mounted
Binocs on board during WWII. The Captains and near - would be able to see better
with the radioactive lenses. I wonder how many paid the price with brain tumors.

Martin
Martin Eastburn
@ home at Lions' Lair with our computer lionslair at consolidated dot net
NRA LOH & Endowment Member
NRA Second Amendment Task Force Charter Founder
IHMSA and NRA Metallic Silhouette maker & member


DoN. Nichols wrote:
According to Martin H. Eastburn :

Sounds like a survey around here is overdue.

One thing I did test was the Naval bronze Port holes from a ship that was
at Bikini - It was rather clean as I recall. I'll have to make a table and
check out the odd ball stuff - Telescope and camera lenses - rare earth -


I know that some of the lenses used in the manufacture of the
Starlight Scopes (Night Vision scopes) for the Army were mildly
radioactive.

Enjoy,
DoN.

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

Yea - I know - only 0-5 R/h - need mR and uR scales for real work.
At least the 0-5 does function - and isn't at zero.
Martin

Martin Eastburn
@ home at Lions' Lair with our computer lionslair at consolidated dot net
NRA LOH & Endowment Member
NRA Second Amendment Task Force Charter Founder
IHMSA and NRA Metallic Silhouette maker & member


Nick Hull wrote:
In article ,
"Martin H. Eastburn" wrote:


My CD V-720 Fallout Detection Meter - Yellow with meter and cool reverse
handle -
uses two D's for the Ion chamber - and is capable of 0-5, 0-50, 0-500 R/h.
Oak Ridge called it a CDV-720 Ion Chamber survey meter -

It is powered up and in standby in the shop. Routinely scan bulk metal that
I get
because it might come from anywhere - and the scrap for it from anywhere.
Some from China. So far so good. Not that I'm really worried - it is just
nice to
have a toy like this since I was in Physics myself.


You have a War meter, it is not sensitive enough for the task. You need
a survey meter to read lower levels.


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

Index of refraction. more power in a flatter lenses or even more in a curved one.
Size (diameter) is light gathering ability. Focal length determines magnification.
They wanted more magnification without getting larger.

Martin

Martin Eastburn
@ home at Lions' Lair with our computer lionslair at consolidated dot net
NRA LOH & Endowment Member
NRA Second Amendment Task Force Charter Founder
IHMSA and NRA Metallic Silhouette maker & member


xray wrote:
On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 20:03:09 -0600, "Martin H. Eastburn"
wrote:


The Captains and near - would be able to see better
with the radioactive lenses.


Any logical explanation for why radioactive glass (I presume thats where
the radioactivity was) would be better optically? Seems odd. The
radioactivity can't matter by itself can it?


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

The only thing I found on a search was some w/cu alloys for EDM
purposes. They were around 13.6 g/cc. I also looked at the machinable
tungsten alloys used in boring bars, they still come in at over 19 g/cc.
definitely a mystery metal.

Nick Müller wrote:

Jim Wilson wrote:


For this one, I get a density of 13.7 g/cc. Well, it certainly isn't
mercury!


DU? I hope not. Uran has 18.95 g/cm^3

Americum (Am): 13.67 g/cm^3
Berkelium (Bk): 14 g/cm^3
Curium (Cm): 14 g/cm^3
Hafnium (Hf): 13.31 g/cm^3
Mercury (Hg): 13.59 g/cm^3


Nick

In article ,
xray wrote:

On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 20:03:09 -0600, "Martin H. Eastburn"
wrote:

The Captains and near - would be able to see better
with the radioactive lenses.

Any logical explanation for why radioactive glass (I presume thats where
the radioactivity was) would be better optically? Seems odd. The
radioactivity can't matter by itself can it?

Thorium oxide based glasses have a very different combination of
refractive index and dispersion than other glasses available at the
time, allowing better correction of optical abberations.

Thorium is only very slightly radioactive, and the health problems were
psychosomatic, not physical, for users of the resulting optical systems.
Manufacturers had to be more careful, as they were exposed to the dust
resulting from grinding lenses.

Joe Gwinn

Not so sure - as it is a high Alpha emitter - used in Vacuum tubes for massive currents -
with a very long lifetime. TH 232 is close to the famous U 238 isolated by 1 element called Protactinium.
By the way - U is an alpha source also.

The Alpha emitters can cause eye damage. You state it was all a mental illness.
I think that was bad science running rough shod over victims. Just like agent orange and .....

Martin

Martin Eastburn
@ home at Lions' Lair with our computer lionslair at consolidated dot net
NRA LOH & Endowment Member
NRA Second Amendment Task Force Charter Founder
IHMSA and NRA Metallic Silhouette maker & member


Joseph Gwinn wrote:
In article ,
xray wrote:


On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 20:03:09 -0600, "Martin H. Eastburn"
wrote:


The Captains and near - would be able to see better
with the radioactive lenses.

Any logical explanation for why radioactive glass (I presume thats where
the radioactivity was) would be better optically? Seems odd. The
radioactivity can't matter by itself can it?


Thorium oxide based glasses have a very different combination of
refractive index and dispersion than other glasses available at the
time, allowing better correction of optical abberations.

Thorium is only very slightly radioactive, and the health problems were
psychosomatic, not physical, for users of the resulting optical systems.
Manufacturers had to be more careful, as they were exposed to the dust
resulting from grinding lenses.

Joe Gwinn

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

"Martin H. Eastburn"
wrote in message
...
Not so sure - as it is a high Alpha emitter -
used in Vacuum tubes for massive currents -
with a very long lifetime. TH 232 is close to
the famous U 238 isolated by 1 element called
Protactinium.
By the way - U is an alpha source also.

The Alpha emitters can cause eye damage. You
state it was all a mental illness.
I think that was bad science running rough shod
over victims. Just like agent orange and .....

Martin

Martin Eastburn
@ home at Lions' Lair with our computer
lionslair at consolidated dot net
NRA LOH & Endowment Member
NRA Second Amendment Task Force Charter Founder
IHMSA and NRA Metallic Silhouette maker & member


Joseph Gwinn wrote:
In article
,
xray wrote:


On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 20:03:09 -0600, "Martin H.
Eastburn"
wrote:


The Captains and near - would be able to see
better
with the radioactive lenses.

Any logical explanation for why radioactive
glass (I presume thats where
the radioactivity was) would be better
optically? Seems odd. The
radioactivity can't matter by itself can it?


Thorium oxide based glasses have a very
different combination of refractive index and
dispersion than other glasses available at the
time, allowing better correction of optical
abberations.

Thorium is only very slightly radioactive, and
the health problems were psychosomatic, not
physical, for users of the resulting optical
systems. Manufacturers had to be more careful,
as they were exposed to the dust resulting from
grinding lenses.

Joe Gwinn

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com -
Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup
Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total
Privacy via Encryption =----

How can alpha emitters cause any damage unless
they are ingested? A piece of paper will stop an
alpha particle as they are pretty low in energy.

In article ,
"Martin H. Eastburn" wrote:

Not so sure - as it is a high Alpha emitter - used in Vacuum tubes for
massive currents -
with a very long lifetime. TH 232 is close to the famous U 238 isolated by
1 element called Protactinium.
By the way - U is an alpha source also.

The half-life of Thorium is something like ten billion years, so the
radiation is very dilute -- every so often, a thorium nucleus goes POP.


The Alpha emitters can cause eye damage. You state it was all a mental illness.
I think that was bad science running rough shod over victims. Just like
agent orange and .....

I don't know how one would achieve eye damage with thorium-bearing
glass. I suppose one could hold the lens against one's eye for a
million years. But the thorium-bearing lenses were typically used only
within the optical system, because this glass was too easily scratched.

Cosmic rays are by far the larger radiation source. If one flys from LA
to NYC, being above most of the atmosphere and its shielding, one gets a
100 milliREM dose, about the same as from a dental X-Ray.

Fear of radiation from thorium-bearing glass lenses in an optical
instrument is therefore a mental issue.


The real danger was that people grinding lenses from thorium-bearing
glass for a living would ingest a lot of the dust, and would be
irradiated from within. Even that danger wasn't very large, as the dust
passes right through largely unaffected. But there are many reasons to
avoid ingesting glass dust.

Lens grinding is always done wet (using water), which already controls
the dust. One can still use thorium-bearing glass, but the required
manufacturing safety precautions and swarf disposal regulations are such
that people use other kinds of glass these days, kinds of glass that
were not available back when. I don't know if one can still buy the
thorium-bearing glass in the West. The Russians probably still make it.


Joe Gwinn



Martin

Martin Eastburn
@ home at Lions' Lair with our computer lionslair at consolidated dot net
NRA LOH & Endowment Member
NRA Second Amendment Task Force Charter Founder
IHMSA and NRA Metallic Silhouette maker & member


Joseph Gwinn wrote:
In article ,
xray wrote:


On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 20:03:09 -0600, "Martin H. Eastburn"
wrote:


The Captains and near - would be able to see better
with the radioactive lenses.

Any logical explanation for why radioactive glass (I presume thats where
the radioactivity was) would be better optically? Seems odd. The
radioactivity can't matter by itself can it?


Thorium oxide based glasses have a very different combination of
refractive index and dispersion than other glasses available at the
time, allowing better correction of optical abberations.

Thorium is only very slightly radioactive, and the health problems were
psychosomatic, not physical, for users of the resulting optical systems.
Manufacturers had to be more careful, as they were exposed to the dust
resulting from grinding lenses.

Joe Gwinn

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet
News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+
Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

And big in size

but Alphas causing eye damage is just about the only spot they
possibly could because as you say a sheet of paper stops them
On Wed, 29 Mar 2006 19:05:36 +1100, "Tom Miller"
wrote:


"Martin H. Eastburn"
wrote in message
...
Not so sure - as it is a high Alpha emitter -
used in Vacuum tubes for massive currents -
with a very long lifetime. TH 232 is close to
the famous U 238 isolated by 1 element called
Protactinium.
By the way - U is an alpha source also.

The Alpha emitters can cause eye damage. You
state it was all a mental illness.
I think that was bad science running rough shod
over victims. Just like agent orange and .....

Martin

Martin Eastburn
@ home at Lions' Lair with our computer
lionslair at consolidated dot net
NRA LOH & Endowment Member
NRA Second Amendment Task Force Charter Founder
IHMSA and NRA Metallic Silhouette maker & member


Joseph Gwinn wrote:
In article
,
xray wrote:


On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 20:03:09 -0600, "Martin H.
Eastburn"
wrote:


The Captains and near - would be able to see
better
with the radioactive lenses.

Any logical explanation for why radioactive
glass (I presume thats where
the radioactivity was) would be better
optically? Seems odd. The
radioactivity can't matter by itself can it?


Thorium oxide based glasses have a very
different combination of refractive index and
dispersion than other glasses available at the
time, allowing better correction of optical
abberations.

Thorium is only very slightly radioactive, and
the health problems were psychosomatic, not
physical, for users of the resulting optical
systems. Manufacturers had to be more careful,
as they were exposed to the dust resulting from
grinding lenses.

Joe Gwinn

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com -
Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup
Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total
Privacy via Encryption =----

How can alpha emitters cause any damage unless
they are ingested? A piece of paper will stop an
alpha particle as they are pretty low in energy.

On 29 Mar 2006 05:39:23 -0800, wrote:
Thorium is (perhaps was?) also found in gas mantles, for those camping
lamps.

Still is as of 5 years ago or so; I tested a new one and it's
detectable.

Alpha emitters can cloud and kill eye tissue that is right next to the glass.
I heard it was more than alpha in the first place. And transversing to the retina
via the carrier fluid.

Martin
Martin Eastburn
@ home at Lions' Lair with our computer lionslair at consolidated dot net
NRA LOH & Endowment Member
NRA Second Amendment Task Force Charter Founder
IHMSA and NRA Metallic Silhouette maker & member


Tom Miller wrote:
"Martin H. Eastburn"
wrote in message
...

Not so sure - as it is a high Alpha emitter -
used in Vacuum tubes for massive currents -
with a very long lifetime. TH 232 is close to
the famous U 238 isolated by 1 element called
Protactinium.
By the way - U is an alpha source also.

The Alpha emitters can cause eye damage. You
state it was all a mental illness.
I think that was bad science running rough shod
over victims. Just like agent orange and .....

Martin

Martin Eastburn
@ home at Lions' Lair with our computer
lionslair at consolidated dot net
NRA LOH & Endowment Member
NRA Second Amendment Task Force Charter Founder
IHMSA and NRA Metallic Silhouette maker & member


Joseph Gwinn wrote:

In article
,
xray wrote:



On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 20:03:09 -0600, "Martin H.
Eastburn"
wrote:



The Captains and near - would be able to see
better
with the radioactive lenses.

Any logical explanation for why radioactive
glass (I presume thats where
the radioactivity was) would be better
optically? Seems odd. The
radioactivity can't matter by itself can it?


Thorium oxide based glasses have a very
different combination of refractive index and
dispersion than other glasses available at the
time, allowing better correction of optical
abberations.

Thorium is only very slightly radioactive, and
the health problems were psychosomatic, not
physical, for users of the resulting optical
systems. Manufacturers had to be more careful,
as they were exposed to the dust resulting from
grinding lenses.

Joe Gwinn

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com -
Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup
Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total
Privacy via Encryption =----


How can alpha emitters cause any damage unless
they are ingested? A piece of paper will stop an
alpha particle as they are pretty low in energy.



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

I have some - gave off more white light. Now they don't use it.

Thorium is the reason why soft coal power plant is more radioactive
than a Nuke plant. Thorium is found in soft coal.

Martin

Martin Eastburn
@ home at Lions' Lair with our computer lionslair at consolidated dot net
NRA LOH & Endowment Member
NRA Second Amendment Task Force Charter Founder
IHMSA and NRA Metallic Silhouette maker & member


wrote:
Thorium is (perhaps was?) also found in gas mantles, for those camping
lamps.

Dave


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

"Martin H. Eastburn"
wrote in message
...
I have some - gave off more white light. Now
they don't use it.

Thorium is the reason why soft coal power plant
is more radioactive
than a Nuke plant. Thorium is found in soft
coal.


Also in most clay bricks.

Just don't visit the mountains - more than alpha is in the rocks there!

Martin

Martin Eastburn
@ home at Lions' Lair with our computer lionslair at consolidated dot net
NRA LOH & Endowment Member
NRA Second Amendment Task Force Charter Founder
IHMSA and NRA Metallic Silhouette maker & member


Tom Miller wrote:
"Martin H. Eastburn"
wrote in message
...

I have some - gave off more white light. Now
they don't use it.

Thorium is the reason why soft coal power plant
is more radioactive
than a Nuke plant. Thorium is found in soft
coal.



Also in most clay bricks.



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----