Slashdot Mirror


Radiation Detection Wrist Watch

luigi writes "I4U has this story: vigiWATCH is a newly created swiss company that offers the smallest, most precise radiation detector worldwide in a normal size wrist watch. The watch displays current radioactivity rates from 0.00001mSv/h to 4.00000 mSv/h and cumulative radioactive dose from 0.001mSv/h to 9999 mSv/h. The precision is +/- 25% over total range. Besides the radioactivity detection, its also showing the time in a digital and analog display. The watch looks like a normal casual wrist watch. Hope this watch never becomes standard equipment for survival on this planet. The watch is sold on the site for $1100."

95 of 219 comments (clear)

  1. Sometimes there are times... by RebelTycoon · · Score: 5, Funny

    when you would rather just not know... Like just how many rads that 19" monitor is blasting into your little soldiers...

    I've got nothing...

    1. Re:Sometimes there are times... by 0x0d0a · · Score: 2

      when you would rather just not know... Like just how many rads that 19" monitor is blasting into your little soldiers...

      I guess it all depends on where you wear your radiation-detecting-watch...for eleven hundred dollars, I think I'd keep it highly visible on my wrist.

    2. Re:Sometimes there are times... by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 4, Informative

      If it's a new one (say 1999 or newer) that complies with the TCO spec then it's basically none. It's a very stringent spec on EM emissions and you really won't find much comming from your monitor. Even older monitors tend to comply to the MPR II spec, which is very low emission (not as low as TCO, but still).

      Also, we are talking EM radiation here, not nuclear. There is a difference.

    3. Re:Sometimes there are times... by kcelery · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The static electricity on your monitor can attract radon gas in the atmosphere. The radiation could come from radon, not your monitor, but its concentrates in front of your face. That means air ventilation is also a factor especially when the concrete of your building contains relatively large amount of radon.

    4. Re:Sometimes there are times... by richie2000 · · Score: 5, Informative
      TCO-99 spec monitors doesn't produce any static electricity, at least not in front of or on the front side of the monitor. The rear is another matter... Ever been seated opposing someone else in an office? His or her monitor emissions are what you should worry about, not what your monitor does (that's the other person's problem).

      TCO-99 is a very restrictive specification that not only deals with radiation and emission levels, it also specifies ergonomics. It is for instance considered harmful to have a black border around the viewing area - this has almost killed off sales of black or dark gray monitors. They are almost always TCO-95 spec, even if they meet all the other TCO-99 requirements.

      TCO is The Swedish Confederation of Professional Employees (basically, a white-collar trade union) that thinks about workplace ergonomics and how to keep their members alive and healthy.

      --
      Money for nothing, pix for free
    5. Re:Sometimes there are times... by alienw · · Score: 2

      The rear of the monitor cannot possibly produce any emissions. Emissions are produced when electrons strike the phosphors/glass on the front of the tube. Since a CRT shoots electrons from the back to the front, there are no significant emissions coming from the back.

    6. Re:Sometimes there are times... by richie2000 · · Score: 2

      The picture tube produces significant EM fields backwards. This is easy to test. Set up two monitors pointed away from each other and turn them on. Degauss one while watching the other one.

      --
      Money for nothing, pix for free
    7. Re:Sometimes there are times... by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 2

      Uhhh, that still doesn't mean that static will buildup (it doesn't on any of my monitors). Also, degausing is a horrable example since that is a special case and done infrequently. The emissions from TCO99 monitors is so low that I can set 2 21" monitors side by side, with teh fron bezels touching, and they do not distort each other's image. I do this at work. Yes, when I degauss there is a little interference but that only happens at monitor power on or by specific request on my part.

    8. Re:Sometimes there are times... by richie2000 · · Score: 2

      I never mentioned static. There is, however, an EM lobe going out the back of the monitor. Do the same test but just turn one of the monitors on and back off. See the other monitor distort. Side-by-side doesn't really work since they are fairly well shielded there too. And, if the monitors were shielded all the way around, degaussing would not affect the other monitor, regardless of their relative position.

      --
      Money for nothing, pix for free
  2. Hmm...I may get one. by Valar · · Score: 5, Funny

    To replace my wrist mounted poison gas sensing canary.

  3. Precise? by freebase · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I've not read the specs myself, but hopefully that was a typo... +/- 25% is no where near precise, especially in a dosimeter.

    --
    Sig??? I don't need no stinkin Sig!
  4. cool but ... by beanerspace · · Score: 2

    This is cool, but do I really want to be in a situation where my watch actually goes off? I mean, at that point, wouldn't I want to be wearing so much protective gear that a watch is a bit out of the question?

    1. Re:cool but ... by psxndc · · Score: 2
      Possibly not. As mentioned, dentists, radiologists and such. My fiancee used to work in a biotech lab working with PCR and doing tests on DNA and stuff where normal lab attire is jeans and a t-shirt covered by a lab coat. Often she would have to use radioactive tracers in the DNA. Nothing skin rotting at exposure, but still a good dose of radiation. The tracer was in liquid form and if there was a spill that someone didn't clean up entirely, which on occasion happened, it could easily be absorbed into clothes. The watch could serve as a substitute for the special badges they wear to alert of over exposure since a lot of people already wear a watch.

      psxndc

      --

      The emacs religion: to be saved, control excess.

  5. Useful for the UN Weapons Inspectors by mind21_98 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    These might be useful for the UN weapons inspectors currently in Iraq. They could keep track of radiation without alerting any Iraqi authorities and get a true feel of whether there are weapons of mass destruction (specifically nuclear weapons) around.

    1. Re:Useful for the UN Weapons Inspectors by Imperator · · Score: 4, Funny

      Are you kidding? The Iraqis know the inspectors are looking for nuclear weapons, and they know where they are. It's not as if the inspectors are sneaking around Iraq, communicating with each other through their Dick Tracy brand secret decoder rings. The only way they can catch the Iraqis off guard is to show up where they're not expecting an inspection, not to show up with fancy radiation-detecting wrist watches.

      --

      Gates' Law: Every 18 months, the speed of software halves.
    2. Re:Useful for the UN Weapons Inspectors by 0x0d0a · · Score: 2

      They could keep track of radiation without alerting any Iraqi authorities

      "Hi, guys. Yup, today we left all our radiation-detecting gear at home, and we're just looking for anthrax! Yup, all these boxes just detect biological agents!"

      and get a true feel of whether there are weapons of mass destruction (specifically nuclear weapons) around.

      As opposed to the completely false feel that they're currently getting from their instruments?

    3. Re:Useful for the UN Weapons Inspectors by thelaw · · Score: 2

      what are you saying here? that depleted uranium shells are somehow as dangerous to bystanders as nuclear weapons? unused depleted uranium shells can't hurt you unless you eat them.

      and just a side note, the question is not whether bush or saddam is a better guy. the question is whether more countries should be allowed to get nuclear weapons. we know bush has them. should we let saddam get them too?

      jon

      --
      -- http://www.cerastes.org
    4. Re:Useful for the UN Weapons Inspectors by aminorex · · Score: 2

      There is *no* factual reason to believe that
      Iraq is currently taking any material steps
      towards the production or deployment of nuclear
      weapons.

      Please refute me if you can.

      --
      -I like my women like I like my tea: green-
  6. Better double check the dimensions! by Samir+Gupta · · Score: 5, Informative
    The watch displays current radioactivity rates from 0.00001mSv/h to 4.00000 mSv/h and cumulative radioactive dose from 0.001mSv/h to 9999 mSv/h.

    Me thinks that if current rates are in mSv/h, then cumulative doses should drop the temporal dimension, ie, mSv (no /h)!

    --
    -- Samir Gupta, Ph. D. Head, New Technology Research Group, Nintendo Co. Ltd., Kyoto, Japan.
  7. Illegal in the UK by jaylen · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I like this watch... just a damn shame that in the UK, no citizen is allowed to own anything resembling a geiger counter. The only places they are allowed are in schools or universities, or for authorities/companies with a 'good reason' to have one.

    But the average joe shmoe on the street is not allowed to own one.

    1. Re:Illegal in the UK by mmontour · · Score: 3, Interesting

      just a damn shame that in the UK, no citizen is allowed to own anything resembling a geiger counter

      Yet it seems that you folks are allowed to have nuclear-powered lights (tritium+phosphor devices) that are illegal in the US / Canada. Odd laws...

    2. Re:Illegal in the UK by notestein · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Here are some US Government produced specifications for making a geiger counter from materials found around the house.

    3. Re:Illegal in the UK by f97tosc · · Score: 2

      Maybe offtopic, but in Sweden, it is illegal to think about how to best create a nuclear power plant.

      This is the result of overly ambitious (and probably unconsitutional) laws aiming to make it a 100% certain that no new plants will ever be developed.

      Tor

    4. Re:Illegal in the UK by anonymous+cupboard · · Score: 3, Informative
      When were they banned? I have seen geiger counters and dosimeters available on the UK s/h market, What isn't allowed is a device with a calibration source ('cos it is radioactive).

      Of course, you might end up on Ton's list of people with dangerous equipment and as we know, what is Tony's, is also George's.

    5. Re:Illegal in the UK by Detritus · · Score: 3, Informative
      And your source for this assertion is what?

      See this page for sources of geiger counters in the UK.

      --
      Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
    6. Re:Illegal in the UK by belroth · · Score: 2
      You can buy Geiger-Muller counters in lots of places in the UK. I don't know what you were thinking of.

      Oh, and we're subjects and not citizens.....

      --
      I hereby inform you that I have NOT been required to provide any decryption keys.
  8. Re:The list of too much slash dot by BitHive · · Score: 2

    21) You post "too much slashdot" lists to slashdot, and in true open-source style, invite others to add to it.

  9. Usefulness in saving your life? by yeoua · · Score: 2

    Sure it might be great for small quantities that aren't going to kill you, but think about it... it's a watch, on your wrist.

    If your watch told you it got a dose of lethal radiation... by extension, you did as well. By that time, you could equally judge the lethality of the radiation by the peeling and burning skin all over your body.

    So I don't see this as warning you of danger, as it might be a bit late by the time it beeps at you.

    1. Re:Usefulness in saving your life? by deglr6328 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      not necessarily, you can withstand far higher acute doses to your extremities than you can to your whole body.

      --
      - "Hear that?! The percolations are imminent! Cease your ingress!"
    2. Re:Usefulness in saving your life? by jericho4.0 · · Score: 2

      But if you happen to work with radioactive materials, this could be helpful if something is leaking or otherwise out of the ordinary. It could mean the difference between cancer or not.

      --
      "A language that doesn't affect the way you think about programming, is not worth knowing" - Alan Perlis
  10. Looks normal? by Andorion · · Score: 2

    I can't seem to find any other images of the watch anywhere on that website or elsewhere on the web for that matter. The angle it's at hides the thickness of the watch.... it could be 3/4 of an inch thick =/

    -Berj

  11. What does it mean if.... by SoVi3t · · Score: 2, Funny

    What does it mean if the watch starts glowing green, and melts? Do they have a little voice that says "Congratulations! Now you're the Hulk"?

    --
    Defender of Microsoft and Communism!!!
    1. Re:What does it mean if.... by nizo · · Score: 2

      Actually it just has a little skull and crossbones. Glancing down at your watch, you notice you have just been exposed to a lethal dose of radiation. Luckily the watches come with free diapers, since you promptly shit yourself.

  12. Re:sounds like BS by Garin · · Score: 5, Informative

    Nope. Those are _MICRO_Sieverts, not millisieverts. That's 0.0001 mSv/hr. You'll still see it on that watch, supposedly.

    However, if memory serves me, the average north american feels between 360 and 640 millerem annually (depending on whether or not you smoke). A rem is 0.01 Sievert, so 360 millirem = 3.6 mSv. There are about 8760 hours / year, which gives about 0.0004 mSv/hr. (Did I screw anything up there?)

    However, the most important thing in my mind is that the wearer of the watch will become very aware of just how pervasive and natural a small amount of radiation really is. Maybe if everyone wore one, we wouldn't have the misinformed paranoia that accompanies the word "radioactive" :)

    --
    In any field, find the strangest thing and then explore it. -John Archibald Wheeler
  13. Watch by SavageDK · · Score: 4, Informative

    Well, that watch isnt exactly new.... its sold on this website for way less Actually only 337.20 Here is the link: http://pro-resources.net/watch.htm

    1. Re:Watch by dubl-u · · Score: 2

      The stats on those watches look pretty sad. The ones mentioned at the top of this article can supposedly 0.00001mSv/h. The ones at pro-resources.net bottom out at 0.1 mSv/h.

      Since background radiation appears to be circa 0.0002 mSv/h, the watch at pro-resources.net apparently will only detect levels 500x normal. They should just get rid of the digital display and just show RARE, MEDIUM, or WELL DONE.

  14. See it in the dark? by ProfMoriarty · · Score: 2
    Does it have the radioactive glowy stuff so I see it in the dark?

    Uhmm ... maybe that may upset the readings ... nevermind.

    --
    Karma? Karma? I don't need no stinkin' karma.
  15. Re:sounds like BS by qqtortqq · · Score: 2

    I worked security at a department of energy lab for about a year. There were a few radioactive zones in, near, and around the particle accelerator, and all were well marked, but there were certain spots where I definately would have felt better if I had something that could tell me the radiation level in the area. Security was always first on the scene in case of fire or accident, and you never knew just what could have been destroyed to the point of allowing radiation to leak out. Radiation wise, nothing real bad ever happened, but that was the scariest part of working there sometimes, the radiation that you can't see, smell, or feel.

    BTW, they'd probably post the price because it is interesting and good to know. If you don't have $1100 lying around, why bother clicking through to see how much the price is?

  16. Scenario by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    *beep, beep, beep*

    Guess it's time for my....HOLY SHIT!

    1. Re:Scenario by hitchhacker · · Score: 2

      And it was like "Bleep Bleep Bleep bleep".

      and THEN,

      Like half my face was GONE.

      And I was like... hnuh..?

  17. Workers in related fields by The+Tyro · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I can see plenty of people who work around radiation buying one of these. Light, convenient, and unobtrusive... what's not to like.

    Radiologists, Medical physicists, Nuc. Med guys, Orthopedic surgeons (who use lots of fluoroscopy).

    I don't do very much fluoro... but I have used it in the past to straighten fractured bones and place difficult catheters. Even so... I might consider one of these.

    Also, never underestimate the awesome power of "gadget lust." Even for expensive gadgets, all that's required is a wee bit of rationalization as to how it MIGHT be useful in your job.

    Could even be written off as a business expense...

    --
    Even if a man chops off your hand with a sword, you still have two nice, sharp bones to stick in his eyes.
    1. Re:Workers in related fields by 0x0d0a · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I can see plenty of people who work around radiation buying one of these. Light, convenient, and unobtrusive... what's not to like.

      People that work around radiation (at least in the US) are generally already required to carry radiation-warning equipment. The watch would be redundant.

      I expect that this might become a standard addition to high-end (in the functional, not a "the brand name is Rolex" sense) watches, like altimeters.

    2. Re:Workers in related fields by ceejayoz · · Score: 4, Informative

      The radiation detectors doctors wear aren't real time detectors - the watch is.

  18. Re:sounds like BS by baryon351 · · Score: 3, Funny

    the LCDs in iMac's have one of the highes't radiation outputs of any.

    I think your foil helmet needs changing.

  19. Need Karma? by kaosrain · · Score: 5, Informative

    I'm at the cap, I'll give you some, just don't post misinformation.

    Professional dosimeters have an average accuracy of +/- 10%.

    25% is not considered bad, especially as these are not meant to be used for inspections. From the website:

    Our aim is to help various professionals measure and control the radiation dosis they may be exposed to in a convenient, discreet and continuous way. These professionals can be radiologists, dentists, medical staff, nuclear power plant staff, waste professionals, military, customs and for those who want to know!

    For uses such as these, +/-25% is definately accurate enough.

    You could have gotten free karma much easier if you posted that their technical page contained the following: * all data may be subject to change without notice


    Now THAT is a reason for worry.

  20. Re:sounds like BS by baryon351 · · Score: 2

    but that was the scariest part of working there sometimes, the radiation that you can't see, smell, or feel.

    As opposed to that really visible, smelly textured radiation?

    (ok, I just thought a bit more, and I suppose a hot acrid lava of molten core would probably assault all your senses and be a good indication that it carried a little radiation... for a moment or two anyhows :)

  21. My watch give OFF radiation by saskboy · · Score: 2

    I have an Indiglo Datalink, so my watch gives off radiation, and reads computer screens. It was also less than $80 5 years ago.

    Who got the better deal, me or the shumck who know how many rads they got?

    --
    Saskboy's blog is good. 9 out of 10 dentists agree.
  22. No. by rebelcool · · Score: 3, Insightful
    radiation is all around you and emitted by everything from your smoke detector (contains americium souce which emits alpha particles), to rock (especially granite).

    However, most of these don't emit enough to be harmful. Working in an area with radioactive materials tends to have higher background radiation, as does going on frequent flights or other high altitude operations.

    Radiation is only dangerous in large, very easily detectable doses. And unless its an extreme amount, you can even take short term exposure to a relatively large amount and suffer few ill effects. You wouldnt want to stay long in such a hot environment though.

    --

    -

  23. another asimov prediction come true by margaret · · Score: 2

    Wasn't there an Asimov story with a radiation-detecting watch? I think it was in one of the foundation series novels. The main guy's college dorm room was blown up by a radioactive bomb, but later he figured out that it was staged because his watch didn't register any radiation. The watchband was the indicator, I think. It turned from blue to white or vice versa. Asimov was so great at predicting future technologies. What was that book? It's bugging me now and googling didn't help...

  24. you fail... by rebelcool · · Score: 3, Insightful
    to realize just how many fields use radioactivity. This would be useful for lab workers, oil field techs (plenty or radioactive sources are sent down holes for various reasons), geology... the list goes on and on.

    Just because you don't have a thorough, or even cursory, knowledge about everything in the world doesnt mean something is useless.

    --

    -

  25. Re:Metal by packeteer · · Score: 5, Informative

    Too bad thats not how radiation works. If you ever were near a large source of radiation your own clothes would absorb radiation and keep it coming to your body. One of the most important parts of a nuclear fallout shelter is the entrance room where you take off ALL clothing and shower. Your clothes and aything else you wear if you were near a nuclear explosion would continue the damage if not taken off immediatly.

    --
    unzip; strip; touch; finger; mount; fsck; more; yes; unmount; sleep
  26. I used to have a Geiger counter by MillionthMonkey · · Score: 2, Redundant

    I had it ten years ago- it's in my parents' house somewhere. It was originally marketed to the general public during the early sixties, right after the Cuban Missile Crisis. Maybe someone else has seen one. It was heavy and yellow, with a handle that hung over the dial. It had three sensitivity settings- 100, 10, and 1 of some unit that I can't remember- maybe mrad/hour. (Radiation dosage units are confusing as hell.)

    Either it didn't work at all, or the sensitivity was ridiculously low. I stuck a cobalt-60 source (one of those orange disks you see in highschool and college labs) right underneath it on its finest setting and the needle didn't even budge! Either they didn't understand radiation well back then, or someone was making a fortune during the Cuban Missile Crisis selling fake Geiger counters.

    1. Re:I used to have a Geiger counter by GigsVT · · Score: 2, Interesting

      If it was a big yellow civil defense counter (victoreen), then you damn well better not register anything from any radation source you have laying around, otherwise you are in big trouble.

      Those counters are designed to measure radiation from about 100mREM to 500 REM accurately depending on model. This is several orders of magnitude higher than anything you would have from a high school science lab.

      If it were sensitive enough a meter to measure such small amounts, it would be useless during a nuclear incident, where REMs are going to peak out in the several hundred/hr range, and diminish over the next few days to a few REMs/hr, at which time is begins to be safe to go outside for short periods. You can probably take about 50 cumulative REMs safely without getting sick. 100 is pushing it but you probably wouldn't die. The sick, elderly, and children are more suceptible, none of these numbers are absolute. The point is, these doses are many orders of magnitude times higher than your radiation sample.

      See this link, for a survivalist site, it is a surprisingly well informed, accurate and unbiased assessment.

      --
      I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
  27. Neat Watch by Henry+V+.009 · · Score: 5, Informative

    This would have been nice to know about before Christmas...

    Very cool. One feature I'd like to see in the next version of this watch is some sort of hook-up to a computer that would let you record good data on long-term exposure. Still, I want one of these.

    As far as measuring your total dosage goes, I might as well take this opportunity to inform everyone that government mandated radiation standards are mostly erroneous. By orders of magnitude even. We now know that low-level radiation is simply far less harmful (and far better understood) than we thought it was in the 1950's. Major reason is that the 1950's model is simply a straight line extrapolation from the known lethal dosage. Back then, that was a reasonable guess considering the knowledge of genetics at the time. Needless to say, our current understanding is quite different.

    1. Re:Neat Watch by XNormal · · Score: 2

      We now know that low-level radiation is simply far less harmful (and far better understood) than we thought it was in the 1950's.

      In fact, there is evidence that low-level radiation is actually beneficial. This effect is known as Radiation Hormesis

      --
      Stop worrying about the risks of nuclear power and start worrying about the risks of not using nuclear power.
    2. Re:Neat Watch by Henry+V+.009 · · Score: 2

      Actually the link I gave in my above post discussed the LNT model a great deal. Here it is if you missed it the first time. Moreover, your whyfiles had a number of large errors--such as the analysis of the thyroid cancer rate in the Ukraine. And a couple of short quotes about LNT at the end do not a "lack of understanding" make.

      The LNT isn't just conservative--it's overwhelmingly, crushingly, conservative. It's like making your little kid put on a football helmet before going to his piano lesson. We have come an incredibly long way since the 1950's.

    3. Re:Neat Watch by ParisTG · · Score: 2
      Very cool. One feature I'd like to see in the next version of this watch is some sort of hook-up to a computer that would let you record good data on long-term exposure. Still, I want one of these.

      As long as you're adding a logging feature, it might be useful to add a GPS receiver as well, so that you can tell where, and not just when the radiation was higher/lower.

  28. It takes rather a lot of radiation to harm you. by NChaimov · · Score: 5, Informative

    5-25 rad: No observable effects.
    25-75 rad: Chromosomal aberrations and temporary depression of white blood cell levels in some individuals. No externally observable effects.
    75-200 rad: Vomiting in 5 to 50% of exposed individuals within a few hours. Fatigue and loss of appetite. Moderate blood changes. Recovery within a few weeks.
    200-600 rad: For doses over 300 rem, all exposed individuals will exhibit vomiting within 2 hours and loss of hair after 2 weeks. Severe blood changes with hemorrhage and increased susceptibility to infection, particularly at higher doses. Recovery from 1 to 12 months for individuals at the lower end of the dose range; only 20 percent survive at the upper end of the range.
    600-1000 rad: Vomiting within 1 hour, sever blood changes, hemorrhage, infection, and loss of hair. From 80 to 100% of exposed individuals will succumb within 2 months; those who survive will be convalescent over a long period.
    Introduction to Nuclear Engineering (Lamarshe)

    1. Re:It takes rather a lot of radiation to harm you. by anonymous+cupboard · · Score: 2

      This sounds suspiciously like the old stuff floating around at the time of the cold war, which were hopelessly high. Has this been updated in light of Chernobyl?

    2. Re:It takes rather a lot of radiation to harm you. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      These numbers apply to external whole body doses. Most of the cancer cases resulting from Chernobyl were due to internal doses arising from radioactive iodine. So no, these numbers don't apply to internal doses.

  29. Fallout 3? by l33t-gu3lph1t3 · · Score: 2

    Ooh, I see a new item accessory in the making :)

    --
    ------- "From bored to fanboy in 3.8 asian girls" ----------
    1. Re:Fallout 3? by caternater · · Score: 2, Funny

      I agree... And they do go great with these.

  30. Could it be... by BattleWolf · · Score: 5, Funny

    ... the green, glow in the dark watch-hands causing the +/-25%?

  31. Re:Oh man oh man oh man by Jacer · · Score: 2

    be fare, that's a generalization, i hate america just as much as any other non-american, the catch is, i'm american. i hate the fact that we're facist. i hate the fact we're racist. i hate the fact we meddle in the affairs of others. i hate capitalism. i hate critics, such as yourself, and those worse than you. i hate your generalization that because i'm american, i must be bad. i love the fact that i don't hate you for your misconception, but i hate the fact that you'll never understand why i don't.

    --
    --fetch daddy's blue fright wig, i must be handsome when i release my rage
  32. Re:I hope... by chewedtoothpick · · Score: 2, Informative

    What is with all you hippies? There will never be a time when we all have to commute in haz-mat suits driving airtight cars with their own oxygen source... There may be enough neuclear force to destroy the world, but even nations as angry and stupid as North Korea or Iraq wouldn't do THAT much damage... Sure it is possible that in the future we will have to worry about bombs destroying our homes or something... but it will be a while before and take a lot to come to nuclear war.

    Another thing to know, in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, they can live and walk freely even today with very little above-normal exposure to radiation. Radiation dissipates fairly fast if it isn't continually agitated by further radiation.

    You will have to worry about having to walk around with a sunscreen-sprinkler continually protecting you from a hole in the ozone layer (which by the way has been shrinking steadily since 2000 as was told here on slashdot) before you have to worry about a fallout (the game) like scenario.

    --
    Erutangis ym si siht.
  33. Re:Metal by 0x0d0a · · Score: 5, Funny

    One of the most important parts of a nuclear fallout shelter is the entrance room where you take off ALL clothing and shower.

    Leading to the popular Cold War pickup line "Hey, baby, want to see my fallout shelter?"

  34. Re:Oh man oh man oh man by 0x0d0a · · Score: 2

    ever wonder why the world hates you guys?

    Well, I *did* wonder whether it was what you mentioned or the puppet governments we were trying to set up in Iran and Vietnam, but it seems that you've cleared that up.

  35. Re:Metal by Aglassis · · Score: 5, Informative

    You said: " Too bad thats not how radiation works. If you ever were near a large source of radiation your own clothes would absorb radiation and keep it coming to your body. One of the most important parts of a nuclear fallout shelter is the entrance room where you take off ALL clothing and shower. Your clothes and aything else you wear if you were near a nuclear explosion would continue the damage if not taken off immediatly.

    Your description of radiation and contamination is a little hairy, let me clean it up:

    Radiation is the propogation of energy over a distance via waves. Some types of radiation are (using the example of a nuclear bomb): neutrons (very hazardous--you need to be in a deep fallout shelter or surrounded by a significant amount of water to protect you), alphas (very hazardous--are shielded by your skin, but if they are emitted inside your lungs you are in trouble), betas (minor hazard--shielded by your clothing, not a real problem unless ingested or inhaled), EM radiation in general (the frequency; therefore, the energy of the photon is of prime concern: a radio wave will probably not hurt you but a high energy gamma will--shielded by being in a fallout shelter as long as its deep enough), and non-interacting (like neutrinos--you don't have to worry about these, they can't hurt you). This watch will detect gammas and maybe some other high energy EM radiation (neutrons require larger detection devices, and alphas and betas would be shielded by the metal of the watch). I doubt it can detect as low energy as x-rays, but it might.

    Contamination is getting radioactive material on you. This radioactive material will undergo decays producing radiation. You take your clothes off and shower to remove the contamination so you don't get irradiated.

    Radiation (with the exception of neutrons and alphas) does not beget long term radiation (longer than for example a gamma to be absorbed by an atom and re-emit a lower energy gamma). Its just absorbed and thats the end of it. Neutrons and alphas will typically not beget long term radiation because of the specialized conditions required (causing fission of an atom and releasing radioactive products or being absorbed and transmuting an atom into a radioactive isotope). The contamination on your skin and clothes will be due to fallout (i.e. radioactive material) from the nuclear weapon, not the radiation.

    --
    Suddenly, the hairy finger of a familiar monkey tapped me on the shoulder. It was time.--G. T.
  36. Re:Metal by packeteer · · Score: 2

    thank you... you explained it in way more words than i was willing to write... aslo i dotn proofraed my posts

    --
    unzip; strip; touch; finger; mount; fsck; more; yes; unmount; sleep
  37. Re:Good news for lab workers by anonymous+cupboard · · Score: 2

    True for a lot of people working near nuclear reactors. Photographic style dosimeters (a piece of film shielded by different layers of metal) are very common. I think even hospital workers in X-ray have to use them.

  38. Most Likely Shit by cybergibbons · · Score: 5, Informative

    Unless this is recent, this is just wrong. People are allowed to own Geiger Counters. Why wouldn't they be?

    Maplin used to sell a kit until a few years ago to make one. Second hand militaty units are available on many sites. Scientific suppliers often carry them.

    Also, a dosimeter is a different device to a Geiger counter. Is the watch still illegal?

    I should imagine that if this were like anything else, then dealers would get in a lot more trouble than the buyer, and I have never heard of that happening.

  39. Sensing one's environment by sandow · · Score: 2

    I sometimes think that environmental conciousness will come not because of any actions by activists but because we will develop personal, portable and cheap pathogen detection technology. This would let people know just how much of each toxin was present in their environment. There would still be arguments about what amount constitutes a dangerous exposure, but if I only get 1 PPM of dioxin at home and 100 PPM at work, I'm going to start looking for another job.

    Are there any more personal detection devices like this on the market?

    Perhaps what we need is a site the provides plans and techniques for detecting various poisons. There could also be a section to rate your town. Of course it would probably become competitive. Imagine the headlines; Local chess club dumps toxic waste. "We wanted to make the toxic top ten" says club president at his arraignment.

  40. WRT: K-19... what kind of doses? by ArcSecond · · Score: 2

    I have no idea how accurate the movie was, but in K-19, the reactor techs who made repairs inside the reactor area were shown to be puking and showing signs of hemorrhage within 10 minutes. Are we talking on the order of 1000 rad here? Anyone know of any data on the exposure of the rest of the crew?

    --

    I've got a bad attitude and karma to burn. Go ahead. Mod me down.

    1. Re:WRT: K-19... what kind of doses? by Alsee · · Score: 2

      I have no idea how accurate the movie was... within 10 minutes. Are we talking on the order of 1000 rad here?

      Dude, movies tend to skip the boring part where nothing happens between being exposed to radiation and puking. I've seen movies where kids are born and graduate college in 10 minutes. :)

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
  41. Note to self... by qwijibrumm · · Score: 2

    Heavy sales of this product indicate mass paranoia. If this thing sells well. Invest in tin-foil hat and body suit tailoring company.... Perfect.

    --
    I wish there was some there was some way that I could be outside playing basketball, in the rain, and not get wet.
  42. "Standard equipment for survival" by Archeopteryx · · Score: 2

    Let George Bush start his little nuclear war, and it will be! Seriously folks, there is a faction in the Religious Right who believe that only a nuclear war will fulfill the Revelations prophesy, and bring Jesus back. And they WANT ONE. Scary stuff!

    --
    Dog is my co-pilot.
    1. Re:"Standard equipment for survival" by ErikZ · · Score: 2


      What, you never wished for nuclear war just to get everyone to shut the hell up?

      --
      Democrats or Republicans. They are both taking us to the same place and they are not afraid of us anymore.
  43. Its stupid by Ilgaz · · Score: 2

    So, you will have "1000% warning" of radiation, will it help? It works at light speed! The radiation. You will run away?

    Try to make your goverment a bit peaciful instead.

    Like, not bombing Iraq for sake of 3-4 petrol companies.

  44. Re:IN SOVIET RUSSIA by ErikZ · · Score: 2


    Why the heck would it be useful around Chernoble?

    "Woah! My 500$ watch is picking up radiation!"

    'No kidding genius, where have you been?'

    --
    Democrats or Republicans. They are both taking us to the same place and they are not afraid of us anymore.
  45. X-ray Radiation from Monitors by BigBlockMopar · · Score: 3, Informative

    Also, we are talking EM radiation here, not nuclear. There is a difference.

    Yeah, it's unclear what the original poster thinks that he's going to be getting "nuked" by.

    Actually, several kinds of radiation leave a monitor, though it's only the last two that tend to cause worry:

    • Light - this is, after all, why you bought the monitor?
    • Heat.
    • Sound - ultrasonic and sonic, ranging from the ultrasonic whine of the power supply's inverter and the horizontal windings of the deflection yoke and the flyback transformer, to the rasp of the vertical deflection yoke windings, to the click of various relays as the sync rate changes.
    • Electromagnetic - primarily from the horizontal and vertical deflection circuits, these behave basically as VLF radio transmitters. Their actual effects on the human body are unknown, but the fact that the word "radiation" is used to describe them is enough to get every do-gooder high-school-educated hausfrau or trade union member up in arms. When a monitor says "Low Radiation", this is what is meant, but it's not what I worry about.
    • X-rays - X-rays are really a kind of electromagnetic radiation in theory, but in practice, they're quite different. They're ionizing, meaning that they cause a charge in something when they strike it. In a CRT, a very high voltage power supply is used to accelerate beam of electrons to an appreciable percentage of the speed of light, and then they're slammed into the phosphor coating on the inside of the screen. If you compare this with the theory of operation of an X-ray machine, you might be amused to note the similarities. The vacuum inside the CRT is only part of the reason why the glass is so thick... there have been stringent X-ray standards since the early 1960s, when most color TV sets like the RCA CT-100 could cloud photographic film. Of course, a failure in the high voltage regulator circuit of a modern monitor or TV could cause it to spoil all your vacation photos.

    X-rays are ionizing radiation and are known to be carcinogenic and mutagenic. They're essentially man-made gamma rays. Geiger counters do tend to count them, though it depends on their energy.

    --
    Fire and Meat. Yummy.
    1. Re:X-ray Radiation from Monitors by alienw · · Score: 2

      Most (all?) monitors have a protection circuit that shuts it down if it starts to emit too much x-ray.

  46. Re:I hope... by Melantha_Bacchae · · Score: 2

    An AC wrote:

    > Maybe not North Korea but what about the US?
    > Especially with that trigger happy president only
    > thinking about the axis of evil and terrorism.

    Representatives from our esteemed allies, Japan and South Korea, will be visiting with our fearless leader next week. Hopefully they will share with him some tips on the fine arts of diplomacy and peace.

    At the moment, our country and North Korea are using the time honored technique employed by angry children of talking to each other through a third party. I do not think this is working at all.

    "The path of peace is yours to discover for eternity."
    Japanese version of "Mothra" (1961)

  47. Re:sounds like BS by Alsee · · Score: 2

    Maybe if everyone wore one, we wouldn't have the misinformed paranoia that accompanies the word "radioactive" :)

    No, we'd just have a bunch terrified people phoning some government agency every time they saw the level "jump" from 0.0003 mSv/hr to 0.0005 mSv/hr.

    -

    --
    - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
  48. Re:sounds like BS by Alsee · · Score: 2

    I think your foil helmet needs changing.

    You make it sound like a diaper! LOL

    -

    --
    - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
  49. Man, it'd be cool if... by joshv · · Score: 2

    It'd be cool if this thing came with a glow in the dark radium face.

    -josh

  50. Re:sweet, but what i really want by VistaBoy · · Score: 2

    Don't forget the suit that has a voice telling you what it's doing to protect you.

    "Warning....major...fracture...detected...BEEP BEEP BEEP...Emergency...medical...system...activated... morphine...administered."

  51. Rip-off by Animats · · Score: 2
    These all seem to be resellers of Polimaster's radiation detector watch. Polimaster has a whole line of similar instruments, for people who work with radioactive materials. The resellers are doubling and tripling the price, too.

    The wearable devices are mostly gamma detectors. More useful, for the paranoid, would be an air sampler that detects alpha and beta emitters. If you're worried about terrorist-type attacks, they're more likely to be in the form of airborne radioactive particles than from a big gamma source.

    One of the things Homeland Security was supposed to be doing was putting radiation detectors into every fire station in America. That doesn't seem to have happened, and it should.

  52. Wow. by ArcSecond · · Score: 2

    I think they were outside the core, but inside the containment vessel. Not that I know tons about nuke power plant architecture. But the movie showed them being exposed to steam which I assumed was moving through pipes in the reactor core.

    --

    I've got a bad attitude and karma to burn. Go ahead. Mod me down.

  53. Ancient technology. by AJWM · · Score: 2

    A geiger counter in a wrist watch? Come on, James Bond had one of those in the movie Thunderball, back in the 1960s.

    --
    -- Alastair
  54. Re:Good news for lab workers by FredGray · · Score: 3, Informative
    Photographic style dosimeters (a piece of film shielded by different layers of metal) are very common.

    Actually, the old "film badges" have largely been replaced by devices called thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs). They are made of a material which, when struck by radiation, goes into a metastable excited state. The badge is processed by heating it up, causing the molecules that had been excited to drop back to the ground state. In the process, a photon is emitted, which is detected by a photomultiplier tube. Your radiation dose is proportional to the number of photons counted. The advantages of a TLD over a film badge are that it tends to more precise for very small doses, it can be processed faster if you have the equipment on-site, and it's reusable.

  55. Re:sounds like BS by mc6809e · · Score: 2

    Since when do cigarettes give off radiation?

    Tobacco contains large amounts of polonium-210 which is radioactive.

    A smoker who smokes 1 pack a day gets the equivalent of something like 200-500 chest x-rays in a year.

    Some links:

    http://www.no-smoking.org/may00/05-19-00-1.html

    http://www.ringnebula.com/peds_paper.htm

    http://nepenthes.lycaeum.org/Drugs/THC/Health/canc er.rad.html

    If you're interested in estimating your yearly radiation dose, check out:

    http://newnet.lanl.gov/main.htm

    Compare the dose from a plutonium powered pacemaker with that from smoking one pack of cigarettes a day -- cigarettes give you about 10 times as much radiation as the pacemaker.

  56. good idea albeit expensive by zogger · · Score: 2

    --in these days of terrorism, this watch could give someone an immediate headsup to evac any area that has become dangerous from perhaps a "dirty" radiological device or just from some *insane goon* spreading radioactivity in some manner. Maybe well before any "official" word of an attack is released on the radio, etc. And after an attack it would be useful for noting hotspots and relatively "cleaner" areas to avoid or travel in. Too bad it's so expensive I would get one to add to my survival/preparedness supplies.

  57. It was a Victoreen 715 by MillionthMonkey · · Score: 2

    If it was a big yellow civil defense counter (victoreen), then you damn well better not register anything from any radation source you have laying around, otherwise you are in big trouble.

    That was pretty much our assessment when we couldn't get it to work. I typed "Victoreen" into images.google.com to see what I recognized- it was a Victoreen model 715. And now the picture reminds me- the units were Roentgens/hr (on the "X1" setting- the switch had X100, X10, X1, and X0.1 positions).

    The manual for this thing was pretty scary.

  58. Would have been fun at Trinity by wowbagger · · Score: 2

    I went to the Trinity site opening this last October - it would have been fun to have had this watch then as I wandered around the site of the first nuclear blast.

    I can think of some people that this would be useful for - anybody who works in caves. Due to naturally occuring uranium in granite, all caves with poor air circulation exhibit increased levels of radon. In fact, the National Parks Service workers at Carlsbad Caverns wear dosimeters, and are not allowed to work there longer than a couple of months before being rotated out, to limit their exposure.

  59. Re:sounds like BS by qqtortqq · · Score: 2

    I'd much have prefered radiation be stinky, at least then I'd know i was in trouble. Kinda along the same lines of them putting an artificial smell in natural gas.