It is, then, quite plausible to evaluate how much Gamma a specific watch is emitting using a Geiger counter. Gamma was still finding its way through the obstacle. I took one of my watches and placed it behind 6cm of lead. Given that Alpha particles will not pass through a plexiglass and Beta particles, if present, will only penetrate a centimetre or so of aluminium, if a watch is recording high radioactivity readings through more than a centimetre, then what it will be recording is Gamma emission. However, a simple Geiger counter is very effective at evaluating how much radiation is being emitted. In the past, i have stated very clearly that a simple Geiger counter is totally inappropriate as a tool to determine what type of radiation is in a watch for the purpose of authenticating a dial. It is relatively easy to determine how much Gamma is being produced by a watch. Indeed the amount used on one specific watch could vary quite considerably from another of exactly the same reference. Amounts used will have varied from one manufacturer to another. Now, this will vary from one watch to another. This makes the analysis of the radioactive material much easier to interpret. This also makes it easy to understand since Alpha particles cannot penetrate a piece of paper whilst Gamma particles can penetrate virtually anything. For the purposes of this article, it is sufficient to consider just Alpha and Gamma. ![]() Radium-226 emits Alpha and Gamma particles, though other steps in its decay chain also emit Beta. Radioactive emission comes in different forms depending on the nature of the isotope. The question is, are they dangerous? Potentially, yes. Such watches are, today, very much alive. Those that had Radium-226, however, are still not even in the adolescence of their prospective radioactive lives. Many wonderful vintage watches exist today with very low levels of radioactivity courtesy of the specific isotope applied when first manufactured. Secondly, Radium-226 has a half-life of 1600 years, whereas other isotopes typically have much shorter half-lives (Radium-228: 5 years, Strontium-90: 29 years, Promethium-147: 3 years, Radium-228: 6 years, Tritium: 12 years).įor watches, then, that had radioactive material applied with relatively short half-lives, the problem has largely decayed away. By far the majority of radioactive watches from this era contain Radium-226. First, this was the isotope that was most commonly used by watchmakers from the 1920s through to the 1960s era - until it was made illegal to use. I will focus on this isotope for two main reasons. In order to enhance clarity, I will examine just one variant: Radium-226. For one thing, watch manufacturers used a wide variety of different radioactive substances including amongst other, Radium-226, Radium-228, Promethium-147, Strontium-90 and Tritium. The issue of radioactive watches is complex. So many vintage dealers brush us off with the idea that a radium watch is only dangerous if one inhales/ingests some of the radium dust. As watch collectors, it seems only right that there is some clarification on the issue. This article sets out to present the points about the health hazards of wearing a watch with high radioactivity levels. Radioactive watches are in this category. Where I have a problem, however, is a situation where there is a clear medical risk yet, for some unfathomable reason, it is not understood or more cynically the facts are misrepresented or simply just not made evident. And, in possession of that evidence, smokers have still decided to smoke. Smokers are generally well-informed about such risks as medical science has made its position very clear. ![]() Yet, there are plenty of people who smoke.Īnd I have absolutely no problem with smokers at all. Typically, smoking-related deaths are not quick affairs. Long-term smokers live approximately 10 years less than non-smokers. It is estimated that approximately half of all smokers die from a smoking-related illness. Smoking cigarettes seriously damages one’s health. ![]() Medical science is fairly clear on the subject.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |