As someone born 60km from Chornobyl and having just played Stalker 2, hearing the word sarcophagus in the context of ionising radiation just tickles my brain the right way.
I've a brain tumor (don't worry, it's not going to kill me any time soon) but as part of the panic of figuring out IF it was the kind that would kill me, I had to have a "nuclear scan" (or at least that's what the doctor referred to it as) where I had radioactive dye injected into my spinal column (my csf) and then they pointed a camera that could detect ionizing radiation at my head and spine and we could see the radioactive fluid LIVE on camera. That way they could see if there were act leaks in my csf or if the radioactive fluid was getting into other parts of my body or blood. They also put cotton swabs into my nose and mouth and then afterward they scanned the cotton for radiation to see if any of it leaked out. It's was fascinating seeing my brain in 3d live. Even better, at some point I had a CT scan while the fluid was still in my head and I swear to God, while the CT scan was on, I could see through my own eyelids. I seriously had x-Ray vision for a short period. I could see through the table I was on, I could see the X-ray emitters light up. According to a radiologist I mentioned it to later he said they've had other patients not the effect and his best guess was that it had something to do with cherenkov (sp?) radiation, but there was no real way to study the effect safely for obvious reasons.
@Kepler3-bBlue could also come from radioactive particles activating neurons within his visual cortex rather than producing photons that he directly saw although that would probably take wayyyy more radiation than is possible here
This sounds kinda similar to an effect many astronauts have reported-apparently most of them have noticed sporadic bright blue flashes, even with their eyes closed, while they’re in space. It’s theorized to be Cherenkov radiation produced by radioactive particles interacting with the vitreous humor in the eyes, but it also hasn’t really been tested for obvious reasons
Fiestaware is the forbidden fruit for vintage collectors. It's poison, but god. wouldn't a hot serving of chicken noodle soup go so hard in one of those bowls?
You could always opt for uranium infused glass bowl, still cool but without the lead and Much less likely to chip/leach into what you’re eating. (The glaze isn’t just uranium, but has a shockingly high lead content, which to me is way scarier than the uranium!)
@@HuheJass True, you don't need very much Uranium at all to get the cool effects from it, but lead? If any amount is used it's probably going to be too much, the fact that it was used AT ALL for these kinds of applications is tragedy enough but it was used fucking EVERYWHERE, humanity as a whole is STILL recovering from the widespread use of leaded gasoline... unlike lead, uranium at least has the decency to kill you quicker and more obviously.
There is still some distinction between X- and gamma rays; I'm in astro and the difference I'm aware of is in energy; X-rays are keV-type energies and gammas are MeV-type energies. (Which makes sense, since nuclear interactions - as in minerals - have MeV energies and the strongest reasonable electromagnetic interactions have keV energies)
yeah, you wouldn't want a gamma ray image of your body. It's not very useful for that. It's like saying a red wavelength is the same as a blue one because they're both visible and interact photoelectrically
That's a definition, but the issue is the definitions aren't consistent. Some say "if it somes from an atom it's a gamma ray", but you get gammas with Kev energy. If you define it as the mev cutoff, then why does every gamma spectrometer start in the kev range? Without a clear and consistent definition, the cutoff is arbitrary and meaningless.
That sounds quite arbitrary and post-hoc reasoning to say that the _intensity_ of the radiation makes it different _type_ of radiation. It is equivalent of running a light bulb first with 50% intensity a then 100% intensity and claiming the light they produce is completely different type. But no, that's not quite how it works.
Part of my day job involves frequently x-raying electronics assemblies to check for solder quality, and it never gets old to be able to see inside of stuff. Seeing the plates clearly within a capacitor, seeing the coils inside of potted inductors/transformers, seeing the semiconductors inside of large diodes, it's so fun. We even sometimes use the x-ray machines to inspect wires that we suspect are broken from our other equipment to find where the fault is.
My only criticism is that, no, we absolutely cannot use "x ray" and "gamma ray" interchangeably, just like we cannot use "radio waves" and "microwaves", or "red light" and "blue light" interchangeably. The bands are pretty well defined by their properties.
@@DemocracyDiesInDarkness It's not just where they're emitted from, it's the wavelengths (or inversely frequency). Xrays go from 10 nanometer to 10 picometer wavelengths. Gamma starts at 10 picometer and is anything shorter than that.
That's actually not a full bridge rectifier. It's a voltage multiplier. Different circuit, used for a different purpose. (but ElectroBOOM has played with voltage multipliers too)
I think the reason I literally cannot stop coming back to this channel is because the topics are so varied, and so amazingly interesting I have found VERY few channels that truly make me want to chase my mad scientist dreams and become a super villain such as this one Please for the love of god, stay evil
This was interesting. I worked as a F/W Engineer at Bicron 20 some years ago until Thermo took over and sent it to Mexico. I still have a Surveyor M meter. I also worked at Philips Healthcare on a CT/PET scanner project (software). When that was finished, they shipped it all to Israel and shuttered the facility. Lots of interesting stuff they worked on.
That's not the "geiger counter" itself that you're hearing (i.e. you're not hearing the sound of individual particles being detected). Many radiation detectors can be set to sound an alarm when they detect radiation over a certain level (i.e. levels that are seriously dangerous to humans, etc). I'm pretty sure in that shot we're just hearing the speaker in the unit sounding an alert tone because the level is above it's programmed "danger" threshold.
I thought that the difference between x-rays and gamma rays was wavelength. Every EM chart I’ve seen has the waves after visible light listed in order of ultraviolet - x-rays - gamma rays. I’m confused by your statement.
If x-rays are the same as gamma rays then we might as well say the same thing about microwaves and radio waves, or uv-visible-IR light. They are all classified by wavelength/energy, even though they are all technically electromagnetic waves
That's what I thought, too. But after thinking about it for a bit, I'm pretty sure he's right. Everything i can think of that purportedly produces X-rays, including the X-ray machines of the 60s, either are literally radioactive objects producing gamma radiation, or are producing higher energy rays than those gamma sources. So gamma radiation and x-rays must inhabit the same part of the EM spectrum. As for the historical side, that's definitely true. Gamma rays were discovered by a chemist studying rocks and X-rays by a physicist with vacuum tubes.
@frostyelkk xrays are from electrons shifting energy levels and interacting with matter. An electron in a synclatron generates xrays, a SEM produces xrays ( backscatter spectroscopy amd EDX both analyse xrays produced from the interaction of the electrons in an SEM) Gamma rays are the result of nuclear decay of atoms
7:45 Actually, not exactly. X-rays are not just usually limited with the energy of around ~10⁵ eV, there is more to it. The radiation named X-rays is also 1. human made, 2. has a property to get absorbed by some materials to make it useful for something, like X-ray photography. It's not useful to shine high energy gamma rays on a person to make pictures of their bones or tissues because gamma rays are too penetrative to easily distinguish one from another. Although, gamma radiation can also be less than 10⁵ eV of energy, if a particular kind of nuclear decay or another process emits this kind of photons.
7:45 although they are both high energy photons, x-rays and gamma rays are *not* interchangeable. A gamma ray is produced via nuclear interactions or matter/anti-matter annihilations. An x-ray is produced by the deceleration of high energy charged particles, typically electrons. As a medical physicist, this distinction is actually important because both are used in radiation therapy. Gamma rays produced by Co-60 are/were used in teletherapy machines (not so much anymore in America but they’re still popular in places that don’t have super stable power supplies) as well as in modern Gamma-knife machines. X-rays are what are used in most radiation therapy machines in the US, which are linear accelerators (LINACS). Anyways, great video as always
X-rays are gamma rays are not interchangable. It's an arbitrary distinction since it's all just EM radiation, but people use it. X-rays are less energetic and can come even from atomic transitions. Gamma is usually the name for radiation from nuclear transitions and are more energetic than X-rays. Generally, x-rays are gamma rays(under some definitions), but not all gamma rays are x-rays
I'm 1:04 in and have just spent half an hour reading about the Nevada Test Site, only now popping back over and remembering we were gonna X-ray something with a dinner plate. Lol. Love this channel
FINALLY a good sponsor read, I'm so tired of the obviously fake and boring sponsor segments interrupting my video and I'm so happy to see someone actually integrate one into their content in a constructive way
I don't remember X-rays and Gamma rays to be the same thing : X-rays are mainly produced from high energy plasma through Bremsstrahlung. The energies involved are at most 100keV. Gamma rays on the other hand are emitted by transformations in the nucleus level at energies at the MeV range
A chemistry enthusiast from Australia was recently charged and now faces court due to importing a periodic table containing small samples of all possible elements. One of the samples was a cube containing an estimated 350 atoms of plutonium. Your next video should be a practical instructional to build a an open source desktop cyclotron, and link all the files. This way I can go to court to support this guy, carrying my own sample (A sample I didn’t import) as a way of protesting the absolute absurdity of this.
@@KurosakiYukigo correct. I postulated that given the sample size, one could even break open the container and eat the contents if they wished, without any negative effect. Given that the distances between objects at this scale are so massive, and that activity depends on quantity. The chances of a single decay (and all children of that decay chain) having the exact trajectory and timing required to cause any non reversible generic ionisation event is astronomically low. Further more, I believe that anyone born after the 1970s has almost certainly bioaccumulated more Pu than this, and carries this inside them at all times, including when they cross borders on any flight. This is a result of decades of weapons testing and also notable historic reactor incidents, where by materials containing PU were released into the environment, eventually making their way to every corner of the earth, and ultimately into earths biosphere. Failing a diy cyclotron (because let’s be real for a second lol) my next best option is to take a handful of uranium rocks with me from the ground. These will be many orders of magnitude hotter, and contain a much higher mass of fissile material, which would also technically be considered a restricted nuclear material under the law.
There are some Vinyl record anti static brushes that contain plutonium. I just find it weird that Australia is considered a top 5 democracy, when you can barely do any electrical work by yourself, a journalist got firebombed, a battery company is suing a small UA-camr for saying factual information and someone is getting sued for potentially importing some radioactive atoms
I’ve been watching you since 50k subs and it makes me so happy to not see you guys struggle financially / motivation-wise. Always one of my favorite channels, everything you guys do is so cool.
X-Rays and Gamma rays are both high energy photons but the difference is from where they originate. X-Rays are from the electron cloud and Gamma rays are from the Nucleus. Now Academically they are not the same thing and you will really piss off your co-worker who is a Health Physicist by saying that they are the same (speaking from experience). Practically from a detection and interaction standpoint they are both high energy photons and their interactions with matter are the same and are driven by the energy of the photon not from where it originated. Its like saying the Atlantic and Pacific oceans are the same thing. From a practical standpoint they are both large saline bodies of water and there is some overlap between them. Boat designs don't need to be optimized or specialized for either ocean within reason. Academically they are not the same thing because they are in different locations.
i thought x-rays had longer wavelengths than gamma rays. like how visible light has longer wavelengths than ultraviolet. visible light is not the same thing as ultraviolet light. so im confused as to why people keep saying gamma rays and x-rays the same thing. x-rays have wavelengths around 10^-10 meters, while gamma rays have wavelengths around 10^-12 meters. thats what i was taught in school.
@@S0difX-rays are photons higher than a certain energy. Gamma rays are photons emitted from the nucleus. It so happens that the weakest gamma rays are well beyond the threshold for photons to be called x-rays, and it’s rare (but not unheard of) for x-rays to be in the energy levels of typical γ-rays, so people often, technically incorrectly, treat them as simply different energy categories of regular old light
That doesn't make them different things, it just makes them _the same thing that comes from different sources._ Your ocean example is a bit flawed, too. It's more like claiming "that stuff comes out of wells in the ground isn't actually water, because water can only come from rain, not from the ground". We don't categorize EM radiation (or any other elementary particles) based on its source, we do it based on its physical properties (i.e. wavelength). If two photons have the same energy level, they are fundamentally indistinguishable from each other, and therefore they are the same kind of radiation. It doesn't matter how they were produced. (Also, what about, for example, high-energy photons produced by the event horizon of a black hole, or high-energy collisions in a supercollider? Those don't come from either "the electron cloud" or from "the nucleus". Are those also some new forms of radiation that should have yet different names?) Originally, way back when, X-Rays and gamma rays were based on the source, because people didn't know any better. In modern science, they are generally not distinguished from each other, or are distinguished based on wavelength. Most people do consider there to arguably be a difference (X-rays are lower energy, and gamma rays are higher energy), but the dividing point is not well defined, and different people have different ideas of where it should be. However, for most practical purposes, it doesn't matter that much, so nobody's worked that hard to try to standardize it, that's all.
@ They are different phenomena, but not different *things* I’m not saying they’re substantively, measurably different. They’re both EM waves, they just originate at different places (information which is meaningful to humans, but not to the physics of the wave) To be clear, High-energy photons in supercolliders are gamma rays if they from from the nucleus relaxing, and are X-rays if they come from anything else. However, people will **colloquially** refer to X-rays above a certain energy (with an ill-defined cutoff) as gamma rays, despite it not being technically accurate
@@nicholasneyhart396yes, it was't added for shits and giggles, the thorium was added because it improved optical quality, and it did. We have better coatings nowadays but it was better than contemporary throium free alternatives. Also, it is not the radiation that makes them better, that's a side effect what, if anything, can make the coating degrade over the decades.
Wow! I learned so much from this video! I never knew a cloud chamber could show x/gamma rays. How come no one ever mentioned that? And concentrated uranium products get more radioactive as the daughter products develop. How come no one ever mentioned that? This is such a great video. Thank you!
High voltage supply that can be taken apart: big zapper tennis racket. I use these for my cloud chamber and they're very easy to power externally. Awesome video as usual!
Really nice man, those visuals were amazing. I've never seen x-rays from an electronic source visualized like that in a cloud chamber; the sheer noise is insane. Same for the pained wailings of your detectors. Great video!
I genuinely would eat a dinner served to me on that plate, and I've seen enough videos discussing how objects from that time were coated in radioactive materal for one reason or another (colour) to recognize the "hot" plate immediately. Of course, I'd be using my cutlery very carefully and probably won't want to eat off it AGAIN, but to see it "in use" just once in person would be neat.
Iirc the bigger issue with uranium fiestaware isn't the radioactivity but the risk of heavy metal poisoning from the uranium. Dont eat anything acidic on Fiestaware (which can leach uranium into food) and ceramics tend to be strong enough that as long as you aren't using excessive force to eat your food, you dont need to worry too much about damaging the fiestaware)
Fun fact about the history of xrays. As early as 1896 people knew they could be dangerous, a while back I has reading "The Phonoscope", a magazee from the mid-late 1890s that's all about the phonograph and amusement machine industry, and in almost all of the issues there's blerbs about people getting "sunburned" from xray tubes, and the safest way to use them.
Once at a town history museum they had a shoe store x-ray machine. Apparently in the 1920s (?) it was a thing to stick your foot in this undoubtedly dangerous box to somehow help the shoe salesman get you better shoes. I was astounded.
I absolutely love collecting uranium glass from antique stores. Uranium glass is both much more common and much safer for use than fiesta ware (given that it won't produce dust if broken), and it looks cooler. Unfortunately, uranium glass often seems to be from the same manufacturer and the same style of very thick-walled wine glasses. But recently I was able to find a thin-walled regular drinking glass for only $10. I don't actually use them anymore, but back in college a few years ago, I would use a uranium glass wine glass every once in a while for a quick drink of water.
If you tried to use the blue-sensitive film with the green-emitting cassette, that would explain why you were not getting any images. In terms of pigments like inks and dyes, green is made of yellow and blue, but when speaking of light green is a primary color (there is no blue in green light). X-ray film is primarily sensitive to visible light, which is why the intensifying screens are required (they absorb x-rays and emit photons of colored light). If you have green intensifying screens you would need green-sensitive film.
I would eat off the plate. Wouldn't put it under my pillow, and if I broke it, I'd vacate the premises, but eating off it would be okay. Also, I've always been taught that X-rays and gamma rays differ in frequency, with gamma rays taking up the highest frequencies and X-rays sitting between ultraviolet and gamma rays.
Small correction: X-Ray gas wavelength between 1 nanometer and 10 picometer And Gammaray has a wavelength between 10 picometer and 100 femtometer Thus Grammarays and X-rays are NOT the same (Gammarays are a lot more powerful)
In reality they have an overlap in their energies. All the x-ray and gamma terms mean is one comes from the electron and the other from the nucleus. Gamma rays from the nucleus are generally higher energy.
There are different sources denoting that they are separate but yes there are also ones saying the hard X-ray goes up to 1 picometer and those also say that the soft X-rays go up to "several 10nm" (XAFS Analysis and Applications to Carbons and Catalysts, Hiromi Yamashita)
It is worth noting that despite the daughter isotopes being highly radioactive, they will be present in tiny concentrations due to equilibrium such that their radioactivity alone no longer exceed uranium itself
My mom gave me one of these from my grandmas old set when I moved into my first apartment. Ended up eating off of it for a couple of years before realizing it. I cope by believing in radiation hormesis.
Considering the topic of the video and the stuff these guys deal with, I wouldn't be surprised if it was an actual uranium tip round. Naturally, that would not be something to be disclosed in YT video as even owning those may constitute as a war crime.
@@simoncleret I mean, in Canada it is a war crime if you shoot towards enemy with a bullet that you hadn't engraved with apologies, so it's not really that far fetched.
What would happen if you put some Rhenium metal in the chamber? The elements most common isotope in nature is unstable, with a half life of around 45 billion years! The half life of rhenium can also be lowered to 33 years when fully ionized, it would be interesting to get this phenomenon on camera, since I don’t believe it has ever been done before. I appreciate all of your uploads, especially ones relating to synthetic opal, I look forward to seeing your next uploads
I cannot express how frickin' cool the x-ray shadow picture is! When you showed it first without even commenting on it, I had to pause the video and stare at it for a good while. It's just so evocative!
X-rays also have a lot more use compared to just taking pictures of your bones - its recent application is of chip production (even though 13.5 nanometers EUV isn't really X-ray, it still behave like it so it's considered super soft X-rays, thus the machine that uses that light uses X-ray mirrors in order to focus light through the masks and onto chip wafer, optical lenses are practically useless below 100 nm light wavelength). Also, another one could potentially be to stuff a lot more data into holographic crystal with X-ray laser light which means several hundred terabytes or even more since X-ray laser wavelength is so much smaller than the usual Infrared - red laser wavelength. Especially for long-term cold storage since it got a few to no moving parts except for SLMs (including DLP DMD chip) and cooling fan, which in process should generally make it far more reliable than the hard drives. As for those who want to do X-raying the dirty cheap way and you don't want to bother with X-ray tube, you can get "No-Salt" Potassium Chloride salt substitute as the cheapest Gamma-rays source possible, as it turns out it's also radioactive.
Not only does the point of origination matter... nucleus versus electron cloud/orbital... but so does the energy, therefore wavelength. X and gamma rays are no more the same than a '72 Volkswagen beetle and a 2020 Porche Carrerra are.
I worked for a few years at a company that develops dental xray generators, xray sensors, and film. Firstly, you can definitely pick up a used portable dental xray generator for $500. Next, what you're looking for is a beam collimator to target the rays generated. You'll also want to pick up a line pair phantom to determine the resolution of your system. Finally, take a look at flat panel digital detectors. You'll be way happier with the results using digital sensors.
Wait, i remember him saying that eating from theese plates from time to time is not dangerous and now he says that it'd give you heavy metal poisoning? huh
They are still growing them I think. Updates for that are gonna come slow at this stage in all likelihood because the meat fish accouterments need time to grow nicely
Ya making a brane in a jar is a very slow and expensive process we will be getting updates it will just be slow so in the mean time we will just get more grate videos like this one
If to open a Wikipedia article about X-ray, the first line is: An X-ray (also known in many languages as Röntgen radiation) is a form of high-energy electromagnetic radiation with a wavelength shorter than those of ultraviolet rays and longer than those of gamma rays. But anyway, interesting experiment, thanks for sharing.
long ago, they would put film in a manila envelope to take xrays, but film needs a lot of radiation to become exposed. the light box cassette helped reduce that dose a lot. modern xray cassettes do not use film but instead use phosphors that retain the xray image and then can be flashed clean. these require even less xray dosage because you dont need to overcome the film barrier anymore. more modern exam rooms have image receptors that use scintillation chips that are easy activated by xrays, further reducing the dosage needed.
I work on medical software, and we have the opportunity to go in hospital radiology departments and see how they work and get a tour. At one point I said that X-Rays and gamma rays are the same thing and they though I'm stupid. It's nice to see in your video that you mention that they are the same and put an equal sign between them.
@kleavenae wouldn't worry about it ieee and the euro equivalent can't agree on what letters to use for arbitrary chunks of the much lower rf bands of the spectrum. Where space starts in km or freedom units... interstellar space....it's a big list.
They are not the same, there's defined differences in wavelength and energy between both. If you ever had physics in school you'd know that lol, Thought Emporium is utterly wrong here for whatever reason
I know the gamma rays are being blocked by the density of the uranium, but the first thing that popped into my head was "I used the radiation to block the radiation"
This is an excellent video on DIY xray imaging! I used to do neutron radiography with gadolinium oxide image intensifier screens and xray film. It was a big fat mess and I'm glad we've moved on to digital image sensors over stinky film developer fluids! I wish that I had been around when you were making your high voltage xray tube supply. That's literally the kind of thing I do in my spare time. Just off the cuff: you could probably make a very serviceable 70 kV DC supply by using a ZVS (zero voltage switching) circuit to power an AC flyback (no internal diodes) and then connect that to a 4 stage cockcroft walton voltage multiplier. You can order the ZVS circuit and AC flyback online so the only thing left to do is have a 15 to 25 volt power supply to feed the ZVS and the diode multiplier that you already have. Also, pot the diode multiplier so it isn't arcing and corona discharging everywhere.
X-rays and gamma radiation is not the same. X-ray: larger wavelength less penetration lower ionizing ability lower frequency produced by bremsstrahlung radiation (breaking radiation) when beta radiation decelerate near an atomic nuclei, alpha particles interact with matter through ionization, and gamma producing it via the photoelectric effect and Compton scattering. I.e. radiation produces x-rays. Gamma: shorter wavelength Higher penetration higher ionizing ability higher frequency produced by the nucleus of a radioactive atom when it becomes unstable and undergoes radioactive decay. I.e. radioactive isotopes produces gamma radiation. The only similarity is that they're both a type of electromagnetic radiation, meaning they are both photons. To quantify the level of error in saying they are the same is like saying "The infrared light you emit from the heat you got from the campfire is the same as the ultraviolet light emitted by the sun.". This is fucking stupid.
This was my understanding but isn’t there also some overlap in wavelengths at the upper end of x rays and lower end of gamma rays? I think it’s even kind of a blurry line between the softest of x rays and the most extreme ultraviolet light right?
It's not this cut and dry, different fields simply define xrays and gamma based on how they were generated, others draw a line in the EM spectrum. You're just being pedantic, they have very similar properties, unlike UV and infrared which are distinctly different property wise
@@artomix7 It's not just how they are generated, or even the EM spectrum. They behave differently because of their distinct properties in application, intensity, and level of required protection. While it's true that different fields may define X-rays and gamma rays based on their generation or position in the EM spectrum, the distinctions in their properties and behaviours are significant enough to warrant a distinction. These differences are not merely pedantic; they have practical implications in various applications, such as medical imaging, radiation therapy, and nuclear safety. For example, the higher penetration and ionizing ability of gamma rays require more stringent protective measures compared to X-rays. Additionally, the ability of gamma rays to undergo pair production is a unique interaction that X-rays do not exhibit. In scientific discussions, precision is crucial to ensure accurate communication and understanding. Just as UV and infrared light have distinct properties and uses, so do X-rays and gamma rays. Clarity in these distinctions helps us apply the correct safety measures, technologies, and methodologies in various fields.
@@Nosirrbro The only blurry line is inadequate information. Often times one can see X-rays on a overlapping line of gamma. This frankly isn't the case, it's incorrect. Hard x-rays which are the photons above 5-10 keV have the end of their range is 100 keV. Gamma rays start at 100 keV and only go up. It's very much like saying "What's the line between visible light and ultraviolet light? Both are the same.". But lets say for the sake of the argument. 100 keV x-ray and 100 keV gamma ray, the most extreme case mind you. Then and only then do you actually need to look at their origin because they would be indistinguishable. Another way you could look at it is x-rays are from things that are irradiated while gamma rays are from things that are radioactive. Meaning x-rays come from the interactions of bremsstrahlung radiation or electron transition between energy levels in atoms while gamma rays are emitted from the nucleus of atoms during radioactive decay or nuclear reactions. Saying x-ray and gamma rays are the same because they are both high intensity photons is much like the error of rounding Pi down to 1 in astronomy because the distances involved are so astronomically high. Pun intended.
Do you think you could try pulling off the same tricks that are possible with regular light? Like pinhole camera, double slit experiment, sharper image via smaller aperture, etc.? I am not sure if these are worth an entire video, but thought I'll suggest them.
Loved the video! Total shot in the dark, but I would love to see you guys recreate history, and put some regular photo paper in those cassettes and take an x-ray. It might give interesting results. Either way, can’t wait for the next video! Cheers!
1) Radiation self-sanitizes dishware
2) Keeps food warm
3) Add Geiger counter for DIY white noise machine
@@Zoms101 it’s all positives, I can’t see any downside to using this dishware!
@@ErikPelyukhno downside: orange
@@reknoht8562 I happen to like the color orange. You monster.
It also fills your room with radioactive radon gas in case you get bored of breathing regular air.
Another plus is that collectors love it, yet it it is still fairly affordable, at 20 dollars and often much less per piece.
it is literally impossible to guess what the next thought emporium upload will entail
Spiders.
Nah, it's easy to guess.
Guessing correctly, however...
"Nuking my back yard to produce einsteinium"
@@EddieTheHKinda like applied science but more frequent postings and abusing yeast and bacteria DNA for s&g's thrown in.
But eventually it always collapses into a known and observable outcome. ♥️
Seeing the whole cloud chamber condense all at once from the x-ray tube is legitimately terrifying.
Its listed under the category of "GTFO ASAP" moments when in LAB.
"the fog is coming"
24:49 Brother, I was not ready for him to just slap a frozen rat onto the table lol
And a real one as well
Or say he was a snake owner.
reptile owners...
Linguini is worth it
Somehow having a Pet Noodle just seem to fit the whole aesthetic of the channel
Next video: proving that there is life after death using turmeric and hardware store chemicals
i feel like that episode would just be lsd synthesis
Building a hydron collider using an old broom and a hammer
Building a digital computer using Paleolithic tech (ft. Primitive Technology)
Nuclear fusion using plumbing supplies
i misread that as "life after using turmeric and hardware store chemicals"
As someone born 60km from Chornobyl and having just played Stalker 2, hearing the word sarcophagus in the context of ionising radiation just tickles my brain the right way.
Set the zone free, Skif
Are you sure that's not the radiation shooting through your skull?
I've a brain tumor (don't worry, it's not going to kill me any time soon) but as part of the panic of figuring out IF it was the kind that would kill me, I had to have a "nuclear scan" (or at least that's what the doctor referred to it as) where I had radioactive dye injected into my spinal column (my csf) and then they pointed a camera that could detect ionizing radiation at my head and spine and we could see the radioactive fluid LIVE on camera. That way they could see if there were act leaks in my csf or if the radioactive fluid was getting into other parts of my body or blood. They also put cotton swabs into my nose and mouth and then afterward they scanned the cotton for radiation to see if any of it leaked out. It's was fascinating seeing my brain in 3d live. Even better, at some point I had a CT scan while the fluid was still in my head and I swear to God, while the CT scan was on, I could see through my own eyelids. I seriously had x-Ray vision for a short period. I could see through the table I was on, I could see the X-ray emitters light up. According to a radiologist I mentioned it to later he said they've had other patients not the effect and his best guess was that it had something to do with cherenkov (sp?) radiation, but there was no real way to study the effect safely for obvious reasons.
The things you saw we're blue? If yes it was Cherenkov radiation
@Kepler3-bspecifically a ghostly cyan blue.
@Kepler3-bBlue could also come from radioactive particles activating neurons within his visual cortex rather than producing photons that he directly saw although that would probably take wayyyy more radiation than is possible here
This sounds kinda similar to an effect many astronauts have reported-apparently most of them have noticed sporadic bright blue flashes, even with their eyes closed, while they’re in space. It’s theorized to be Cherenkov radiation produced by radioactive particles interacting with the vitreous humor in the eyes, but it also hasn’t really been tested for obvious reasons
Cool! Good luck with the tumor, yo
Fiestaware is the forbidden fruit for vintage collectors. It's poison, but god. wouldn't a hot serving of chicken noodle soup go so hard in one of those bowls?
Any soup you'd put in there would be hot for sure
You could always opt for uranium infused glass bowl, still cool but without the lead and Much less likely to chip/leach into what you’re eating. (The glaze isn’t just uranium, but has a shockingly high lead content, which to me is way scarier than the uranium!)
@@HuheJass True, you don't need very much Uranium at all to get the cool effects from it, but lead? If any amount is used it's probably going to be too much, the fact that it was used AT ALL for these kinds of applications is tragedy enough but it was used fucking EVERYWHERE, humanity as a whole is STILL recovering from the widespread use of leaded gasoline... unlike lead, uranium at least has the decency to kill you quicker and more obviously.
Hot in more ways than one haha
@@HuheJass lead glass is still a thing, so if that's something you're afraid of, watch out for that I guess!
There is still some distinction between X- and gamma rays; I'm in astro and the difference I'm aware of is in energy; X-rays are keV-type energies and gammas are MeV-type energies. (Which makes sense, since nuclear interactions - as in minerals - have MeV energies and the strongest reasonable electromagnetic interactions have keV energies)
yeah, you wouldn't want a gamma ray image of your body. It's not very useful for that. It's like saying a red wavelength is the same as a blue one because they're both visible and interact photoelectrically
Gamma rays would produce x-rays when scattering though, no?
That's a definition, but the issue is the definitions aren't consistent. Some say "if it somes from an atom it's a gamma ray", but you get gammas with Kev energy. If you define it as the mev cutoff, then why does every gamma spectrometer start in the kev range? Without a clear and consistent definition, the cutoff is arbitrary and meaningless.
That sounds quite arbitrary and post-hoc reasoning to say that the _intensity_ of the radiation makes it different _type_ of radiation.
It is equivalent of running a light bulb first with 50% intensity a then 100% intensity and claiming the light they produce is completely different type. But no, that's not quite how it works.
@anteshell it's not, otherwise infrared is the same as gamma rays. X-rays are rays that can be produces in an electric tube
Part of my day job involves frequently x-raying electronics assemblies to check for solder quality, and it never gets old to be able to see inside of stuff. Seeing the plates clearly within a capacitor, seeing the coils inside of potted inductors/transformers, seeing the semiconductors inside of large diodes, it's so fun. We even sometimes use the x-ray machines to inspect wires that we suspect are broken from our other equipment to find where the fault is.
Ooo that's cool! I lowkey want to see that now 😂
Do you have another x-ray machine to diagnose the other in case it ever breaks? 😅
@@ErikPelyukhno haha, we do have three of the same xray machine, so theoretically yes
@@ErikPelyukhno That's why he's watching this video ;-)
Being able to x-ray a wire harness to find a break would be awesome
dude, your videos are insanely cool!!!!!!!!!
it just doesn't stop getting better, minute after minute
My only criticism is that, no, we absolutely cannot use "x ray" and "gamma ray" interchangeably, just like we cannot use "radio waves" and "microwaves", or "red light" and "blue light" interchangeably. The bands are pretty well defined by their properties.
"it's all just photons man, chill out..."
thanks for keeping up a higher standard. distinctions are vital!
He does touch on where they are emitted from matters.
@@DemocracyDiesInDarkness It's not just where they're emitted from, it's the wavelengths (or inversely frequency).
Xrays go from 10 nanometer to 10 picometer wavelengths. Gamma starts at 10 picometer and is anything shorter than that.
@@PendragonDaGreatno, it’s entirely where they are from. Gamma rays are photons emitted from the nucleus. All other high-energy photons are x-rays
Says who? I've always seen gamma rays as higher frequency than x-rays, just like blue light is higher frequency than red light.
25:24 FULL BRIDGE RECTIFIER SPOTTED
Boom boom
That's actually not a full bridge rectifier. It's a voltage multiplier. Different circuit, used for a different purpose. (but ElectroBOOM has played with voltage multipliers too)
0:15 Yeah.. so what? It keeps your meal warm while you eat it! 🤣🤣🤣
lol
The emojis ruined the joke in my opinion
@@MonkeyBoy0918nah you ruined it more than the emojis for me
@@MonkeyBoy0918 People emoji-laughing at their own jokes is an absolute pet peeve of mine.
how would it make it warm
"accidentally demonstrating fundamental properties of physics" is probably something you do for fun at least once a week
"Instead, the American military wanted it so they could rapidly redecorate the Nevada desert ... and ... parts of Japan" is one heck of a line, haha.
"Pleased to report that (the mummy) tastes awful." Only on this channel would that be an expected sentence.
Now I've got to go check out the mummy video I've been sitting on.
I think the reason I literally cannot stop coming back to this channel is because the topics are so varied, and so amazingly interesting
I have found VERY few channels that truly make me want to chase my mad scientist dreams and become a super villain such as this one
Please for the love of god, stay evil
3:57 forbidden salmon
So that’s what the salmonids are! /ref
yummy salmon
Radioactive Grandma? This is the content I'm here for.
That's why grandmas are superheroes!!!
Grandma got run over by a hydrogen bomb......
I managed to misread the title as ashes instead of dishes, and i was very confused about why his grandma was radioactive
Sweet old radma
This video has everything; radio photography, chicken mummy, danger noodle....
This was interesting. I worked as a F/W Engineer at Bicron 20 some years ago until Thermo took over and sent it to Mexico. I still have a Surveyor M meter. I also worked at Philips Healthcare on a CT/PET scanner project (software). When that was finished, they shipped it all to Israel and shuttered the facility. Lots of interesting stuff they worked on.
17:25 it is a terrifying thing to hear a geiger counter sound like a tuning fork
the only thing that would be on mine mind then would be 'run run run run'
That's not the "geiger counter" itself that you're hearing (i.e. you're not hearing the sound of individual particles being detected). Many radiation detectors can be set to sound an alarm when they detect radiation over a certain level (i.e. levels that are seriously dangerous to humans, etc). I'm pretty sure in that shot we're just hearing the speaker in the unit sounding an alert tone because the level is above it's programmed "danger" threshold.
I thought that the difference between x-rays and gamma rays was wavelength. Every EM chart I’ve seen has the waves after visible light listed in order of ultraviolet - x-rays - gamma rays.
I’m confused by your statement.
If x-rays are the same as gamma rays then we might as well say the same thing about microwaves and radio waves, or uv-visible-IR light. They are all classified by wavelength/energy, even though they are all technically electromagnetic waves
That's what I thought, too. But after thinking about it for a bit, I'm pretty sure he's right. Everything i can think of that purportedly produces X-rays, including the X-ray machines of the 60s, either are literally radioactive objects producing gamma radiation, or are producing higher energy rays than those gamma sources. So gamma radiation and x-rays must inhabit the same part of the EM spectrum.
As for the historical side, that's definitely true. Gamma rays were discovered by a chemist studying rocks and X-rays by a physicist with vacuum tubes.
You're right, and Thought Emporium is utterly confusingly wrong in this case. The cut off wavelength between both seems to be around 0.01 nm.
@@Natibe_
I think all x-rays are a kind of gamma radiation, but not all gamma radiation is made of x-rays.
Bad naming conventions are bad.
@frostyelkk xrays are from electrons shifting energy levels and interacting with matter. An electron in a synclatron generates xrays, a SEM produces xrays ( backscatter spectroscopy amd EDX both analyse xrays produced from the interaction of the electrons in an SEM)
Gamma rays are the result of nuclear decay of atoms
7:45 Actually, not exactly. X-rays are not just usually limited with the energy of around ~10⁵ eV, there is more to it. The radiation named X-rays is also 1. human made, 2. has a property to get absorbed by some materials to make it useful for something, like X-ray photography. It's not useful to shine high energy gamma rays on a person to make pictures of their bones or tissues because gamma rays are too penetrative to easily distinguish one from another. Although, gamma radiation can also be less than 10⁵ eV of energy, if a particular kind of nuclear decay or another process emits this kind of photons.
7:45 although they are both high energy photons, x-rays and gamma rays are *not* interchangeable.
A gamma ray is produced via nuclear interactions or matter/anti-matter annihilations.
An x-ray is produced by the deceleration of high energy charged particles, typically electrons.
As a medical physicist, this distinction is actually important because both are used in radiation therapy. Gamma rays produced by Co-60 are/were used in teletherapy machines (not so much anymore in America but they’re still popular in places that don’t have super stable power supplies) as well as in modern Gamma-knife machines.
X-rays are what are used in most radiation therapy machines in the US, which are linear accelerators (LINACS).
Anyways, great video as always
X-rays are gamma rays are not interchangable. It's an arbitrary distinction since it's all just EM radiation, but people use it. X-rays are less energetic and can come even from atomic transitions. Gamma is usually the name for radiation from nuclear transitions and are more energetic than X-rays.
Generally, x-rays are gamma rays(under some definitions), but not all gamma rays are x-rays
I'm 1:04 in and have just spent half an hour reading about the Nevada Test Site, only now popping back over and remembering we were gonna X-ray something with a dinner plate. Lol. Love this channel
FINALLY a good sponsor read, I'm so tired of the obviously fake and boring sponsor segments interrupting my video and I'm so happy to see someone actually integrate one into their content in a constructive way
I don't remember X-rays and Gamma rays to be the same thing : X-rays are mainly produced from high energy plasma through Bremsstrahlung. The energies involved are at most 100keV. Gamma rays on the other hand are emitted by transformations in the nucleus level at energies at the MeV range
High speed electrons are not plasma captain. Usually the vacuum in xray tubes is very good.
i just know that x-rays are a lower frequency range while gamma rays are higher
Americium 241 have energy pick at 24 and 55 keV
A chemistry enthusiast from Australia was recently charged and now faces court due to importing a periodic table containing small samples of all possible elements. One of the samples was a cube containing an estimated 350 atoms of plutonium.
Your next video should be a practical instructional to build a an open source desktop cyclotron, and link all the files.
This way I can go to court to support this guy, carrying my own sample (A sample I didn’t import) as a way of protesting the absolute absurdity of this.
Surely you wouldn't really be able to do much with 350 atoms of Plutonium, right? You wouldn't even be able to see it without an electron microscope.
@@KurosakiYukigo correct. I postulated that given the sample size, one could even break open the container and eat the contents if they wished, without any negative effect. Given that the distances between objects at this scale are so massive, and that activity depends on quantity. The chances of a single decay (and all children of that decay chain) having the exact trajectory and timing required to cause any non reversible generic ionisation event is astronomically low. Further more, I believe that anyone born after the 1970s has almost certainly bioaccumulated more Pu than this, and carries this inside them at all times, including when they cross borders on any flight. This is a result of decades of weapons testing and also notable historic reactor incidents, where by materials containing PU were released into the environment, eventually making their way to every corner of the earth, and ultimately into earths biosphere.
Failing a diy cyclotron (because let’s be real for a second lol) my next best option is to take a handful of uranium rocks with me from the ground. These will be many orders of magnitude hotter, and contain a much higher mass of fissile material, which would also technically be considered a restricted nuclear material under the law.
350 atoms? Are sure it wasn't like 350mg or something, because that is insane.
There are some Vinyl record anti static brushes that contain plutonium. I just find it weird that Australia is considered a top 5 democracy, when you can barely do any electrical work by yourself, a journalist got firebombed, a battery company is suing a small UA-camr for saying factual information and someone is getting sued for potentially importing some radioactive atoms
I’ve been watching you since 50k subs and it makes me so happy to not see you guys struggle financially / motivation-wise. Always one of my favorite channels, everything you guys do is so cool.
18:48 would be a cool double-slit experiment visualization
Yesss, that's what I was gonna comment
X-Rays and Gamma rays are both high energy photons but the difference is from where they originate. X-Rays are from the electron cloud and Gamma rays are from the Nucleus. Now Academically they are not the same thing and you will really piss off your co-worker who is a Health Physicist by saying that they are the same (speaking from experience). Practically from a detection and interaction standpoint they are both high energy photons and their interactions with matter are the same and are driven by the energy of the photon not from where it originated. Its like saying the Atlantic and Pacific oceans are the same thing. From a practical standpoint they are both large saline bodies of water and there is some overlap between them. Boat designs don't need to be optimized or specialized for either ocean within reason. Academically they are not the same thing because they are in different locations.
i thought x-rays had longer wavelengths than gamma rays. like how visible light has longer wavelengths than ultraviolet. visible light is not the same thing as ultraviolet light. so im confused as to why people keep saying gamma rays and x-rays the same thing. x-rays have wavelengths around 10^-10 meters, while gamma rays have wavelengths around 10^-12 meters. thats what i was taught in school.
@@S0difX-rays are photons higher than a certain energy. Gamma rays are photons emitted from the nucleus. It so happens that the weakest gamma rays are well beyond the threshold for photons to be called x-rays, and it’s rare (but not unheard of) for x-rays to be in the energy levels of typical γ-rays, so people often, technically incorrectly, treat them as simply different energy categories of regular old light
That doesn't make them different things, it just makes them _the same thing that comes from different sources._ Your ocean example is a bit flawed, too. It's more like claiming "that stuff comes out of wells in the ground isn't actually water, because water can only come from rain, not from the ground".
We don't categorize EM radiation (or any other elementary particles) based on its source, we do it based on its physical properties (i.e. wavelength). If two photons have the same energy level, they are fundamentally indistinguishable from each other, and therefore they are the same kind of radiation. It doesn't matter how they were produced.
(Also, what about, for example, high-energy photons produced by the event horizon of a black hole, or high-energy collisions in a supercollider? Those don't come from either "the electron cloud" or from "the nucleus". Are those also some new forms of radiation that should have yet different names?)
Originally, way back when, X-Rays and gamma rays were based on the source, because people didn't know any better. In modern science, they are generally not distinguished from each other, or are distinguished based on wavelength. Most people do consider there to arguably be a difference (X-rays are lower energy, and gamma rays are higher energy), but the dividing point is not well defined, and different people have different ideas of where it should be. However, for most practical purposes, it doesn't matter that much, so nobody's worked that hard to try to standardize it, that's all.
@ They are different phenomena, but not different *things*
I’m not saying they’re substantively, measurably different. They’re both EM waves, they just originate at different places (information which is meaningful to humans, but not to the physics of the wave)
To be clear,
High-energy photons in supercolliders are gamma rays if they from from the nucleus relaxing, and are X-rays if they come from anything else. However, people will **colloquially** refer to X-rays above a certain energy (with an ill-defined cutoff) as gamma rays, despite it not being technically accurate
@@IanBLacy best explanation I have heard of how they are different and that includes a couple actual health physicists.
The rear Elements of some vintage camera lenses have radioactive thorium.
You can also use old watches, they have radium.
My dad was photography professor and insists that the thorium glass lenses produced a clearer picture.
@@nicholasneyhart396I had both radioactive and normal variants of a Carl Zeiss Pancolar lens from 1960s. The hot one was definitely sharper.
@@nicholasneyhart396yes, it was't added for shits and giggles, the thorium was added because it improved optical quality, and it did.
We have better coatings nowadays but it was better than contemporary throium free alternatives.
Also, it is not the radiation that makes them better, that's a side effect what, if anything, can make the coating degrade over the decades.
@alfepalfe I don't think anyone thought that radiation was what made the thorium glass better, it was just that it had better optical properties.
@Марк.Фетнов Yes, that is the exact model my dad has. He bought one in 1972 with his first camera.
Wow! I learned so much from this video! I never knew a cloud chamber could show x/gamma rays. How come no one ever mentioned that? And concentrated uranium products get more radioactive as the daughter products develop. How come no one ever mentioned that? This is such a great video. Thank you!
High voltage supply that can be taken apart: big zapper tennis racket. I use these for my cloud chamber and they're very easy to power externally.
Awesome video as usual!
Really nice man, those visuals were amazing. I've never seen x-rays from an electronic source visualized like that in a cloud chamber; the sheer noise is insane. Same for the pained wailings of your detectors. Great video!
I genuinely would eat a dinner served to me on that plate, and I've seen enough videos discussing how objects from that time were coated in radioactive materal for one reason or another (colour) to recognize the "hot" plate immediately.
Of course, I'd be using my cutlery very carefully and probably won't want to eat off it AGAIN, but to see it "in use" just once in person would be neat.
Cool, try a parachute jump once too, sans parachute.
Iirc the bigger issue with uranium fiestaware isn't the radioactivity but the risk of heavy metal poisoning from the uranium.
Dont eat anything acidic on Fiestaware (which can leach uranium into food) and ceramics tend to be strong enough that as long as you aren't using excessive force to eat your food, you dont need to worry too much about damaging the fiestaware)
Fun fact about the history of xrays. As early as 1896 people knew they could be dangerous, a while back I has reading "The Phonoscope", a magazee from the mid-late 1890s that's all about the phonograph and amusement machine industry, and in almost all of the issues there's blerbs about people getting "sunburned" from xray tubes, and the safest way to use them.
A Crookes tube is scarily easy to make and last time I looked, there were tons of plans on Ebay. They don't require a hard vacuum or anything.
Once at a town history museum they had a shoe store x-ray machine. Apparently in the 1920s (?) it was a thing to stick your foot in this undoubtedly dangerous box to somehow help the shoe salesman get you better shoes. I was astounded.
I absolutely love collecting uranium glass from antique stores. Uranium glass is both much more common and much safer for use than fiesta ware (given that it won't produce dust if broken), and it looks cooler. Unfortunately, uranium glass often seems to be from the same manufacturer and the same style of very thick-walled wine glasses. But recently I was able to find a thin-walled regular drinking glass for only $10. I don't actually use them anymore, but back in college a few years ago, I would use a uranium glass wine glass every once in a while for a quick drink of water.
The flyback transformers you used, output dc, they have an internal diode stack in them to send out dc, that's why it didn't work with the multiplier
0:15 why wouldn't I be? My food will always be sterile with that plate. No more 5 second rule for me!
and soon enough your insides will be too, it's a win-win!!
If you tried to use the blue-sensitive film with the green-emitting cassette, that would explain why you were not getting any images. In terms of pigments like inks and dyes, green is made of yellow and blue, but when speaking of light green is a primary color (there is no blue in green light). X-ray film is primarily sensitive to visible light, which is why the intensifying screens are required (they absorb x-rays and emit photons of colored light). If you have green intensifying screens you would need green-sensitive film.
6:00 this stuff is absolutely fascinating!
I would eat off the plate. Wouldn't put it under my pillow, and if I broke it, I'd vacate the premises, but eating off it would be okay.
Also, I've always been taught that X-rays and gamma rays differ in frequency, with gamma rays taking up the highest frequencies and X-rays sitting between ultraviolet and gamma rays.
I did eat off of Fiesta plates many times when I was little. My grandmother had a set that was used quite often back in the 1960's.
Small correction:
X-Ray gas wavelength between 1 nanometer and 10 picometer
And Gammaray has a wavelength between 10 picometer and 100 femtometer
Thus Grammarays and X-rays are NOT the same (Gammarays are a lot more powerful)
In reality they have an overlap in their energies. All the x-ray and gamma terms mean is one comes from the electron and the other from the nucleus. Gamma rays from the nucleus are generally higher energy.
There are different sources denoting that they are separate but yes there are also ones saying the hard X-ray goes up to 1 picometer and those also say that the soft X-rays go up to "several 10nm" (XAFS Analysis and Applications to Carbons and Catalysts, Hiromi Yamashita)
It is worth noting that despite the daughter isotopes being highly radioactive, they will be present in tiny concentrations due to equilibrium such that their radioactivity alone no longer exceed uranium itself
My mom gave me one of these from my grandmas old set when I moved into my first apartment. Ended up eating off of it for a couple of years before realizing it. I cope by believing in radiation hormesis.
Cloud chambers are so fascinating. Thank you for showing and talking about it for a good while in detail.
6:32 That "Ick!" got me
As a fellow protogen I personally think radiation is very tasty and seasons my ram excellently
9:33 I like how you casually got a .50 BMG round as a paperweight for some reason 😆
Considering the topic of the video and the stuff these guys deal with, I wouldn't be surprised if it was an actual uranium tip round. Naturally, that would not be something to be disclosed in YT video as even owning those may constitute as a war crime.
@@anteshell Canadians committing war crimes? Sounds farfetched... Want some corned beef?
One of my teachers had a depleted uranium tank round as a paper weight
Thing had some heft!
@@simoncleret I mean, in Canada it is a war crime if you shoot towards enemy with a bullet that you hadn't engraved with apologies, so it's not really that far fetched.
@@anteshell if it is uranium ,it is probably depleted uranium
10:26 Dark Room Baeg
ElectroBOOM’s magic wand could probably drive the arc of your X-ray tube.
You better throw a festival to avoid upsetting the ghost of Hennifer
"At some point we just started x-ray-ing anything that we thought would even vaguely look cool" - Basically everyone who discovered x-rays
THANK YOU for explaining that new geiger counter tech. That's SO COOL I love it.
What would happen if you put some Rhenium metal in the chamber? The elements most common isotope in nature is unstable, with a half life of around 45 billion years! The half life of rhenium can also be lowered to 33 years when fully ionized, it would be interesting to get this phenomenon on camera, since I don’t believe it has ever been done before. I appreciate all of your uploads, especially ones relating to synthetic opal, I look forward to seeing your next uploads
I’m sorry but did you say “genetic engineering tarot card poster?” Because I would buy a full deck of genetic engineering tarot cards.
This is the most interesting thing I've watched this year.
Thank you.
17:23 if your geiger counter makes a noise like that, it's called a "drop and run" scenario, I don't think I need to explain why
we build a switch for the switch.. yes that's the pure engineering jank I love
This is by far one of THE very best science channels on this godforsaken app.
I cannot express how frickin' cool the x-ray shadow picture is! When you showed it first without even commenting on it, I had to pause the video and stare at it for a good while. It's just so evocative!
I was not surprised to learn you got a cute pet danger noodle! beautiful snake!
X-rays also have a lot more use compared to just taking pictures of your bones - its recent application is of chip production (even though 13.5 nanometers EUV isn't really X-ray, it still behave like it so it's considered super soft X-rays, thus the machine that uses that light uses X-ray mirrors in order to focus light through the masks and onto chip wafer, optical lenses are practically useless below 100 nm light wavelength).
Also, another one could potentially be to stuff a lot more data into holographic crystal with X-ray laser light which means several hundred terabytes or even more since X-ray laser wavelength is so much smaller than the usual Infrared - red laser wavelength. Especially for long-term cold storage since it got a few to no moving parts except for SLMs (including DLP DMD chip) and cooling fan, which in process should generally make it far more reliable than the hard drives.
As for those who want to do X-raying the dirty cheap way and you don't want to bother with X-ray tube, you can get "No-Salt" Potassium Chloride salt substitute as the cheapest Gamma-rays source possible, as it turns out it's also radioactive.
X-ray holograms when? :P
Great video
Not only does the point of origination matter... nucleus versus electron cloud/orbital... but so does the energy, therefore wavelength. X and gamma rays are no more the same than a '72 Volkswagen beetle and a 2020 Porche Carrerra are.
Just adds a little heat to your food a little radiation never hurt anybody LMAO
I worked for a few years at a company that develops dental xray generators, xray sensors, and film. Firstly, you can definitely pick up a used portable dental xray generator for $500. Next, what you're looking for is a beam collimator to target the rays generated. You'll also want to pick up a line pair phantom to determine the resolution of your system. Finally, take a look at flat panel digital detectors. You'll be way happier with the results using digital sensors.
Wait, i remember him saying that eating from theese plates from time to time is not dangerous and now he says that it'd give you heavy metal poisoning? huh
Eating acidic food on them is bad and moderation is key
These videos are always so nerdy and out of left field...I love it!
Rays for everyone!
It would be awesome to see a collaboration video with you and the slow-mo guys filming the cloud chamber detecting particles
Please do more on mini brains and lab grown organs
They are still growing them I think. Updates for that are gonna come slow at this stage in all likelihood because the meat fish accouterments need time to grow nicely
Ya making a brane in a jar is a very slow and expensive process we will be getting updates it will just be slow so in the mean time we will just get more grate videos like this one
4:00 okay, phisics is cool and all but just look at that piece of plate, it looks soo magical. Very beautyfull
If to open a Wikipedia article about X-ray, the first line is: An X-ray (also known in many languages as Röntgen radiation) is a form of high-energy electromagnetic radiation with a wavelength shorter than those of ultraviolet rays and longer than those of gamma rays. But anyway, interesting experiment, thanks for sharing.
long ago, they would put film in a manila envelope to take xrays, but film needs a lot of radiation to become exposed. the light box cassette helped reduce that dose a lot. modern xray cassettes do not use film but instead use phosphors that retain the xray image and then can be flashed clean. these require even less xray dosage because you dont need to overcome the film barrier anymore. more modern exam rooms have image receptors that use scintillation chips that are easy activated by xrays, further reducing the dosage needed.
I work on medical software, and we have the opportunity to go in hospital radiology departments and see how they work and get a tour. At one point I said that X-Rays and gamma rays are the same thing and they though I'm stupid. It's nice to see in your video that you mention that they are the same and put an equal sign between them.
@kleavenae wouldn't worry about it ieee and the euro equivalent can't agree on what letters to use for arbitrary chunks of the much lower rf bands of the spectrum. Where space starts in km or freedom units... interstellar space....it's a big list.
They are not the same, there's defined differences in wavelength and energy between both. If you ever had physics in school you'd know that lol, Thought Emporium is utterly wrong here for whatever reason
9:03 it still is! Used to carry around an iridium, selenium, or cobalt x-ray camera. The thing uses uranium to shield from the gamma rays.
I know the gamma rays are being blocked by the density of the uranium, but the first thing that popped into my head was
"I used the radiation to block the radiation"
This has some William Osman vibes
Just with the "knowing what you are doing" parameter a factor of 1000 higher
This is an excellent video on DIY xray imaging! I used to do neutron radiography with gadolinium oxide image intensifier screens and xray film. It was a big fat mess and I'm glad we've moved on to digital image sensors over stinky film developer fluids!
I wish that I had been around when you were making your high voltage xray tube supply. That's literally the kind of thing I do in my spare time. Just off the cuff: you could probably make a very serviceable 70 kV DC supply by using a ZVS (zero voltage switching) circuit to power an AC flyback (no internal diodes) and then connect that to a 4 stage cockcroft walton voltage multiplier. You can order the ZVS circuit and AC flyback online so the only thing left to do is have a 15 to 25 volt power supply to feed the ZVS and the diode multiplier that you already have. Also, pot the diode multiplier so it isn't arcing and corona discharging everywhere.
36 seconds in 17 views? bro got up
The first UA-camr sponsor product i actually have some form of interest in
1:55 half life??!?
3 Confirmed
5:59
11 hours ago??? evil magic
Yes?
@@nisseost1 (it's a game reference)
“My desire to have the thing exceeded my desire to learn all the skills to make the thing” lol. I know this feeling so well
X-rays and gamma radiation is not the same.
X-ray:
larger wavelength
less penetration
lower ionizing ability
lower frequency
produced by bremsstrahlung radiation (breaking radiation) when beta radiation decelerate near an atomic nuclei, alpha particles interact with matter through ionization, and gamma producing it via the photoelectric effect and Compton scattering. I.e. radiation produces x-rays.
Gamma:
shorter wavelength
Higher penetration
higher ionizing ability
higher frequency
produced by the nucleus of a radioactive atom when it becomes unstable and undergoes radioactive decay. I.e. radioactive isotopes produces gamma radiation.
The only similarity is that they're both a type of electromagnetic radiation, meaning they are both photons.
To quantify the level of error in saying they are the same is like saying "The infrared light you emit from the heat you got from the campfire is the same as the ultraviolet light emitted by the sun.". This is fucking stupid.
This was my understanding but isn’t there also some overlap in wavelengths at the upper end of x rays and lower end of gamma rays? I think it’s even kind of a blurry line between the softest of x rays and the most extreme ultraviolet light right?
It's not this cut and dry, different fields simply define xrays and gamma based on how they were generated, others draw a line in the EM spectrum. You're just being pedantic, they have very similar properties, unlike UV and infrared which are distinctly different property wise
@@artomix7 It's not just how they are generated, or even the EM spectrum. They behave differently because of their distinct properties in application, intensity, and level of required protection.
While it's true that different fields may define X-rays and gamma rays based on their generation or position in the EM spectrum, the distinctions in their properties and behaviours are significant enough to warrant a distinction. These differences are not merely pedantic; they have practical implications in various applications, such as medical imaging, radiation therapy, and nuclear safety.
For example, the higher penetration and ionizing ability of gamma rays require more stringent protective measures compared to X-rays. Additionally, the ability of gamma rays to undergo pair production is a unique interaction that X-rays do not exhibit.
In scientific discussions, precision is crucial to ensure accurate communication and understanding. Just as UV and infrared light have distinct properties and uses, so do X-rays and gamma rays. Clarity in these distinctions helps us apply the correct safety measures, technologies, and methodologies in various fields.
@@Nosirrbro The only blurry line is inadequate information.
Often times one can see X-rays on a overlapping line of gamma. This frankly isn't the case, it's incorrect. Hard x-rays which are the photons above 5-10 keV have the end of their range is 100 keV. Gamma rays start at 100 keV and only go up.
It's very much like saying "What's the line between visible light and ultraviolet light? Both are the same.".
But lets say for the sake of the argument.
100 keV x-ray and 100 keV gamma ray, the most extreme case mind you.
Then and only then do you actually need to look at their origin because they would be indistinguishable.
Another way you could look at it is x-rays are from things that are irradiated while gamma rays are from things that are radioactive.
Meaning x-rays come from the interactions of bremsstrahlung radiation or electron transition between energy levels in atoms while gamma rays are emitted from the nucleus of atoms during radioactive decay or nuclear reactions.
Saying x-ray and gamma rays are the same because they are both high intensity photons is much like the error of rounding Pi down to 1 in astronomy because the distances involved are so astronomically high. Pun intended.
@@SecretLars Nice chatGPT nonsense lmao
The main threat of fiestaware is if the dish is damaged. At that point it can deposit particles into the food.
This is grandma‘s secret ingredient?
The uranium hotpot recipe is delicious
Looking forward to the next installment.
They call me the alpha cuz I'm the biggest but I also got low prnetrating power
Do you think you could try pulling off the same tricks that are possible with regular light? Like pinhole camera, double slit experiment, sharper image via smaller aperture, etc.? I am not sure if these are worth an entire video, but thought I'll suggest them.
I never knew x-rays and gamma rays were the same. I thought they occupied different (but adjacent) parts of the spectrum
They are not the same, they have distinct defined difference in wavelength and energy. Thought Emporium is utterly wrong here.
Yup, X-rays are slightly longer in wavelength than gamma rays. Shorter wavelength is higher energy.
25:00 aww, snake ❤
I really likem these cool and really cute animals :D
I work and an xray machine company and may be able to get you a small lead chamber. If you're interested, send me a dm.
Shoot us an email!
Always an informative pleasure! Happy holidays guys
How are you guys able to comment *11 hours* ago this guy just poster 💀
Patreons get early access.
They got a channel membership for early videos.
8:33 Perfect physics joke with a British comedy film! XD
im one of those annoying people who scream in comments that they're early
Loved the video! Total shot in the dark, but I would love to see you guys recreate history, and put some regular photo paper in those cassettes and take an x-ray. It might give interesting results. Either way, can’t wait for the next video! Cheers!