Gamma Radiation Shielding

The optimist in me hopes a product is coming out of a lab in the near future

For all we know it might be as simple as laminated layers of materials like bronze mesh , lead sheet and reflective elements to break down Gamma Radiation in a similar way to how layers of multi density rubber foams are used in sound wave suppression.

Anyone sitting around idle in a multi million dollar radiation test facility that wants to play like Thomas Edison with the first light bulbs ??

:)

Is there something you're not telling us??

Not sure there is anything better than lead.........but even that has it's bad side.

Lead ? the bad side is weight , volume and price to cover 40 square metres of walls (and the fact you wouldnt eat it or lick it when bored)

not telling you what ? lol

I am just looking at the current state of global relations and wondering what the options are if it gets silly.....

That's it!

Mass density is the secret, so what could be better than lead?

Simple. Neutron star material.

Talk about a load!

Gamma rays are some of the most energetic forms of radiation.

It will be far simpler and cheaper not to be where the radiation is.

what about first responders and mil personnel who can't do their job while sitting 10 feet underground for 5 weeks ? It's possible there will never be an effective shielding material , or then again ............. ?

One suggestion I've seen to reduce the radiation exposure, is to lie down with your feet in the direction of the blast, exposing the minimum surface area to the radiation flux.

If you see where it's coming from, it's almost certainly too late.

Neutron star material sounds cheap enough , can you pop out and grab me a space shuttle full ? :) . There is an answer to every problem IMO .

My answer is that I am too busy. Maybe Russia will be interested - for a price.

However, please be patient. The closest neutron star is about 400 light years away.

Yes, nothing is impossible, but somethings are impractical.

I think it is a bit unstable...better stick with lead.

http://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/10052/what-would-happen-to-a-teaspoon-of-neutron-star-material-if-released-on-earth

<...It will be far simpler and cheaper not to be where the radiation is...> Like Pluto, for instance?

Concerning nuclear weapons, having sweated through the Cuban Missile Crisis, I propose that the current state of global relations is actually a whole lot better than in 1962. There were definitely high ranking people in the USSR ready to push the "big red button", and probably in the USA as well. At that time we had 2 super powers at each others throat with the capability of destroying most of civilization, and both sides playing a game of "chicken" with the other. For now, the really angry groups don't have the capability of that. Some local devastation perhaps, but not global.

1962 was before my time so I don't know the fear in the air during it.

Small bands of tear- a-wrists are unlikely to wipe out whole cities , they are hopefully only more of a nuisance factor . But North Korea has the insanity to start it with the risk of the two largest communist nations on earth holding hands and stepping into it , or the largest sino group might decide to take revenge for Nanking , they must be busting at the bit to win a war against someone (for the first time) .

Where could it go ?

Hopefully it never happens , but it doesn't hurt to create a response initiative .

Or the middle East...

The black flag group has hundreds of millions of $$$ If they do manage to buy one , there is a 70 % chance they would blow themselves up or a 70 % chance they would get intercepted if they tried to transport it into a western democracy

My present (4th) wife, was working at Pan-Tex as admin asst for the Colonel in charge back during the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962. She was 18-19 yoa, federal employee, married, 8 months pregnant, and in high heels when the call came from the Pentagon to alert the Colonel that we stood at DEFCON 2. She ran down a poorly paved road surface at a full sprint in heels, in her delicate condition to get the Full Bird. DEFCON 1 is missiles in air, and it is on like Donkey Kong. DEFCON 2 is all sites should be on launch standby with keys in locks. Pan-Tex would never have been a launch center (to my knowledge, but I am just a poor lumberjack), but would have been about 6 inches from ground zero by launches from Cuba. Not to mention both east and west coasts, in-between, and the Gulf Coast.

When this happened, I was in the second grade. Makes you think, but my wife is the meanest, sturdiest, sternest, stubbornest, laser-eyed, Texas-born woman I have ever known. If she was only half as mean, I would have left her, thinking it safe to do so.

Nothing that impressive to report. I was a 7th grader and just old enough to understand what the danger was. I traveled in a group of "nerds" so we were all talking about it and scared half crazy. I think that half the kids in my class never did understand what was going on, but my little group had a fair idea of what was possibly coming down on us.

The Soviet sub commander who refused to push the launch button (one of three with the keys on that boat, including a communist party official), was at first vilified by his country, then later awarded a medal for averting what would have been the most tragic event in human history.

We should all remember to pray for the cooler heads in any situation, but time is running out where the cool heads will not be the ones in control of nuclear arsenals. When Iran gets the bomb, I can safely predict (along with the Donald) that there will be a nuclear holocaust, and not just on Israel (whom we should be the closest ally with, and should be protecting to the highest level of our ability, but we are not).

We are headed down a path leading to destruction of civilization, possibly our species, and possibly all life on the planet, and our "leader" plays golf. It is reminiscent of Calligula on his floating palace, or Nero playing the fiddle while Rome burned. If anyone thinks this is political, in one sense it is, but in another sense, it is intended to be purely factual, and a stern warning to those who do not see doom approaching.

If we decide to protect Israel 'to the highest level of our ability', shouldn't they pay US federal taxes? Perhaps they could offset the cost by curtailing some of their lobbying.

Basically, one does not in this world, take a dump on our closest ally in the world (or the top 2-3 or top ten) as this admin has done, and win more friends and allies. It just shows off the weaknesses (which are legion as we speak), and the insanity of the present foreign policy, which really AFAICT is no policy other than retreat.

Even the French are laughing at us right now.

Framing the problem as a choice between only 'protecting to the best of our ability' or 'taking a dump on'; isn't very helpful.

.

I do not take dumps on my neighbor, but when all hell breaks loose, my house is what I will protect to the best of my ability. Being a strong ally does not require pledging to die for the other.

.

I think it is distracting to frame this as a for/against current administration discussion. I am more interested in why you think we should commit/invest so heavily to protect Israel. What is it that Israel is doing to further US interests, that earns priority/preference over other countries?

.

Moreover, why are we 1/2 the world's body guard? ....and what is our compensation?

.

Understand, I am not supporting/attacking any particular viewpoint. I'm asking you because you appear to have strong convictions in this area and I'm interested in hearing the reasoning.

Historically, Israel has been as trustworthy an ally as any the US has. You do not turn your back on your allies, and expect them to hang around and wait for you to come to your senses. They will move on, but do not expect them to exhibit complicity with the wishes of the next admin by default.

Really this has nothing to do with gamma rad shielding, so it is totally pointless to even mention. Except someone else opened the door, your honor.

http://www.newsweek.com/israel-wont-stop-spying-us-249757

.

http://www.afr.com/business/energy/cold-war-mystery-israeli-spies-may-have-stolen-us-uranium-to-build-the-bomb-20150401-1mawaw

.

I don't disagree with the idea of not mistreating allies, though I believe your characterization of Israel is a little too trusting.

I wasn't trying to get into an argument. You made some very strong statements and I was interested to hear the reasoning. I believe I understand your take on the subject now. Thank you.

Respectfully suģgest you take this to the break room, if you want to continue along this line.

Well, lead works because of its density, there are denser materials, but they all⁽¹⁾ have the problem that they are 'technically' radioactive, so you'd need a shield to protect you from the shield.

Notes:

1. I am including Bismuth in that list, which makes the 'technically' portion non-ironic. Lead is the densest STABLE element, Bismuth is radioactive, however its half life is on the order of billions of times longer than the current age of the universe, so maybe, possibly, in the heat of a star 'poisoned' with heavy transuranics, one atom of Bismuth has decayed into led. But I wouldn't put any money on that bet, the odds are better for there to be a flat, disk-shaped planet sitting on the backs of four elephants, which in turn stand on the back of a gigantic sea turtle swimming through space⁽²⁾.
2. Terry Pratchett⁽³⁾ changed the myth from tortoise to sea turtle to avoid the question of 'what's the tortoise standing on?' or the answer to that question 'it's turtles all the way down.'
3. Still miss you, man, hope you're having fun in the What Comes Next.
   

Your statements are a little light on factual support.

Bismuth is a red herring, as it is not as dense as lead.....so who cares about the minuscule activity (concern would be more appropriately placed in bananas than bismuth).

Additionally, the common isotopes of lead aren't really that stable, once you start down the path of considering half lives longer than the age of the universe.

There are numerous elements with 'stable' (half lives not less than the age of the universe) isotopes with greater density than those comprising lead....platinum, gold, tungsten, tantalum, hafnium and ruthenium come to mind, though there are more.

.

For shielding purposes, tungsten has a lot of good qualities. Hafnium has some strengths when dealing with neutrons, but the cost would be very high.....borated poly and tungsten would be a better choice if neutrons were a concern.

While the reduction rules of thumb are useful for basic understanding, the energy of expected incident radiation (and whether or not gamma radiation is the only expected) is an important factor that so far is missing from this discussion.

.

As is so often the case, more details on the inquiry would allow better responses.

.

The boron-loaded poly is mostly good against neutrons - but every little helps!

True... just as I stated.

.

It's funny, I noticed your comment about the importance of gamma energy in #4 only a little after writing that energy had not yet seen energy in the discussion.

.

In retrospect, you are right if this is a fusion boosted fission warhead detonation, or a dirty bomb, shielding for neutrons isn't going to be worthwhile. Neutron shielding is better reserved for reactor shielding and possibly trips to Mars.

.

I tend to think blast protection....should you have a chance to get to it will probably cover you pretty well for radiation in the short term. Minimizing ingestion and inhalation of high energy beta and alpha emitting isotopes (especially those that bio-accumulate) over the next several months would be much higher on my list of concerns that shielding from external gamma dose from fallout.

Certainly boron has about the highest thermal neutron capture cross section there is. Isn't boron also used in a certain way in scintillation detectors for neutrons. Fast neutrons, the cross section is lower, so it requires some massive nuclei for recoil (I suppose) along with the boron.

Getting back on the Gamma Ray topic: Here is the Widom-Larsen patent, and I like that they included a whole book's worth on information in the patent.

http://www.google.com/patents/EP1934987A2?cl=en

If they are right, (otherwise why would NASA be keenly interested??), then the future of space travel can be made a bit safer, lighter. But there again, the ultimate space craft would be a giant ball of rock (stable) or a matrix of rock and free metal, with the control systems near the core of the "asteroid". The problem left to solve would be finding ways to accelerate the thing more than 0.01 m/sec². With this much shielding I suppose a massive nuclear reactor could be supported, however.

'...about the highest...' is accurate. It is certainly near the top. There are a couple others though, and it does depend a little on the particular isotope. Isotopes of plutonium have roughly the same capture cross section for thermal neutrons as isotopes of boron.....but that's not a great choice for shielding material.

Isotopes of cadmium, samarium and gadolinium have much larger capture cross sections for thermal neutrons than boron....roughly 3x, 8x, and 70x, respectively. Boron is still an attractive choice for neutron shielding and as a poison.

G.A. That throws a spanner in the works of an already "black art" Is there commonality in the fissile material used in intercontinental ballistic warheads or do we assume it could be a broad and unpredictable range of dirtiness ?

Even using identical warheads, a huge factor in the result is the environment in which the detonation occurs. The height above or below the surface and the composition of that surface can cause large variations in the isotopes created (therefor the activity/energy and half life) and the dispersion of those isotopes.

I suspect the risk of being hit with a dirty bomb is far greater that something more sophisticated in the next 50 years. As such, panic and irrational reaction likely pose a greater risk to life that increase risk of cancer in the more likely scenarios.... , leaving the immediate area of the blast, carefully washing or eating canned food, and taking even very basic precautions to minimize inhalation/ingestion of dust (pull your shirt up over your nose, if nothing else) will probably keep your risks very small in a probable dirty bomb scenario.

That is precisely why I think that the SPP/localized proton matrix theory (Widom-Larsen), if it indeed works is a tremendous boon to the whole arena of gamma radiation shielding. If ALL gamma energies from 10 MeV (or so), all the way down to hard X-rays can be attenuated by only a few mm of this new shielding, then I hope that all can see the benefit to building protection, device protection (in addition to needed EMP protection), personnel protection, vehicle protection, and protection for space vehicles.

That is also why a large space rock would make an "ideal" space craft, if the W-L process in fact does not work (but I think they already have some fairly compelling evidence that it in fact does work).

This may be one of those cases where the best defense is a good offense. Hit the other guy first! Destroy his ability to blow you up. Or at least, make it so he doesn't want to even try.

Radiation shielding isn't driven just by apocalyptic potentials. Shielding technology has a valuable role in space crafts, energy production, and medical applications, just to name a few.

But I agree with you in a way. It's just better not to be where the fight is.

You should consult Dr. Bruce Banner (aka the Hulk), he's the leading authority on gamma radiation.

Tungsten,spent uranium (never really is spent). The three basics are Time, distance, shielding. Also it depends on the wavelength of the emitter.

You could use several layers of Demron....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demron

This stuff for windows....

http://www.rpdinc.com/clear-pb-lead-plastic-sheet-leaded-acrylic-3.html

Underwear...

http://www.rockyflatsgear.com/Men-s-Protection-fig-leaf-underwear/

If you are close enough to the blast to need 10 inches of lead to bring the radiation down to a safe level you have far greater issues to contend with.

The initial blast will destroy anything within 10 - 20 km with the average sized modern nuke , if youre outside the blast impact zone and you're sheltered from the flash at that moment and the skin doesn't fall of your bones , then you might have a few hours as a healthy living organism to get underground before radioactive fallout starts dropping out of the sky. Next survival phase is to avoid fallout for around 3 -5 weeks until gamma has decayed to safer levels. Some people have constructed an underground bunker , it only needs a couple of metres of soil to protect from fallout , and gives pretty good blast protection too. For others , if you're lucky you can find space in an underground car park building next to a supermarket where being 2 - 3 floors underground will protect your asss while giving you access to food and water . I would like to go one step further and add to the wish list for "miracle construction material less than a couple of inches thickness" and weighing significantly less than lead or steel of equivalent thickness that will block out Gamma ..... Not much to ask is it ?

I live within 10 miles of two of the juiciest targets in the UK: AWE (Atomic Weapons Establishment) Aldermaston, where they design the bombs and prepare the ingredients, and AWE Burghfield (FKA Burghfield bomb factory, or more officially ROF (Royal Ordnace Factory) Burghfield), where they assemble them, so shielding is a pretty academic discussion for me, if it all goes off.

Yup, bout sums it up

Interesting site here if you want to see the effective blast areas of different sized bombs if you set them off at different locations and elevations/altitudes.

Nuke your neighbor and see what it gets you.

A 100 MT on my house pretty much ruins most of central North Dakota!

Neat site tcm, at least I know now that I am outside the blast zone of the military finance center at Fort Benjamin Harrison Indiana of a 500 kt blast. If you figure for the worst someone will make it more so then you thought. Duke

Always when dealing with radiation remember the time and distance factor. Short time long distance. When I worked in Nuclear the concrete where Gamma was located was a great protector but the bolts that came through the concrete and entered the Gamma area were very hot as in radioactive. It was a no go area.

makes me wonder about cabling running through blast walls into a bunker , what can block gamma coming through weak points like that ?

assuming no EMP in the equation for now , could optocouplers provide a barrier ?

Cable runs into shielded areas usually go through a layrinth, so only a small amount of (scattered) radiaiton can sneak through.

Just run them vertically down through the floor, but bunkers have a lot more to deal with than simple radiation shielding. The blast itself, its shockwave, and heat are a more critical problem than radiation.

Surface Plasmon Polaritrons allegedly are super-efficient in converting gamma rays to thermal energy. These are the alleged "heavy" electrons in Widom-Larsen theory of condensed matter particle interaction/trapping.

Supposedly, SPP's exist on the surface of ordinary metals, so why does this material not present itself always and every time as the perfect gamma ray absorber? I do not know the answer.

"Essentially all models are wrong. Some are useful." -George E.P. Box

.

Examples abound....

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=lj3iNxZ8Dww

Thank you for the clarification Miss South Carolina, but what does that have to do with not being able to find U.S. of G.D. (gol-shucky darn) Amariki on a freaking map?

At least I had you going for a second during that red-neck rant.

I think the thing with SPP's goes like this: (1) They are in fact always present, and account for the high reflectivity of all metals (depending on state of surface oxidation, of course). (2) The SPP's may only be able to couple energy with gamma rays that are emitted internally to the metal, and not once these rays are already propagating through sparse media (non-condensed matter). Once the photon is already released, "the barn door" is stuck open, in other words.

(3) Hypothesis: SPP's can only interact with the matter that is about to emit the gamma ray, not the gamma ray (or other high energy carrying photon, ion, or particle) itself. Thus it appears there must be a superposition of states that allows exceptionally strong coupling of nuclear energy to lattice energy (phonons) when SPP's are in play.

I suspect that SPP's have a strong role in recent reports of at least temporary room temperature superconductivity of graphene carbon at the surface edges where water has been dried from the graphene. Obviously, I have no particular proof of this.