Jump to content

Radioactivity


AndreyR29

Recommended Posts

I propose to combine, using emitters of electromagnetic waves and radiation, electromagnetic waves of different lengths - radio waves and radioactivity. So that there are ripples of radioactivity on an electromagnetic wave of high power and length (like ripples of small waves on a large sea wave). An electromagnetic wave of great length and power (radio wave) acts as a carrier of radioactivity. This can increase the distance of radioactivity and allow you to change the properties of radioactive elements over a long distance. Which can be used to deactivate radioactive waste from a safe distance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, AndreyR29 said:

An electromagnetic wave of great length and power (radio wave) acts as a carrier of radioactivity.

What length? Wavelength? Length of a light pulse? Btw radio waves are low-energy.

What do you mean 'carry radioactivity'? Neutrons? Fissile material? Material for fusion? Electrons? (beta radiation) Helium nuclei? (alpha radiation).

What you said is very ambiguous.

x-posted with  MigL

Edited by joigus
minor correction
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, John Cuthber said:

Как?

For example, directing electromagnetic and radioactive radiation in a cross direction and measuring the radioactivity level in the direction of electromagnetic radiation.

Edited by AndreyR29
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, AndreyR29 said:

I propose to combine, using emitters of electromagnetic waves and radiation, electromagnetic waves of different lengths - radio waves and radioactivity. So that there are ripples of radioactivity on an electromagnetic wave of high power and length (like ripples of small waves on a large sea wave). An electromagnetic wave of great length and power (radio wave) acts as a carrier of radioactivity. This can increase the distance of radioactivity and allow you to change the properties of radioactive elements over a long distance. Which can be used to deactivate radioactive waste from a safe distance.

“radioactivity” is not some independent form of radiation. It’s simply the property of a nucleus being unstable and emitting energetic particles when it decays to a lower energy state. Those can be alphas, betas, gammas, neutrinos, protons, neutrons - they are the radiation. Of those, only gammas are massless, electromagnetic, and moving at c. For any other particle, differing speed would mean they would arrive at a target at different times if emitted from the same source simultaneously (though neutrinos would take a while)

There is no “carrier of radioactivity” since that’s nonsensical.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, AndreyR29 said:

For example, directing electromagnetic and radioactive radiation in a cross direction and measuring the radioactivity level in the direction of electromagnetic radiation.

Even for gamma rays that won’t achieve anything. Two sets of waves encountering one another at an angle will just pass through each other and emerge on the other side unchanged.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/26/2024 at 8:06 PM, AndreyR29 said:

This can be determined experimentally by combining high-power electromagnetic waves and different types of radiation.

If a radioactive isotope decays only by capturing electrons (rare, useless for "radioactive waste"), or double electron capture, decay can be prevented by high-energy (= short wavelength) photons (which is exactly the opposite of what you said in the first post).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron_capture#Reaction_details

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, AndreyR29 said:

It is possible that this method can be used to speed up the decay of radioactive elements.

In a very narrow way; you could cause a nuclear excitation, and the excited state could possibly have a shorter half-life (probably only for an isomeric state), which happens in K-38. (~8 min vs ~1 sec, IIRC)

You might also cause a nucleon to be ejected, and end up with a shorter half-life, but that’s also unlikely.

 

Hand-wavy assertions, though, are not a substitute for actual physics 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, AndreyR29 said:

You are absolutely right - any statement requires proof. But I am only putting forward hypotheses. Perhaps an experiment will reveal hidden effects.

!

Moderator Note

If you don’t have a model or evidence to discuss then this doesn’t meet the requirements for speculations

 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.