budullewraagh Posted June 21, 2004 Posted June 21, 2004 bah. we didn't do anything cool in my chem class this year. for our last lab we used conc 12 molar HCl to see if it dispersed faster than NH3, but that's just about it...save that organic lab we did involving esterfication in which we used conc 18 molar H2SO4. we burned some Mg. no explosions whatsoever. no radioactive stuff whatsoever. unfortunately, i do not have access to a university lab. my former chem teacher probably wouldn't give me radioactive rare earth elements...or any type of cesium for fear i would blow it up. i really want to make one of these (with an alpha emitter). any other ideas and sources?
MulderMan Posted June 21, 2004 Posted June 21, 2004 im only at highschool level aswell but as i understand more and know more anyway the science teachers will freely tell me things and let me do anything within reason. the radioactive things might have something to do with we have to do that module at GCSE physics (not sure what the equivalent is?) and legally youre supposed to be 16+ to be exposed to radiation in schools, and only allowed to do so many lessons a year with it. there are things called 'fiesta plates' have an orange uranium glaze on them they are supposed to have quite a high source. but you have to think about the minerals there alot of them available, an example is one called muromontite, which is uranium and beryllium which decay to make plutonium http://www.theodoregray.com/PeriodicTable/Elements/094/index.s7.html
budullewraagh Posted June 21, 2004 Posted June 21, 2004 meh, im not into making Pu. i have a friend who has a pot with a uranium paint; her father found this out when he went around the house with a geiger counter. im only interested in alpha emitters; my parents wont let me work with anything more dangerous. thanks anyway
MulderMan Posted June 21, 2004 Posted June 21, 2004 the folks are always suspicious to what i do anyway, alpha emmiters can be bad also if they get inside the body.
Dave Posted June 21, 2004 Posted June 21, 2004 Indeed. Although the skin may protect you from alpha emitters because the alpha particles are so weak, if ingested they'll go around happily ionizing your atoms and turning your cells into nasty things. If you absolutely must go around eating radioactive material at least have the sense to eat a gamma emitter. (note: don't eat radioactive material, it's definately not good for you.)
swansont Posted June 21, 2004 Posted June 21, 2004 Indeed. Although the skin may protect you from alpha emitters because the alpha particles are so weak' date=' if ingested they'll go around happily ionizing your atoms and turning your cells into nasty things. If you absolutely [b']must[/b] go around eating radioactive material at least have the sense to eat a gamma emitter. (note: don't eat radioactive material, it's definately not good for you.) To clarify: it's not that the alphas are "weak," i.e. low energy - it's that they deposit their energy in a very small distance of travel. Internal exposure is really bad. External exposure is no big deal. Any you're right- gammas are a "whole body" dose. But I still don't recommend eating any.
Cap'n Refsmmat Posted June 21, 2004 Posted June 21, 2004 I would recommend it to some people... *evil grin* Whoops, forgot my medicine.
Dave Posted June 21, 2004 Posted June 21, 2004 I wouldn't joke about it really, I'd expect it's extremely painful and not very pleasent. Almost certainly fatal depending on how much you ingest.
MulderMan Posted June 21, 2004 Posted June 21, 2004 well dont forget if you take the radiation away you will still have a toxic chemical like any other.
Dave Posted June 21, 2004 Posted June 21, 2004 True, one more reason why it's stupid. Uranium (which is obviously radioactive) is also highly toxic. Not nice
budullewraagh Posted June 21, 2004 Posted June 21, 2004 right......ok, i think i'll make a note to myself not to drink solutions of am241. ok????????
YT2095 Posted June 22, 2004 Author Posted June 22, 2004 the only problem with Am241 is that no matter how much you could get, it wouldn`t change temp. that uranium paint sounds a likely candidate though )
swansont Posted June 22, 2004 Posted June 22, 2004 the only problem with Am241 is that no matter how much you could get, it wouldn`t change temp. Why not?
YT2095 Posted June 22, 2004 Author Posted June 22, 2004 because the Am241 available to civilians are mounted on slugs and contain little more than a microcurie per slug, you`de need millions to make a gram, and you`de need several grams, the maths say he would need more than he could get and process. that`s all
MulderMan Posted June 22, 2004 Posted June 22, 2004 are these slugs like a little round disk with a little stick on the end? thats the type we use. i checked in maplins and they said £130 for the geiger muller kit!!! it might be cheaper to get a real rate meter.
YT2095 Posted June 23, 2004 Author Posted June 23, 2004 all the slugs I`ve seen are like a tiny brass colored plate stamped into the center of a stainless steel slug, never any "stick" like protrusion? as for Maplins I can`t say, I bought mine in Kit Form about 6 or 7 years ago, as with most things of a rarity or low demand, the price may well have gone up since
MulderMan Posted June 23, 2004 Posted June 23, 2004 o i thought you meant a slug like the source here, thats an example of what ive used, apart from lead on a stick that ive seen in a cloud chamber.
budullewraagh Posted June 26, 2004 Posted June 26, 2004 actually, after reading the radioactive boyscout i found that it is possible to obtain significant amounts of americium-241 if you look hard enough for smoke detectors. what's more disturbing is the fact that david hahn was able to make fissionable uranium 233, and how (more or less) easy it was to do so. after ordering uraninite ore and pitchblende from a czech company and failing to dissolve the crushed uranium powder in solution of nitric and sulfuric acids, hahn decided to use thorium-232. he found dozens of lantern mantles and took off the thorium dioxide. next he shoplifted hundreds of lithium batteries, took out the lithium pieces and stored them in a jar filled with oil. he then did a replacement reaction where he oxidized the lithium and reduced the thorium dioxide. yes, folks, david hahn had purified thorium metal. what's more, he created a neutron gun first by using americium-241, a beta emitter and aluminum. he then realized that wasn't enough and obtained beryllium from a friend who worked at a laboratory. one day he found an antiques store, brought his geiger counter and noticed that it went off the wall when he put it near a particular clock. in the clock he found radium paint in a glass jar, used to paint the face of the clock in order to make it glow. then he molded lead around this Be and Ra-226 and poked a hole in it so that the neutrons could escape. he obtained gun sights, opened them and drained the tritium in order to slow down the neutron. he then set up his reactor by placing many strips of thorium in the path of the neutron gun. the thorium-232 absorbed a neutron to become thorium-233, which yields beta particles and becomes uranium-233.
YT2095 Posted June 28, 2004 Author Posted June 28, 2004 Beta particles through a peice of parafin wax can make Gamma particles too
YT2095 Posted June 29, 2004 Author Posted June 29, 2004 Naah, it`s not as if you`re gaining any real power above the original input, infact you`de be trading down. but if you did need a weak gamma source and weren`t bothered about Protons, that would be the way to go Alpha emiter / Berylium ---> Beta particles / Parafin Wax ---> Gamma source + Protons each stage trades down from the initial Alpha source in overall energy, nothing disturbing really (unless you had shed loads of it LOL).
swansont Posted June 29, 2004 Posted June 29, 2004 what's more, he created a neutron gun first by using americium-241, a beta emitter and aluminum. Am-241 is an alpha source. Betas generally won't kick neutrons out of a nucleus edit:fix quote tag
swansont Posted June 29, 2004 Posted June 29, 2004 Naah' date=' it`s not as if you`re gaining any real power above the original input, infact you`de be trading down. but if you did need a weak gamma source and weren`t bothered about Protons, that would be the way to go Alpha emiter / Berylium ---> Beta particles / Parafin Wax ---> Gamma source + Protons each stage trades down from the initial Alpha source in overall energy, nothing disturbing really (unless you had shed loads of it LOL).[/quote'] I think you mean neutrons where you have the beta.
YT2095 Posted June 29, 2004 Author Posted June 29, 2004 yeah, I think you need something like 50Mev to do that (or somewhere along those lines) and Betas are about the 14Mev mark IIRC?
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now