Probably s tupid question but

  • Thread starter roy2008
  • Start date
In summary, radioactive materials look the same as non-radioactive materials, but are controlled and would be very improbable to come in contact with.
  • #1
roy2008
13
0
probably s tupid question but...

I was just wondering what radioactive materials typically look like? solid metal or powder? and if one handles these materials would their skin then be contaminated?
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
  • #2


The look exactly like the non-radioactive version.
Atoms come in slightly diffierent types called isotopes, most are stable, a few are radioactive but they have the same chemical and physical properties.

Contamination is either from some of the material rubbing off and staying on your skin or from a more highly radioactive material changing the material that it's in contact with and making it radioactive.
 
  • #3


roy2008 said:
I was just wondering what radioactive materials typically look like? solid metal or powder? and if one handles these materials would their skin then be contaminated?
Radioactive materials come in various forms, the same as non-radioactive materials. They are however controlled at the source. It would be rather improbable that someone in the general public would come in contact with a radioactive substance. People who mine coal, minerals and particuarly thorium or uranium ores, and those who work with radioactive materials would certainly have a much greater risk of coming in contact with radioactive materials, BUT people in those situations wear protective clothing and gear and/or work remotely with the materials. The objective is to miminize or prevent the contact with radioactive materials.
 
  • #4


There is a huge difference between just being near radioactive materials that are giving off radiation, and actually being contaminated by them. Many deadly radioactive materials have radiation that would be stopped by a piece of paper.

Radioactive fallout carried in the wind, as happened with the Chernobyl nuclear accident, can have elements like Strontium90 end up in the grass that gets eaten by cows. Folk drink the milk and it ends up in their bones because Strontium can chemically replace Calcium. There, the radiation knocks bits out of the cells DNA, messing up the reproducing, and causing cancers like leukemia. Even now, there are parts of the UK where such farming is not permitted. Yet to look at, Strontium is a silvery-grey metal, very like Calcium, and they both oxidize into white chalk.

Most radioactive substances are not seen pure. Instead, they come mixed up as oxides or ores. A few cause blue glows when put in water. (Called Cherenkov Effect) See a http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cherenkov_radiation" know that many radioactive things are in fact glowing brightly. Its just that the wavelength involved is not a visible one. Gamma radiation from Cobalt 60, used to treat cancers, is like and unseen light. It is deadly! it is just and urban myth that radioactive things visibly glow. Radioactive things do not normally glow visibly by themselves. They look exactly like their non-radioactive versions.

Glow-in-the-dark clock faces and pointers have in the past been made with phosphrescent paint mixed with Radium. This is no longer done, but many people got very ill making them. Many gemstones like rubies and sapphires are treated with radiation to improve their colours, and have to be kept for years in lead-lined safes until they become safe to handle.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #5


As I understand it, a fair number of the employees of the Radium Dial Company got seriously dead due to their work...
 
  • #6


That was back when the effects of radiation were not clearly understood (40's). The painters would use a fine tip brush to paint radium on to the dials of airplane instruments, and would "lick" the tip of the brush to make a finer point. Radium is a bone seeker, so many of them developed leukemia and other bone/marrow diseases.
 
  • #7
It seems to have been occurring before the 1940’s according to the person on page 2 of this forum!
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3901/is_200510/ai_n15640929/pg_1?tag=artBody;col1
 

1. What is the purpose of asking "Probably s tupid question but"?

The phrase "Probably s tupid question but" is often used as a way to preface a question that the speaker thinks may be obvious or silly. It can also be used to show humility and acknowledge the possibility of being wrong.

2. Is it okay to ask "Probably s tupid question but" in a professional setting?

It is generally not recommended to use this phrase in a professional setting as it may come across as unprofessional or lacking confidence. It is better to ask a question directly and confidently without prefacing it with this phrase.

3. How is "Probably s tupid question but" different from saying "I have a question"?

"Probably s tupid question but" implies that the speaker is unsure or doubtful about their question, while "I have a question" simply states that the speaker has a question to ask. The former may come across as less confident and may cause the listener to perceive the question as less important.

4. Are there any alternative phrases to "Probably s tupid question but" that can be used?

Yes, there are many alternative phrases that can be used to preface a question, such as "I have a quick question", "This may sound silly but", or simply stating the question without any preface. It is important to choose a phrase that feels comfortable and appropriate for the specific situation.

5. How should someone respond if they are asked a question prefaced with "Probably s tupid question but"?

It is important to remember that the person asking the question is likely feeling uncertain or uncomfortable. Responding with patience and kindness can help the person feel more at ease and encourage them to ask more questions in the future. It may also be helpful to reframe the question and answer it in a way that makes the person feel more confident and knowledgeable.

Similar threads

  • Nuclear Engineering
2
Replies
66
Views
6K
  • Nuclear Engineering
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
16
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
769
Replies
26
Views
836
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • Nuclear Engineering
2
Replies
53
Views
14K
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • Classical Physics
Replies
18
Views
535
Back
Top