Gamma Rays: Electromagnetic Shielding for Long-Term Protection in Space

AI Thread Summary
Electromagnetic shielding is ineffective against gamma radiation, which requires solid materials for protection. Gamma rays primarily interact with electrons in matter through mechanisms like the Compton effect and the photoelectric effect. Effective shielding should maximize electron density, making lead a common choice due to its density and cost-effectiveness, despite alternatives like thorium and uranium being radioactive. The discussion highlights that while gamma radiation is a concern, high-energy charged particles pose an even greater risk in space. Solid shielding remains essential for long-term human protection from gamma radiation in space environments.
varungreat
Messages
11
Reaction score
0
can electromagnetic shielding in space protect humans (for a long period) from gamma radiation??
i:rolleyes:
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
No, gamma radiation is neutral and no electromagnetism will protect humans from it. Solid shielding is required.
 
Thanx!
But please tel me more about this SOLID SHIELDING required.
 
Gamma rays interact primarily with the electrons in matter, primarily through the Compton effect (http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/quantum/comptint.html#c1), but also the photoelectric effect (http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/mod1.html#c2).

At gamma energies above 1.022 MeV, pair (e+, e-) prodcution is possible, whereby the gamma photon interacts with the nucleus to form an electron-positron pair. The electron and positron will interact with other electrons to slow down, and ultimately the positron will combine with an electron in mutual annihilation (transformation) into two gamma rays of ~ 0.511 MeV.

Now an effective shield for gamma-radiation should maximize the electron density, and that is why lead is used - it also happens to be relatively inexpensive to other heavy (dense) elements. Thorium and uranium would be good shield materials by this criterion, but they are also radioactive themselves.

The tradeoff for shielding is the mass.

The effect of high energy charged particles is more of a concern in space.
 
Here's a video by “driving 4 answers” who seems to me to be well versed on the details of Internal Combustion engines. The video does cover something that's a bit shrouded in 'conspiracy theory', and he touches on that, but of course for phys.org, I'm only interested in the actual science involved. He analyzes the claim of achieving 100 mpg with a 427 cubic inch V8 1970 Ford Galaxy in 1977. Only the fuel supply system was modified. I was surprised that he feels the claim could have been...
Thread 'Turbocharging carbureted petrol 2 stroke engines'
Hi everyone, online I ve seen some images about 2 stroke carbureted turbo (motorcycle derivation engine). Now.. In the past in this forum some members spoke about turbocharging 2 stroke but not in sufficient detail. The intake and the exhaust are open at the same time and there are no valves like a 4 stroke. But if you search online you can find carbureted 2stroke turbo sled or the Am6 turbo. The question is: Is really possible turbocharge a 2 stroke carburated(NOT EFI)petrol engine and...
Back
Top