This reminds me to watch "Godzilla 2000" again.

Deep.

Hacker?



Or...



Link for those who don't recognize that second guy

Unfettered access...

Don't worry ma'am, I'm from the Internet.

Pavia_Resistance: Found a Fukushima feed on Pachube

Link (new window)

That could be the dirtiest thing ever said on the internet.

Sad that people have to do this themselves because their government is trying to keep it secret.

"I traveled to Japan with PBS NewsHour science correspondent Miles O'Brien"



/hot

Hackers? I guess we are going to get some really interesting places that have radiation alerts.

The Japanese? Those sandal wearing goldfish tenders?

On their radiation map isn't it a little a little misleading to list the categories by their maximum rather than their minimum? Isn't that more standard?

I think listing 1.4uSv/h as 5uS/h is a tad sensational. Yet they claim to be neutral and not taking a side...

jingks: On their radiation map isn't it a little a little misleading to list the categories by their maximum rather than their minimum? Isn't that more standard?

I think listing 1.4uSv/h as 5uS/h is a tad sensational. Yet they claim to be neutral and not taking a side...

Actually, no. In most radiation exposure maps you survey an area and label that area with the highest recorded value UNLESS you have enough data and history to do a time weighted average. The idea is to be conservative not sensational.

NuclearScientist: jingks: On their radiation map isn't it a little a little misleading to list the categories by their maximum rather than their minimum? Isn't that more standard?

I think listing 1.4uSv/h as 5uS/h is a tad sensational. Yet they claim to be neutral and not taking a side...

Actually, no. In most radiation exposure maps you survey an area and label that area with the highest recorded value UNLESS you have enough data and history to do a time weighted average. The idea is to be conservative not sensational.

Is there any way these civilians can determine isotope profiles without a lab equipment?

krackpipe: NuclearScientist: jingks: On their radiation map isn't it a little a little misleading to list the categories by their maximum rather than their minimum? Isn't that more standard?

I think listing 1.4uSv/h as 5uS/h is a tad sensational. Yet they claim to be neutral and not taking a side...

Actually, no. In most radiation exposure maps you survey an area and label that area with the highest recorded value UNLESS you have enough data and history to do a time weighted average. The idea is to be conservative not sensational.

Is there any way these civilians can determine isotope profiles without a lab equipment?

It depends on a lot of factors. The short answer is that it's highly unlikely they have the technical knowledge and training to puzzle that out.

The primary indicator would be half-life. They'd have to do timed samples and determine the approximate half-life of what they're dealing with and go from there. It's unlikely, however, they're dealing with uniform distribution of isotopes and would probably be counting mixed samples anyway. Also, some of what's been released isn't going to decay at a measurable rate. A 100 year half-life will be indistinguishable from a 30 year half-life, at this point.

NuclearScientist: krackpipe: NuclearScientist: jingks: On their radiation map isn't it a little a little misleading to list the categories by their maximum rather than their minimum? Isn't that more standard?

I think listing 1.4uSv/h as 5uS/h is a tad sensational. Yet they claim to be neutral and not taking a side...

Actually, no. In most radiation exposure maps you survey an area and label that area with the highest recorded value UNLESS you have enough data and history to do a time weighted average. The idea is to be conservative not sensational.

Is there any way these civilians can determine isotope profiles without a lab equipment?

It depends on a lot of factors. The short answer is that it's highly unlikely they have the technical knowledge and training to puzzle that out.

The primary indicator would be half-life. They'd have to do timed samples and determine the approximate half-life of what they're dealing with and go from there. It's unlikely, however, they're dealing with uniform distribution of isotopes and would probably be counting mixed samples anyway. Also, some of what's been released isn't going to decay at a measurable rate. A 100 year half-life will be indistinguishable from a 30 year half-life, at this point.

Good point. Their government may have very detailed maps, at least within their military, but is apparently not making them public? Glad civilians can do something to help their own safety...in their circumstances, isotopic ratios of byproducts that help determine what happened are not as important as simply avoiding them if they're still hot.

NuclearScientist: jingks: On their radiation map isn't it a little a little misleading to list the categories by their maximum rather than their minimum? Isn't that more standard?

I think listing 1.4uSv/h as 5uS/h is a tad sensational. Yet they claim to be neutral and not taking a side...

Actually, no. In most radiation exposure maps you survey an area and label that area with the highest recorded value UNLESS you have enough data and history to do a time weighted average. The idea is to be conservative not sensational.

You didn't really understand my post. At least I don't think you did. The detected 1.4 uSv in an area. However, it is color markers as 5.0 because they label the greater than one and less than or equal to five color mark as 5.0. Normally when you graph/chart things, at least in my experience, you label >0, >1, >5, etc. Not

Forgive my bad grammar/spelling in my last post. Still not used to mobile posting.

In summary, I suck at posting from my mobile and bins are usually [0,1),[1,5), etc., and labeled on the lower limit, not (0,1],(1,5] and labeled on the higher limit. Am I completely wrong here?

I tried to help Safecast but I'm not an electrical engineer or computer programmer and I live on another continent so there was next to nothing I could do. I did send them readings every few hours until it became really obvious that you'd need a nuclear lab to detect the amount of radiation coming to the United States from Japan.

^my geiger counter

dbrunker: I tried to help Safecast but I'm not an electrical engineer or computer programmer and I live on another continent so there was next to nothing I could do. I did send them readings every few hours until it became really obvious that you'd need a nuclear lab to detect the amount of radiation coming to the United States from Japan.
[farm5.static.flickr.com image 270x500]
^my geiger counter
Did you ever live in Sacramento or Palm Beach, by any chance?

jingks: In summary, I suck at posting from my mobile and bins are usually [0,1),[1,5), etc., and labeled on the lower limit, not (0,1],(1,5] and labeled on the higher limit. Am I completely wrong here?

Chernobyl maps either list the ranges explicitly for each color or use >1,>2,>3. Mainly I think because it's not at all confusing that way.

Just listing numbers means that looking at the map alone doesn't tell you what the range is of each color is. Is it 1-2 or is it 2-3, etc. So just from a UI point of view their map suck horribly.

krackpipe:
Did you ever live in Sacramento or Palm Beach, by any chance?

I think I drove through Sacramento, once. Does that count? Why do you ask?

dbrunker: krackpipe:
Did you ever live in Sacramento or Palm Beach, by any chance?

I think I drove through Sacramento, once. Does that count? Why do you ask?

Just interest; thought you might have done some work at the UCD lab.