KMUD: 8-17-2018 Critical Thinking In Academia

Dan W

Member
Joined
Jan 22, 2013
Messages
1,528
Direct MP3 link | Podcast setup

This had additional caller questions on topics like digestion/enzymes/endotoxin, reverse T3, and living on upper floors of a high-rise.

Donate to support KMUD here.
 

Attachments

  • kmud-180817-critical-thinking-in-academia.mp3
    17.4 MB · Views: 169

G Forrest

Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2016
Messages
85
Ray responded with his usual argument about the studies showing the health benefits of living at elevation, particularly 2000-6000 ft, but also mentioned a study of solar flairs causing damage in rabbit studies from the lead barrier overhead. I’m wondering, is living at say 1000 to 2000 feet more hazardous due to this solar flare issue than say living at sea level? And then above the 2000 ft range you are generally safe?
 

x-ray peat

Member
Joined
Dec 8, 2016
Messages
2,343
Ray responded with his usual argument about the studies showing the health benefits of living at elevation, particularly 2000-6000 ft, but also mentioned a study of solar flairs causing damage in rabbit studies from the lead barrier overhead. I’m wondering, is living at say 1000 to 2000 feet more hazardous due to this solar flare issue than say living at sea level? And then above the 2000 ft range you are generally safe?
I think what he is saying is that at higher altitudes, or high up in a building, cosmic rays pass through you. But if you have several stories of a building above you, cosmic rays hitting the building material create a shower of secondary and tertiary rays that are much more dangerous. He says that this also happens at lower elevations due to the denser atmosphere.

However Ive seen studies that say that strokes and heart attacks go up the higher you are in a building. Some say its because you are farther away from the earthing effect of the Earth's magnetic field.
 

DrJ

Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2015
Messages
719
I think what he is saying is that at higher altitudes, or high up in a building, cosmic rays pass through you. But if you have several stories of a building above you, cosmic rays hitting the building material create a shower of secondary and tertiary rays that are much more dangerous. He says that this also happens at lower elevations due to the denser atmosphere.
Nailed it. The secondary and tertiary rays are more dangerous because they are lower energy and thus much more likely to be absorbed by a part of your body than the higher-energy gamma ray that spawned them.
 

yerrag

Member
Joined
Mar 29, 2016
Messages
10,883
Location
Manila
Nailed it. The secondary and tertiary rays are more dangerous because they are lower energy and thus much more likely to be absorbed by a part of your body than the higher-energy gamma ray that spawned them.
Is this because our bodies resonate well with lower frequency radiation?
 

DrJ

Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2015
Messages
719
Is this because our bodies resonate well with lower frequency radiation?
No. It's just because lower energy x-rays have a much higher probability of interacting with/being absorbed by a material (any material) than higher energy x-rays.
 

yerrag

Member
Joined
Mar 29, 2016
Messages
10,883
Location
Manila
No. It's just because lower energy x-rays have a much higher probability of interacting with/being absorbed by a material (any material) than higher energy x-rays.
Thanks. I suppose dwelling in the lower floors of a high-rise can't be equated to living in a cave of a high mountain, or can it?
 

DrJ

Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2015
Messages
719
Thanks. I suppose dwelling in the lower floors of a high-rise can't be equated to living in a cave of a high mountain, or can it?
They could potentially both be well-shielded depending on the construction of the building. Some materials are more likely to just absorb the x-ray rather than produce a cascade (e.g. lead), other materials are much more likely to produce the relatively lower-energy x-ray cascade through Compton scattering (e.g. carbon), or some mixture of both and depending on the x-ray energy. Some materials will even fluoresce more x-rays when hit by the right x-ray energy. But concrete is generally an okay absorber and is usually poured in a pretty thick layer when used, so you should be in good shape.
 

yerrag

Member
Joined
Mar 29, 2016
Messages
10,883
Location
Manila
They could potentially both be well-shielded depending on the construction of the building. Some materials are more likely to just absorb the x-ray rather than produce a cascade (e.g. lead), other materials are much more likely to produce the relatively lower-energy x-ray cascade through Compton scattering (e.g. carbon), or some mixture of both and depending on the x-ray energy. Some materials will even fluoresce more x-rays when hit by the right x-ray energy. But concrete is generally an okay absorber and is usually poured in a pretty thick layer when used, so you should be in good shape.
Since pretty much all highrises are built with concrete, wouldn't this be a non-issue? Maybe except for those lower floors with a.glass-enclosed atrium, or for the building perimeter sidewalk?
 

DrJ

Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2015
Messages
719
Since pretty much all highrises are built with concrete, wouldn't this be a non-issue? Maybe except for those lower floors with a.glass-enclosed atrium, or for the building perimeter sidewalk?
I don't quite catch what you mean. Wouldn't *what* be a non-issue?
 

yerrag

Member
Joined
Mar 29, 2016
Messages
10,883
Location
Manila
I don't quite catch what you mean. Wouldn't *what* be a non-issue?
Since highrises are pretty much encased in concrete, the dwellers would then be protected from the secondary and tertiary radiation, as long as the concrete walls are there, even in the lower floors. That's why I would say the danger from cosmic radiation would be a non-issue, wouldn't it?

But the danger would still be there if lower floors are unprotected by concrete, such as when lower floors are covered by glass, such as in atriums. And wouldn't the perimeter sidewalks be left unprotected by cosmic radiation as well?
 

DrJ

Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2015
Messages
719
Since highrises are pretty much encased in concrete, the dwellers would then be protected from the secondary and tertiary radiation, as long as the concrete walls are there, even in the lower floors. That's why I would say the danger from cosmic radiation would be a non-issue, wouldn't it?

But the danger would still be there if lower floors are unprotected by concrete, such as when lower floors are covered by glass, such as in atriums. And wouldn't the perimeter sidewalks be left unprotected by cosmic radiation as well?
Yeah, it just sort of depends where they are coming from. When I picture a high-rise, I typically picture it surrounded by other high-rises which would also add to the shielding effect, so even the sidewalks might be pretty well-shielded excepting x-rays coming straight down.
 

yerrag

Member
Joined
Mar 29, 2016
Messages
10,883
Location
Manila
Yeah, it just sort of depends where they are coming from. When I picture a high-rise, I typically picture it surrounded by other high-rises which would also add to the shielding effect, so even the sidewalks might be pretty well-shielded excepting x-rays coming straight down.
That's very helpful to know. Thanks!
 
EMF Mitigation - Flush Niacin - Big 5 Minerals

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom