Very interesting findings on my last airplane flight. It was during the day, so good lighting, and no adjacent passengers, so I could do plenty of Geiger testing without getting anyone upset.
I have video and pictures are will place these into a post at Nukepro when I can
There was considerable radiation differences in different areas on the flight path, and at the same cruising altitude. Basically 11 CPS to 15 CPS. CLICKS PER SECOND! not per minute, per second!
The upper atmosphere is FULL of radiation. Much more so than 20 years ago. Cosmic radiation is various stuff, and what you will pick up on an Inspector Geiger will be gamma. There is no beta radiation in Cosmic.
A few centimeters of flesh will stop all Beta radiation
By putting the Pancake Style Geiger on my leg, I can effectively block all beta coming from the "downside". Beta from the "upside" will still hit the Geiger tube, so I can block half the Beta
In multiple repeated tests the readings quickly ramped down from 15 CPS to 11 CPS doing the Leg Beta Blocker test routine <LBB>(TM stock 2014). This is a delta of 4 CPS due to Beta being blocked on one side of the pancake geiger.
Since I was blocking 50% of the Beta with the flesh of my leg (or stomach as shown in the video), this means there is 2 times 4 CPS beta in the aircraft. 8 CPS Beta, of 480 CPM Beta inside the air of the airplane. I see.
This Beta, to repeat, is not Cosmic. Fukushima is here.
Review the Nukepro Geiger interpretation chart here to see what 240CPM means.
http://nukeprofessional.blogspot.com/2012/04/geiger-counter-interpretation.html
Here are 2 videos shot back to back that shows the massive Beta reduction using "body shielding".
This is 13 CPS, Clicks per second. A normal background radiation level in modern days is 25 CPM Clicks per minute. Do you see an issue here?
Craig-123 from ENENEWS contributed the following information
This other site did more like a "data logging" using altitude, but claimed it all to be cosmic, which is gamma and Xrays
And here is some stuff from Anti-Proton
* For more: view Anti-Proton's You-Tubed high altitude experiences at:
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RwYs0Ue4SbI
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=apWRH39Jgcc
Here is a view of the "Alpha window" on the backside of the inspector, the door actually makes a nice standoff so you can put the inspector over a radiation test plate and yet not touch the sample.
United Airlines cabin, complete with high beta emitting air.
Good test, thanks for doing that.. would it be worth someone testing for differences between alpha, beta and gamma using a sheet of paper, a piece of metal and a thick book, to get even more information?
ReplyDeleteThe Inspector Geiger has an Alpha window on it, so I tested with window opened and closed, no difference therefore very little alpha.
Deletethe craft shell itself would block alpha particles. Unless of course they were sucked in through the ventilation system somehow and made it past the filters. Paper can stop alpha, as deadly as they are!
Delete@Joe I wonder how much filters they have? Can't imagine much. Agreed on the Alpha stop though.
DeleteYes, this is a vital public service. We need people to do the same on different routes. BTW, Stock, where did the flight occur? Duration?
ReplyDeleteChicago to Honolulu, 9 hours. I took readings most of the flight
DeleteGreat citizen journalism, Well done, build the evidence, the system doesn't want us to know how bad the situation really is. I still believe that Honshu should be evacuated and I have seen nothing to change my mind on this for over 1200 days now..
ReplyDeleteThanks Kevo!
DeleteExcellent reporting stock Do you think buying a used counter would be ok? How to test accuracy? I have access to radiation beams at the hospital if could be calibrated that way
ReplyDeleteUsed might be OK, top quality is around 600
Delete3 orders or magnitude equals 1,000 x greater!!! not 20X... 1,000X
ReplyDelete"Direct exposure from deposited radionuclides together with the ingestion pathway was estimated to be three orders of magnitude greater than that from inhalation or exposure to airborne radionuclides (cloud shine)." (pg. 23).
World Health Organization. (September 8, 1986). Working group on assessment of radiation dose commitment in Europe due to the Chernobyl accident: Bilthoven, 25-27 June 1986. Report No. ICP/COR 129(s) Rev 1. 5134V. World Health Organization, Copenhagen, Denmark.
May 1986 W. Europe Ground deposition 131I +/- 1,000,000 Bq/m2
May 1986 W. Europe Ground deposition 137Cs +/- 140,000 Bq/m2
Large scale computerized dispersion models (MESOS and GRID) were used to reconstruct deposition patterns over Europe; these isolated areas of very high local deposition were located in the Ukraine, Central Scandinavia and Central Europe.
"Exposure of the population occurs through three main pathways: inhalation of airborne material, external irradiation from material deposited on the ground and ingestion of contaminated foodstuff." (pg. 2).
WHO Regional Office for Europe. (1989). Health hazards from radiocesium following the Chernobyl nuclear accident: Report on a WHO working group. J. Environ. Radioactivity. 10(3). pg. 257-296.
This publication contains no media specific data on the Chernobyl-derived radioactive fallout. It is a general survey of the pathways, radiological impact and risk assessment of radiocesium.
The correct W(r) multiplier for internal effects are a matter of discussion and also a stochastic process in my opinion, and they vary by isotope and method of ingestion. Agreed the real value may be much higher than 20, and these figures were created by the lying radiation industry.
DeleteThe closer one travels to the Tropics, from my perspective near the 49th, the thicker the atmosphere, no?
ReplyDeletePS: Here is something for Ontological: http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap141211.html
Breaking ...
ReplyDeleteQuote: "Update: 12/14/14, 8:06 A.M. - Record breaking Radiation detection in Texas Panhandle!
On the late afternoon of December 4th, a long time running station located in Bolger, Texas, northeast of Amarillo, set off our Alert system, recording readings as high as 25,000 CPM!!! In fact, the radiation levels were well into the 000's for so many minutes that the software almost could not keep up. See the graph at right. For context, he is operating the pancake-tubed Inspector Alert indoors from the second story of his home. His normal baseline background is about 40 CPM.
A storm was rolling through at the time, accompanied by rain, and the Jet Stream map shows its active precipitating fringe directly over the panhandle at the time of the alert - see map below. Wind was from the south. The fact that it was raining set up an opportunity to collect a water sample to confirm that the radiation was related to the storm. So the operator did successive 10 minute average scans of the exact same sample of rainwater to first confirm its radioactive nature, then secondly to measure its radiation level, and thirdly (and of critical importance) to measure the decay rate to to the end of ruling in or out various isotopes of known half life. i.e. the "Poor Man's Isotope Identifying Test", using a Geiger counter.
Results: The rainwater was in fact radioactive, starting out around 300 CPM, and its radioactive constituent decayed very rapidly, indicating a half life of a few hours, such that by the following morning, the same rainwater sample measured no more than background.
Conclusions: Because of the short half life, many fission by-products can be ruled out, and so the initial tendency would be to implicate naturally occurring Radon washout. However, we have never seen raw environmental readings of Radon daughters this high - yes, commonly in the 00's of CPM, even over 1,000 CPM, but never to our knowledge averaging well into the 000's and in this case, as high as 25,000 CPM.
So the working theory we have now, (if not Radon washout), among the station operator and a few of our members involved in the analysis that evening, is a possible detection of some sort of radioactive release from the Pantex plant located only 25 miles to the southwest. Pantex is involved in the disassembly of nuclear weapons at that site. Interestingly, this same Texas monitoring station recorded a possible radiation detection from Pantex on a couple of previous occasions - search the Archives for the Updates of 4/15/13 and 11/24/12"
Quoted from: http://www.radiationnetwork.com/Message.htm
Credit for my relay: http://optimalprediction.com/wp/recent-health-issues/comment-page-8/#comment-56455
Quote of Bobby1: "I am having a severe relapse of ME. It is possible this is being triggered by radiation. But it’s hard to tell with this damned disease."
He could probably use some friendly visitors to his site to warm his heart.
Possibly related (or no)?
Delete" http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/intraseasonal/temp10anim.gif "
... "Try a webcam with the glass protective cover with a very slight breeze blowing towards the ccd, for alpha "visualization" (in dark maze-like enclosure with an isolated plate to measure uVolts/uA)??? (contrast no airflow with known ft/min^3 - perhaps a spare "control" cam?) Cam (or two) above filter element, perhaps? Vortex flow around cam ass. via "rifled" tubing???"
http://majiasblog.blogspot.com/2014/12/rising-radiation-in-phoenix-across-time.html?showComment=1418608064540#c5438798085284916357
What could one do with gross counts per square centimeter?
Nuclear war non stop is just several reactors away
ReplyDeleteIt's likely all products of the interaction of cosmic rays with the atmosphere.
ReplyDelete@stockwell, from, well, stock.........
Deleteplease explain how cosmic could possibly create beta in the atmosphere
I can't see any mechanism, but I do know the skys were angry from 6 months in Hawaii after fuku mess
Cosmic rays contain no beta radiation. Cosmic rays interact with the atmosphere, and the aluminum skin of the aircraft, by Compton scattering, which produces beta particles. While it is true that "There is no beta radiation in Cosmic", it is only true in the vacuum of outer space. A human observer will encounter beta radiation, whose source is cosmic rays.
DeleteOn a flight from Moscow to London (day) my accumulated dose was 3.5ms/h. Averaging 0.8ms/h. Rather high! Measure with soeks 01M 2014
ReplyDeleteShite bro, so you got 3 years background on one flight?
DeleteThats harsh, no worries, US gov is trying to pass law that says 100 mSv is "low"
Stock, dont let the talking heads, read EXPERTS, give you a hard time about not being an expert at this nuke stuff..They are all LIARS..Your not. Keep up the good work. peace to ya.
ReplyDeleteHere is a list of radioisotopes formed by the action of cosmic rays on the atmosphere; the list also contains the production mode of the isotope. [many are beta emitters]
ReplyDeleteIsotopes formed by the action of cosmic rays on the air
Isotope Mode of formation
³H (tritium) 14N (n, 12C)³H
7Be Spallation (N and O)
10Be Spallation (N and O)
11C Spallation (N and O)
14C 14N (n, p) 14C
18F 18O (p, n)18F and Spallation (Ar)
22Na Spallation (Ar)
24Na Spallation (Ar)
28Mg Spallation (Ar)
31Si Spallation (Ar)
32Si Spallation (Ar)
32P Spallation (Ar)
34mCl Spallation (Ar)
35S Spallation (Ar)
36Cl 35Cl (n, γ)36Cl
37Ar 37Cl (p, n)37Ar
38Cl Spallation (Ar)
39Ar 38Ar (n, γ)39Ar
39Cl 40Ar (n, np)39Cl & spallation (Ar)
41Ar 40Ar (n, γ)41Ar
81Kr 80Kr (n, γ) 81Kr
Maybe you should have taken a few courses, and check your meter scale and conversion factors you may be off by a factor of 10, cps/ Sv conversion can be tricky.
LOL Michael Mann, trying deception, how sad.
DeleteI am not relying on a Sv conversion
The pancake probe picks up not just cosmic radiation from above, but also scattered cosmic radiation from below And the gamma from those isotopes noted above. Placing the probe on the leg blocks a high percentage of those other gammas along with any betas coming from below.
DeleteMust beta pancakes are only sensitive on one side, through a thin Mylar beta window.
Your analysis (8 CPS beta) is bogus.
Chelsei, your comment is disingenuous at best.
DeleteThe inspector is not a "beta pancake" , bring game next time
Perhaps of interest: I was unable to verify your allegations and due to my own findings I disagree with them now. My data is included on:
ReplyDeletehttps://allegedlyapparent.wordpress.com/2015/03/06/geiger-counter-data-from-airplane-flights-denver-atlanta-amsterdam/
Thanks for inspiring me to do more testing, though.
All the best, - mvb
Upon second testing, I did find a Beta signal too higher up, albeit far from as pronounced as what you claimed. Could it be that horizontal versus vertical was a significant factor in your data as well?
ReplyDeleteMy latest: "More Geiger Counter Measurements: Flight Brussels -> Atlanta (Elevated Beta Radiation Signal Found in Data!)"
!@-> https://allegedlyapparent.wordpress.com/2015/03/26/more-geiger-counter-measurements-flight-brussels-atlanta-elevated-beta-radiation-signal-found-in-data/
Hope this helps fine-tune things. All the best,
MVB
MVB, I did see a change as I went from quick 1 minute samples horizontal to vertical. More on the horizontal, but not much like 15%.
DeleteCosmic comes in from all directions, not just "up" so the earth blocks all of the gamma from "below" pretty much a 100% shield even at 6 miles up. the atmosphere blocks some in vertical testing, but less at higher altitudes.
My prior testing was on my leg, although I shot the video on my stomach so I could see what I was shooting. Leg testing was pure horizontal, and results were similar to stomach testing. A massive reduction, indicating beta.
I fly on Tuesday and will try to replicate the test.