[HN Gopher] CO2 laser enables long-range detection of radioactiv...
___________________________________________________________________
CO2 laser enables long-range detection of radioactive material
Author : EA-3167
Score : 38 points
Date : 2025-03-21 21:41 UTC (3 days ago)
(HTM) web link (physicsworld.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (physicsworld.com)
| PaulHoule wrote:
| Makes me think of
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ionization_chamber which can work
| at atmospheric pressure.
| MisterTea wrote:
| The multiplier effect invokes this:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scintillation_counter
| ziknard wrote:
| Easily defeated by a large Tupperware container.
| CamperBob2 wrote:
| Very interesting effect, but yes, the real imagination comes in
| when you have to explain how it might be used in practice.
| Animats wrote:
| Yes. 10 meter range, must have line of sight to the
| radioactive material. When does that come up in practice?
| Terr_ wrote:
| Could it be useful in a nuclear-reactor context?
|
| If the sensor is further away, it might be easier to
| maintain, have a longer lifetime, and could even be re-
| aimed to cover a wider area or identify where a specific
| hotspot is.
|
| Depending on how l
| SiempreViernes wrote:
| I think this is for the, now depressingly remote, situation
| where you want to verify that something at the end of a
| adversaries missile is really not a nuclear weapon because a
| treaty says that would be one too many.
|
| In that context a way to measure radioactivity by non-
| invasive means is great!
|
| Shame that a nuclear weapons treaty with limits and an
| inspections regime is more sci-fi than the technology needed
| to remotely verify the presence of a warhead.
| ricksunny wrote:
| >Shame that a nuclear weapons treaty with limits and an
| inspections regime is more sci-fi than the technology
| needed to remotely verify the presence of a warhead
|
| Well articulated. The early history of atomic weapons
| regulation hinges on precisely the difficulty of
| independent verification means (as well as judgements on
| whether or not an adversary would let you into their
| country without whack-a-mole style circumvention). I still
| think that verification technology is the main stumbling
| block. Neutrino detection is what I (and I bet ongoing
| orograms in the DoE) focus on for this purpose. We need to
| be able to figure out how to sense neutrinos order of
| magnitude more effectively than we can currently. Right now
| it feels like panning for gold silt with sieves as sparse
| as chicken-wire.
| gh02t wrote:
| Kinda, but at least for gamma radiation (which is the main one
| you care about finding at standoff), the same radiation that
| induces the ionization these lasers detect will go right
| through tupperware and ionize the air outside, which will be
| just as detectable as long as it's strong enough to still
| produce enough ionization outside the tupperware.
|
| Shielding the source with something that actually absorbs
| gammas like steel or lead is something that would actually
| render this laser detection null, but that's also true of
| conventional direct radiation detection methods too. No real
| way to find something that's not emitting something.
|
| Regardless, this method is probably more intended for scenarios
| like nuclear accidents where you don't really have to worry
| about someone hiding the source from you. Though I still don't
| see that many applications for it even within that niche (and I
| did my PhD on finding radiation sources and currently work full
| time on it, so I'm fairly knowledgeable on the subject...), as
| there are a lot of limitations to this.
| ggm wrote:
| TSA will be buying.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2025-03-24 23:00 UTC)