[HN Gopher] High speed X-ray video: jumping beans, wind-up toys ...
___________________________________________________________________
High speed X-ray video: jumping beans, wind-up toys and more
Author : surprisetalk
Score : 53 points
Date : 2025-11-07 14:06 UTC (4 days ago)
(HTM) web link (www.youtube.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.youtube.com)
| echelon wrote:
| I got nervous watching him put his hand in front of the machine.
|
| You don't want to subject yourself needlessly to ionizing
| radiation. A little here and there is probably okay at small
| doses and for valid reasons, but it all adds up over a lifetime.
|
| He didn't mention how much X-ray radiation this puts out in the
| first half or so of the video. I worry it's more than a medical
| photograph as it's continuous high sample rate video, but I'm not
| an expert. Would be curious to know.
|
| Also curious about the shielding and leaking.
|
| Don't damage your DNA if you don't have to. This is a cool, semi-
| educational video. I don't think I'd take the same risk though.
| zzlk wrote:
| I think it's probably not true that it all adds up over a
| lifetime. That's the model that is widely used but there's some
| good evidence to suggest it's not accurate.
|
| see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linear_no-threshold_model
| eig wrote:
| Be rest assured Ben's previous job was in the medial imaging
| industry. While he worked on MRI machines rather than ionizing
| radiation, I think he's very well aware of the dangers of X
| rays and has many projects dealing with ionizing radiation.
| There's a lot of bad safety science YouTubers, Ben isn't one of
| them :)
|
| Funny thing: it's actually rare to get radiation damage to
| human hands and feet since there's not too much growing tissue
| there!
| scythe wrote:
| >there's not too much growing tissue there!
|
| On the contrary, I was told stories in school that old IR
| doctors used to lose the hair on their hands after using the
| fluoro for years. The fingernails are also radiosensitive.
|
| The main reason that X-rays of the hands and feet are usually
| very low risk is because the beam intensity (dose) required
| to penetrate the small amount of tissue is very low. Because
| the video uses a high-sensitivity detector (photon counter)
| the dose may be even less than usual. However, it would still
| be a regulatory violation if you did it in a hospital.
| scythe wrote:
| >I worry it's more than a medical photograph as it's continuous
| high sample rate video, but I'm not an expert. Would be curious
| to know.
|
| Typical fluoro skin entrance exposure rate to go through
| someone's hand is on the order of 1-3 millisieverts per minute.
| With a more advanced detector (like this one) it may be lower,
| but increasing the frame rate or resolution will tend to
| require higher dose rate. The associated risk of skin cancer is
| quite small. But please be aware that unnecessary X-Ray imaging
| of living things is against the law in most jurisdictions.
| SoftTalker wrote:
| I've wondered how much the average X-ray dosage dropped since
| they stopped using film and switched to detector-based
| imaging. Anyone know?
| scythe wrote:
| You can compare diagnostic reference levels (DRLs) from
| different years for the same exam; these correspond to the
| 75th percentile patient dose for a particular imaging
| study. It can be a little annoying to find older DRLs (I
| just tried).
|
| NCRP 172 (published 2015) provides a direct comparison of
| digital to film for some examinations. For upper GI
| fluoroscopy without oral contrast the DRL for film is 3.9
| mSv and for digital is 1.5 mSv. I think this is roughly
| typical.
| rdtsc wrote:
| > He didn't mention how much X-ray radiation this puts out in
| the first half or so of the video. I worry it's more than a
| medical photograph as it's continuous high sample rate video,
| but I'm not an expert. Would be curious to know.
|
| > Also curious about the shielding and leaking.
|
| If you'd watch the video the last part explains exactly that.
| The energy levels involved, how the beam is stopped, how
| backscatter is checked. He is definitely no dummy who just
| found an x-ray machine in a dump and just powered it up for
| clicks and giggles.
| bkraz wrote:
| I may have the opportunity to use a much higher framerate camera
| in the future. Please leave suggestions for things that are
| fairly transparent to x-rays (no metal, or very thin small
| internal parts), and demonstrates the utility of high speed
| capture (typically things breaking, bouncing, shattering). The
| last requirement is that the object be very small, just 1 to 2 cm
| long. Since learning about ptycography, I may try that as well
| since x-ray ptycography is one of the real world uses for these
| sensors.
| s0rce wrote:
| I thought the insect breathing work at the synchrotron was cool
| https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.1078008
| jcims wrote:
| I wonder if you could blow some fine mesh aluminum/iron powder
| through a small whistle to see any of the airflow effects.
|
| Spurious xray emission from triboelectric effect.
|
| Phase change of various materials changing absorption
| characteristics.
|
| Capacitor discharge.
| shellfishgene wrote:
| This may be a bit hard, but jumping insects like locusts and
| crickets?
| Python3267 wrote:
| Here's an interesting one, if the equipment is sensitive enough
| you could test if you can see the difference in air densities
| as a .22 caliber bullet passes by.
| SweetSoftPillow wrote:
| Hummingbird
| SweetSoftPillow wrote:
| Brookesia nana aka nano-chameleon.
| lacoolj wrote:
| Not only is this incredibly cool, but it bridges my knowledge of
| x-ray (CR/XR, in this case, DR) even further. I work for a
| medical imaging company and we actually sell and promote our
| digital radiography machine that will do this, but for humans (at
| a much, much slower rate, but enough to be useful in medical
| diagnostics).
|
| I had never considered an application of use outside of medicine.
|
| So, my day is now accounted for. In addition to "overdue
| training" on things I already know, I will be youtubing all the
| x-ray, MRI, ultrasound fun things that you would never see
| otherwise.
|
| Thank you OP!
| cycomanic wrote:
| Please post a link to your YT channel so we all can take part
| in the fun.
| rdtsc wrote:
| That's wild they have a high speed 8K photon counting device for
| x-rays now. It's not the one he tested but it's the latest one
| the company has https://www.dectris.com/en/detectors/x-ray-
| detectors/eiger2/
|
| It's also neat how he describes how the acquisition works: 32bit
| tiffs, pci card, real-time linux, and a special rack-mounted
| server.
| world2vec wrote:
| One of the most underrated channels on YouTube.
| pmontra wrote:
| A Motif interface from the early 90s at about 10:00 in the video.
| That X-Ray detector has probably a very long history.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2025-11-11 23:01 UTC)