Thanks Phideaux,
I did my own ring measurements:
I would expect you to so that you can see that I have not biased my measurements.
Can you tell me why your 214Po and 218Po circles are outside the 214Po and 218Po rings? (And why are your pictures a different hue?)
The 214Po circle does not match any of the 214Po ring and the 218Po halo only matches at the top of the 218Po ring, where there appears to be a much wider area of damage that extends the width of the diagonal band of coloration, and is outside the ring elsewhere.
This means you have missed the target, and you need to scale the picture up more. This will make your "210Po" measurement larger.
polonium-210 19.9 m.
And you are already at the half-way point between 210Po and 222Rn while you have missed the two outer rings.
This is similar to my last picture in
Message 255, when I intentionally forced the 210Po ring to match half-way between the 210Po and 222Rn ring, and demonstrating that you cannot eliminate 222Rn without missing the outer rings.
Then I placed it over the U halo:
While here you match these two outside rings, but your 210Po circle is outside the 210Po ring all the way around.
In other words you are not consistent and have biased your data.
I measured the diameter of the circle, so no need to worry about that. Here are the basic measurements for the rings I placed over the image:
The polonium-210 halo is wider than the usual, but one of the measurements in the published results had the ring at 19.8.
Do you remember where I said that the curve of α energy versus ring diameter was not a smooth curve? It was
Message 255, and I have gone back to that and rotated it and blown it up for easier visibility:
As noted, I used this curve to generate radii for 230Th and 234U inside the 226Ra circle. These are the numbers in red above.
Then I relaxed the curve at the 210Po point to see what a smoother curve would generate for this radius, then I did the same thing with the original curve relaxed at the 222Rn point:
Curve estimated 210Po value = 19.55 μm:
Curve estimated 222Rn value = 20.35 μm:
My conclusion from this is that the natural separation of these rings is less than what we see in the published data: in each case the estimate moves by 0.15 μm: toward the other ring. This, of course, makes distinguishing one ring from the other more difficult (as in the 2nd, 3rd and 4th rings of the 238U halo where the overall distance between 2 and 4 is 0.47 μm, or half the distance from 210Po to 222Rn). One explanation for the disparity is that early damage affects penetration of later damage, however this would apply across the board due to the short half-lives involved, so I rule this out. Another reason could just be that the results are empirical data and there is a statistical spread, with many more measurements of some rings than of others, and variation from rock to rock.
However, I don't see reason to expect a larger separation, rather I see reason to expect a smaller separation, thus making your problem with the outer rings even more acute.
As it sits, neither of your circle sets match the pictures, nor are they consistent from one to the other.
Enjoy
Edited by RAZD, : correct picture
we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.
• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •