News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Dismantling Sellafield: the epic task of shutting down a ... by adrian_b on Friday December 16, 2022 @11:29AM (#34016488)
Most people are not aware that carbon, potassium and calcium are radioactive elements.

Despite that, our body contains large quantities of them.

Like also for the chemical toxins, the dangers of radiation depend on the dose, and we should not worry when it is low enough.

Also platinum is a radioactive element, but those who wear platinum jewelry are seldom aware of this.

Re:Dismantling Sellafield: the epic task of shutting down a ... by adrian_b on Friday December 16, 2022 @05:08PM (#34021166)
Someone has downvoted this, but I cannot understand the reason, unless it was due to ignorance.

Everything written above are facts, not opinions.

They are little known facts, which is why I have mentioned them. Uranium and thorium are the most radioactive among the elements that have survived since the creation of the Solar System, but they are not the only radioactive primordial elements, there are many others.

Most people who are afraid of radiation do not realize how many of the surrounding objects are radioactive, without being dangerous because of that.

Re:Dismantling Sellafield: the epic task of shutting down a ... by hcknwscommenter on Friday December 16, 2022 @05:56PM (#34021755)
Typically, when one refers to an element as "radioactive" one is either referring to a particular isotope that is radioactive (e.g., C14) or an element in which the most abundant naturally occurring isotope(s) are radioactive (e.g., U). To call "carbon" radioactive, is technically true I suppose depending on your view but the level of radioactivity in natural carbon is so low that it is an almost meaningless truth. Potassium and calcium have a bit more natural radioactivity, but still it poses no health issues. The other elements you list are essentially the same, except perhaps Halfnium (have not checked). Heck by the definition you seem to be using of the term "radioactive element", I do not think there exists a non-radioactive element.

Of course, you are correct that the dangers of radioactivity depend on the dose. But your message is diminished by overly emphasizing the radioactivity in carbon and other naturally occurring elements that pose zero health risk and frankly are so very non-radioactive in a relative sense.

Re:Dismantling Sellafield: the epic task of shutting down a ... by adrian_b on Sunday December 18, 2022 @03:16AM (#34035905)
A chemical element is called "radioactive" whenever at least one of its naturally occurring isotopes is radioactive.

Whenever at least one isotope is radioactive, anything containing that element is radioactive, but with a lower activity, proportional with the natural abundance of the radioactive isotope. Because the isotopic abundance also matters, elements like carbon and potassium have very low activities even if their radioactive isotopes have high activities, because the abundance of their radioactive isotopes is very low.

The majority of the naturally occurring chemical elements, i.e. about three quarters of them, are non-radioactive.

Even if the naturally occurring chemical elements either are non-radioactive or have low radioactivity, otherwise they would have disappeared since the formation of the Solar System, their radioactivity is non-negligible due to the huge number of atoms that exist in every gram of substance.

Inside a human body, during each second, thousands of atoms disintegrate, emitting radiation.

However, almost all damage caused by the natural radiation is repaired, because all living cells have very efficient mechanisms for this. Only at higher doses those are overwhelmed.

Re:Dismantling Sellafield: the epic task of shutting down a ... by trashtester on Sunday December 18, 2022 @12:11PM (#34039738)
> A chemical element is called "radioactive" whenever at least one of its naturally occurring isotopes is radioactive.

I think you the defintion is the opposite, ie that an element is considered radioactive if NO isotopes are stable (ie ALL are radioactive).

https://www.thoughtco.com/list-of-radioactive-elements-60864...

Re:Dismantling Sellafield: the epic task of shutting down a ... by hcknwscommenter on Wednesday December 21, 2022 @08:46PM (#34088723)
>The majority of the naturally occurring chemical elements, i.e. about three quarters of them, are non-radioactive.

Huh? Care to name 5 non-radioactive elements according to your definition?

Re:Dismantling Sellafield: the epic task of shutting down a ... by pvaldes on Saturday December 17, 2022 @10:22AM (#34028452)
> carbon, potassium and calcium are radioactive elements...

> [we have it in our body], so... [we all are radioactive]

can be radioactive in some circumstances, does not mean they are always radioactive. Is a non-sequitur.

Re:Dismantling Sellafield: the epic task of shutting down a ... by adrian_b on Sunday December 18, 2022 @03:26AM (#34035947)
Any radioactive element is always radioactive.

There are no circumstances that can influence its radioactivity, short of placing it inside a nuclear explosion or inside a high-energy particle accelerator.

Nevertheless, most naturally occurring radioactive elements have a radioactivity that is low enough to not pose any danger.

Re:Dismantling Sellafield: the epic task of shutting down a ... by pvaldes on Sunday December 18, 2022 @06:03AM (#34036580)
> Any radioactive element is always radioactive.

> There are no circumstances that can influence its radioactivity

False and false. Elements are not radioactive per se. Only some isotopes of those elements are, and some are more frequent than other. Just because you have some carbon in your body does not mean that is radioactive. (In some cases metabolism even evolved to favor some kind over the other).

Time can and will influence radioactivity, so any radioactive element is -not- always radioactive. This is false.

Location is also very important. The background radioactivity of a granite mountain is not included in the body as atoms. It does not pass the outer skin barrier, that is shedding a layer of dead cells all the time in any case.

Re:Dismantling Sellafield: the epic task of shutting down a ... by Schroedingersat on Sunday December 18, 2022 @10:54AM (#34038821)
You were downvoted because, whether or not they understand the numbers or know the names, most people understand that long lived bioaccumulative high activity alpha emitters like Tc99, Cs137 or Pu240 are really, really bad.

Obvious half truths and misdirections told in a really arrogant way then re-enforce the idea that anyone telling them any amount of radiation is safe is deliberately trying to mislead them, and so they wind up trusting nobody.

They then correctly infer that the liar is malicious and trying to scam them. So all in all they get to the right place even if it is for the wrong reasons.