Because the ionizing type and the photoelectric type are sensitive to
different products of combustion. The ionizing type is most sensitive
to invisible products, and the photoelectric type to the visible type,
IE smoke. Thus the photoelectric ones will respond first to smoldering
fires, and the ionizing type to fire that have rather complete
combustion. Thus a good detector should really have both.
Marshall
Bob Banever wrote:
Richard,
Well why make smoke detectors that emit radioactivity then
when safer alternatives that work just as well exist? They used to
make watch dials from radium until they realized that people were
recieving radiation from them that was potentially dangerous. To
this day fertilizer is made from uranium tailings used to grow
tobacco. Every time you smoke a pack of cigarettes you get the
equivalent amount of radiation of one chest x-ray. This is insane...
yet it is done on a massive scale. My point is this... radioactivity
belongs IN THE GROUND where it has it's natural uses. It does NOT
belong above the ground in anything... including nuclear reactors
(remember Chernobyl?), DM munitions (depleted uranium causing cancer
and genetic defects in those populations exposed such as found in
Iraq). Where radiation is found naturally above the ground it is
ALWAYS considered dangerous.
Bob
----- Original Message -----
*From:* Richard Goodwin <mailto:[email protected]>
*To:* [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
*Sent:* Friday, April 23, 2010 7:05 AM
*Subject:* Re: CS>A closer look at americium 241 from a smoke detector
I thought I was being clearer than that. Not sure that radiation
or anything else has a "rightful" place where it "should" be, but
the stuff in the ground is certainly far from harmless -- how many
people have died of cancer who lived in houses full of radon all
their short lives?
And yes, if you dig it up and concentrate it into something that
is now highly radioactive, and put it in your pocket, of course
you will suffer consequences. But why would you do that? Having
dug it up and made it into something dangerous, you ought to put
it somewhere where you cannot be affected by it, like in a reactor
to produce electricity, behind shielding sufficient to prevent any
exposure at all. That way it is safer for you than when it was in
the ground.
Dick
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* Bob Banever <[email protected]>
*To:* [email protected]
*Sent:* Fri, April 23, 2010 9:46:37 AM
*Subject:* Re: CS>A closer look at americium 241 from a smoke detector
Richard,
You entire premise is flawed. Radioactivity is a natural
byproduct of decaying organic material and has it's rightful place
in the ground. By being there it is safely away from harming
humans and other living things that have no need for this type of
radioactivity. By your premise digging it up, concentrating it
and putting in our personal environments is ok. Nothing could be
farthur from the truth. This type of energy is destructive to
DNA... it kills living things in such high concentrations. Why
would you want to expose yourself or your loved ones to ionizing
radiation? It causes cancer, genetic defects, and a host of other
diseases in plants, animals, and man.
--
The Silver List is a moderated forum for discussing Colloidal Silver.
Rules and Instructions: http://www.silverlist.org
Unsubscribe:
<mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe>
Archives:
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/maillist.html
Off-Topic discussions: <mailto:[email protected]>
List Owner: Mike Devour <mailto:[email protected]>
