Guys, lets hope that the radiation does not escape the system if we ever want to see any of these units become adopted in large numbers. Be careful what you hope for! I would be far more satisfied to find that the original measurement was not accurate.
If this radiation signal is for real, can the energy be confined to within a well shielded device? I have not followed the testing too closely, but I tend to recoil at the mention of gamma radiation. Dave -----Original Message----- From: Eric Walker <[email protected]> To: vortex-l <[email protected]> Sent: Tue, Apr 12, 2016 12:12 am Subject: Re: [Vo]: MFMP GS5.3 - a replication On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 1:35 PM, Bob Higgins <[email protected]> wrote: We are all hoping for a repeat performance of the "signal", the gamma burst output. In GS5.3, the team is much better prepared to monitor the radiations. Time bases for all of the data acquistions have been carefully synchronized. Amptek has generously loaned MFMP an X-123 CdTe x-ray spectrometer capable of about 6keV to 80keV measurement. Mark Jurich has borrowed an x-ray scintillator system from SLAC to monitor. The GM detector has been upgraded to a sensitive 2" pancake detector. I'm looking forward to the conclusions. I'm sure MFMP have done a range of calibrations; possibly something like these? Calibrated the x-ray spectrometer and scintillator against known standards. Verified that the x-ray spectrometer, the x-ray scintillator and GM detector work in coincidence (when there's a signal in one there's a signal in the others). Taken background readings over a period of weeks n order to characterize occasional background events and avoid confusing them for a possible signal. Eric
