Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 12:18:47 -0400
Subject: Re: Replacement cloud chamber
Oooooo...thanks Cliff. I had looked up the wrong one! Lesson learned:
always use the geiger counter. *sigh* This has just NOT been a good week
for me for doing the obvious and remembering to do things period.
Fortunately, the mail hadn't gone out. So, back to square one.
On 10/14/2004 10:47 AM, Cliff Bettis wrote:
>Something is wrong here. The half life of Ra 226 is 1620 years. The source should not be the problem.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: cablem
> To: email@example.com
> Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2004 9:27 AM
> Subject: Re: Replacement cloud chamber
> I'm working on it. The source is mounted in a screw that seals the chamber, so its part of the whole design. I'm sending it off to Spectrum Techniques to see what they can do. It looks pretty easy to me.
> And, as an indicator as to the age: my source was radium 226. You can't get that in any quantity now without a license. The demo has lasted 15 years. If only all my demos were as sturdy.
> On 10/13/2004 5:17 PM, John Welch wrote:
>You can't replace the source?
>----- Original Message -----
>Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2004 1:33 PM
>Subject: Replacement cloud chamber
> Well, the source in the cloud chamber is dead. It was a nice Klinger
>model...but I can't find any cloud chambers at Klinger (actually, the
>site links are messed up and I can't find much of anything). The usual
>places I've looked have the "student" models using lantern mantels, etc.
>I want something better. This one lasted 15 years. Does anyone know
>where to get a really good one?
Wake Forest University
Winston-Salem, NC 27109
"I think the payload was too top heavy."
"Maybe we shouldn't try launching Barbies."
From Paul.Nord@valpo.edu Thu Oct 14 11:45:16 2004