Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Dangerous radioactivity rapidly destroyed

  1. #1
    Council Member kowalskil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Fort Lee, New Jersey, USA
    Posts
    49

    Default Dangerous radioactivity rapidly destroyed

    Bacteria destroy radioactivity


    A recent claim: radioactivity can be reduced by bacteria. See this link:

    http://pages.csam.montclair.edu/~kow...vysotskii.html

    Radioactive Cs-137 is mostly responsible for meltdowns of spent reactor fuel. This discovery, if confirmed, will lead to many useful practical applications, both civilian and military.

    Ludwik Kowalski (see Wikipedia)
    .
    Ludwik Kowalski, author of a free ON-LINE book entitled “Diary of a Former Communist: Thoughts, Feelings, Reality.”

    http://csam.montclair.edu/~kowalski/life/intro.html

    It is a testimony based on a diary kept between 1946 and 2004 (in the USSR, Poland, France and the USA).

    The more people know about proletarian dictatorship the less likely will we experience is.

  2. #2
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    136

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kowalskil View Post
    Bacteria destroy radioactivity


    A recent claim: radioactivity can be reduced by bacteria. See this link:

    http://pages.csam.montclair.edu/~kow...vysotskii.html

    Radioactive Cs-137 is mostly responsible for meltdowns of spent reactor fuel. This discovery, if confirmed, will lead to many useful practical applications, both civilian and military.

    Ludwik Kowalski (see Wikipedia)
    .
    If you want to change the nucleus of an atom, i.e. to convert one element into another, you need more than compounds which only affect the electron shell of this atom.
    Artificial nuclear transmutation works, however, with high energy particles which are not found in non-radioactive cells. The claim is very likely nonsense.

  3. #3
    Council Member Fuchs's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    3,189

    Default

    The only good that bacteria can achieve in regard to radiation is afaik to make the radioactive isotopes more easily disposable or to integrate them into certain molecules that so a human body would not accumulate/integrate the radioactive isotope.

  4. #4
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Northern New Jersey
    Posts
    40

    Default

    I read the abstract, but I'm not familiar enough with the units of radioactive decay to figure out what they're measuring the increase of with the bacteria. I've seen curies, rads, and sieverts used before in various applications, but nothing with the abbreviation Bk (Bq, bequerel?) and a google search lead me to the Burger King homepage. I guess that's what an undergrad engineering degree with 2 semesters of physics buys you these days (and 15 years of knowledge decay). Figuring out what they measured the increase of (and how large the increase was compared to their measurement error) would be my first step in deciding whether this was something I personally will keep an eye on or not.

  5. #5
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    136

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KenWats View Post
    I read the abstract, but I'm not familiar enough with the units of radioactive decay to figure out what they're measuring the increase of with the bacteria. I've seen curies, rads, and sieverts used before in various applications, but nothing with the abbreviation Bk (Bq, bequerel?) and a google search lead me to the Burger King homepage. I guess that's what an undergrad engineering degree with 2 semesters of physics buys you these days (and 15 years of knowledge decay). Figuring out what they measured the increase of (and how large the increase was compared to their measurement error) would be my first step in deciding whether this was something I personally will keep an eye on or not.
    Bacterial cells, even in relative low concentrations, do NOT form a solution, but a suspension with much higher concentration on the bottom of the flask, this can easily be demonstrated with UV spectroscopy.
    Therefore, the described "control experiment" is completely useless and misleading as cells which bind/incorporate caesium were not used. Or in other words, sedimentation of the ceasium containing cells is a likely source for the "destruction" of radioactivity.

  6. #6
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    IL
    Posts
    73

    Default

    It's nonsense, let's stop this thread.

  7. #7
    Council Member davidbfpo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    13,055

    Default

    Moderator's Notice

    Thread locked after a review.
    davidbfpo

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •