Recent comments in /f/news

throwleboomerang t1_jdkxg80 wrote

You are just plain wrong. Let's say we've got a sample of that tritium and it reads 3 counts per second (CPS) on a lead-encased geiger counter (i.e. not exposed to background level). If I then take a non-lead encased counter outside, it now reads 10 CPS from normal atmospheric/environmental radiation. If I then take the tritium outside of the lead and measure it with the unshielded meter I will likely still get 10 CPS, i.e. no increase in background. The tritium in this case has less than the background radioactivity and therefore does not cause an increase, which means your dose does not increase.

Edit- this is an example, the CPS are made up to illustrate the point, lest you think I am stating exactly what will happen.

0

DankDuke t1_jdkwd0j wrote

23% sounds like an insane amount to most people. Until they see what the yearly total is. They deserve more, and that's very obvious.

Edit: I don't think I disagree with any of your views here, just trying to clarify that their 23% is totally different than a 23% for anyone else. Teachers are getting fucked and it's time they get what they deserve; more money.

7

stonewall384 t1_jdkwcca wrote

I understand it is a harmless amount of radiation, but it is dishonest to say it is less than background. Anything added to background is more than background. This is an example of some company trying to skirt regulations. If they distort the truth, they distort the truth they deserve the fines

2