If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Maybe, as well I thouth so, although some doesn't believe in this.
for X-raying you know it needs ample of tools or epuipments( a van ).
I wish you succeed and tell about it, don't forget to keep us entirely in contact.
I'm the first one who likes to order it, if you desire.
well...of course there are a lot of problems reaching 1cm resolution at 25meters underground...but at 5-10 meters is not a problem.
But with no discrimination. Enviromental problems, hazards...
This stuff is too "dangerous" I think, and not for hobbists in any case.
I think he was talking about a gamma-ray camera...not GPR.
Best regards,
Max
techniques exist and are secret similar to radio interferometers...or using ultra uhf bands for small wave lenght
techniques exist and are secret similar to radio interferometers...or using ultra uhf bands for small wave lenght
Hi,
gamma-ray ones exist but are not for hobbists... sunday-THunters etc too risks involved, too expensive stuff, too skills and knowledge required... it's military stuff only... and civilian applications are still prototypes that only big e.g. minerary-companies (like CSIRO of Australia) can play with.
Me personally don't like the approach of hi-invasive radiations in the environment to find stuff... and also if you use lot of care this stuff can easy kill you in matter of few years.
So I think there isn't future in the TH scenario for this stuff... and applications will remain only military or by big companies with lot of money to spend in safety devices and automated testing e.g. vehicles.
Other things like pulsed microwaves are possible... but you have to consider that enormous power is required to penetrate soil with that and not so easy to mount e.g. a 1MW microwave laser (actually "maser") on your shoulder.
Non-portable machines... so you need the "van" ... you need a very powerful e.g. gas-generator etc etc
Similar problems for these... so no future for these on the TH scenario.
My goodness!
I remember this book: "The Scientific American Book of Projects for The Amateur Scientist".
There were several interesting but quite dangerous projects in it, if I recall.
I particularly like the "homemade atom smasher". What fun we could have with this particle accelerator in the parlor! I wonder if I can transmute lithium into unstable beryllium like Cockcroft and Walton did with a similar atom smasher.
And the project to tranquilize a rat could come in handy on treasure hunts when wild animals intrude into your camp.
If bones are not transparent to X-rays i cant imagine how mineral soil could be? or do we need Mw of power?
Fred.
The Xray machine in the article probably puts out less Xray strength than a dentist office Xray machine. In order to see the Xray image, we must place the film behind the object to see the shadow left from Xrays at the back side of the target. This would mean we need to capture the Xray image from under the buried target to locate it.
Because we cannot put our sensors under the target, ground-penetrating radar is the closest thing to Xrays used look for the reflected waves. The received signal is a low resolution indication of a target, similar to the signal a metal detector finds when over metal. Radar and Xrays do not produce an image of the target because these reflected waves cannot be focused onto an image on a viewing surface. At least not with optical lenses or electronics.
If we wanted to see an Xray image of the target under the ground, it may be possible by watching the reflected Xrays with special lobster eye lenses that use the principle of reflection rather than refraction to produce an image of the reflected Xrays. See these pages for details of these lobster eye lenses: http://spie.org/x14632.xml http://www.poc.com/emerging_products/lexid/default.asp
The Xray machine in the project probably would not have enough power to make a visible image on an image sensor array when reflected from the ground 1.5 meters distance. But if it were focused on a photomultiplier tube, then it may be very easily visible. We can't know unless we try looking at the reflected Xrays with a lobster eye lens and a photomultiplier tube. But looking at the photos of the security Xray vision scanners, it looks like they work fine with low power battery hand-held units. I suspect the hand-held security pistols emit less Xray strength than the home Xray project.
Think about before you make some 1KW power supply... for your surplus tube bought on ebay !
Exactly. Very dangerous for people who do not understand the hazards.
In the case of the X-ray vision pistol, you see a man holding the pistol for searching and inspecting behind walls. This is a low power unit that reflects weak X-rays back to the pistol lens. The man is not harmed by the reflected X-rays because they are much weaker than what you find in a dentist office. Yet this same pistol can show images from behind steel plates and several inches into the ground from a distance of 9 feet. We will not need to worry about hundreds of treasure hunters with these new X-ray vision pistols because they cost a half million dollars each and will not come down in price until the development phase is completed. This means that hackers will not be modding these pistols for a sharp focused beam to increase the X-ray concentration in places where we are treasure hunting.
Comment