From my limited knowledge, itwould be very hard to make it react to all types of radiation (alpha, beta, gamma) since they penetrate differently and interact with forces differently. You could potentially make a magnetic "lens" that would interact with alpha and beta particles, but gamma rays would ignore it.
The best way I can think of to make a "radiation camera" is similar to how you can make a "wifi camera", by hooking up a radiation detector to a pan-tilt mechanism, and moving it around very slowly and sampling the amount of radiation detected at each point. Essentially a single pixel "camera" that you have to move around to take a full picture. However, you'd also have to shield the detector from any radioactivity coming from directions that it's not pointed in, which is especially hard if you're trying to capture gamma rays, since they like to penetrate through everything. Its like if light could leak into the side of a normal camera, you'd get rubbish photos
Why would it have to be a single pixel instead of an array of sensors like any digital camera?
Sure, we probably can't make Geiger counters in a form factor that allows an array of a million of them in a handheld device, but maybe 20x16 or something?
I mean you could make that work, but you'd have to shield between all of the detectors so that you don't get the radiation equivalent of bloom on your pictures. If you have only one, it'll be easier to shield, in my head anyway
Depends on the energy ranges and particle types you are interested in.
For instance we routinely take plenty of x-ray images, though there is fortunately not a lot of stuff just lying around that are bright enough x-ray sources to properly expose standard x-ray detectors.
Detecting electrons or protons (beta and alpha radiation) in such a way that you can work out their arrival direction is also doable, but the equipment is fairly bulky and you tend to have to wait a long time to accumulate enough detections to see anything.
While a sensor array of tiny/microscopic Geiger–Müller tubes sounds practical, focusing the particles to generate an image on that sensor is not. There is no lens that can simultaneously focus all the different types of particles. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ionizing_radiation#Directly_io...
You could make a pin-point camera with an array of detectors that will receive thus only the radiation coming from the direction fixed by the positions of the aperture and of the detector.
However that might not work well because the material around the pin-point aperture might not absorb sufficiently the rays coming from different directions and it cannot be made thick.
So what may work better is to make the detector array in the form of a compound arthropod eye, where each detector is at the bottom of a long tube whose walls absorb the rays coming from any other direction except its axis.
In practice, besides trying to absorb the rays coming from different directions, preventing them to reach the detector, for high-energy rays there is the alternative to use 2 or more collinear detectors for each direction (corresponding to an image pixel). A high-energy particle or photon will pass through all collinear detectors, causing simultaneous pulses at their outputs. Whenever such pulses are not simultaneous, they are discarded, because they correspond to rays coming from another direction than intended for that pixel. The accumulated count of filtered pulses per some time interval will give the luminosity of the corresponding image pixel.
That’s actually one reason I’m quite excited about wind and solar as a power source. Apart from the CO₂ that coal and gas pants emit (and the fugitive methane emissions from coal, oil and gas production), it seems like an improvement to be able to generate electricity without having to pump so much waste heat into the atmosphere with all that water vapour.
Ohh, is that what the programmers were doing all through Halt and Catch Fire? Waiting for compilation? I couldn't understand how they got away with acting like naughty 5 year olds, throwing things at each other constantly.
Just noticed that chrome allows the filter css3 property to be exercised on street view.
I assume this will be adopted by the other platforms too? But I'm not a particularly educated programmer, so I don't know the likelihood!
Chrome seems to be the only browser that allows the -webkit-filter to be applied to the street view object. -webkit-filter, or filter or whatever you want to call it does work on other browsers, but it only works with the street view window in chrome
Ah! Thanks for saying.
I can't figure out why, but the jquery.animate-colors.js scripts that I'm using are failing on my site, but work on the demo page at: http://www.bitstorm.org/jquery/color-animation/
Odd
EDIT: Found it! Firefox couldnt handle the jquery transition from no background-color, to a color. It needed a background-color to be set first.
I wanted to send 2 pages to a friend side by side, and couldnt find a site that did it.
Feedback appreciated!
A lot of the larger websites don't work due to cross-domain restrictions for iFrames, and the block errors aren't standardised unfortunately so I've not got an error catch yet.
Saying that, the majority of pages do work!
