[ RadSafe ] Chris Busby physicists annd chemists
sjd at swcp.com
Sun Apr 24 14:40:04 CDT 2011
It's not my risk model. The equations are not my
equations. If you want to know what was delivered to Moses on Mount
Sinai, I suggest you read the book of Exodus.
At 09:58 AM 4/24/2011, you wrote:
>It is fascinating and alarming that you do not even know the
>scientific source of your own health physics risk model.
>How can that be? Did you think your equations were delivered on
>Mount Sinai to Moses?
>From: radsafe-bounces at agni.phys.iit.edu on behalf of Steven Dapra
>Sent: Fri 22/04/2011 14:45
>To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing List
>Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Chris Busby physicists annd chemists
> The term "health physics" was coined
>during the Manhattan Project. Hence, it's been
>used for over 65 years. You are going to
>single-handedly overturn an expression that has
>been used for this long? I have never heard
>anyone objecting to this term, not even the
>fanatical anti-nukers I've encountered over some 35 years.
> The ICRP model is not 'my' model. I
>don't even know that the ICRP has a model and I
>certainly don't know what it is.
> You wrote, "Did you know what happens at
>a decay position in ionisation when a dipositive
>ion of one element turns suiddenly into a
>tripositive element of another element? Do you
>think that matters? Its not factored into ICRP as a dose. Why?"
> What is this supposed to mean? Does it
>matter if an element turns into an element of
>another element? Is it supposed to be factored
>into ICRP as a dose? If you want to know why the
>ICRP does what it does (or doesn't do) why not
>write the ICRP and ask. No one here is a
>spokesman for the ICRP. It seems to me that you are barking up the
> All of your pretentious mumbo-jumbo does
>nothing to alter the fact that you are not a health physicist.
>At 03:28 AM 4/22/2011, you wrote:
> >I mean that health physicist is a contradiction in terms.
> >You cannot apply physics to human health.
> >Biological systems are too complex to be dealt
> >with in some primitive stress/strain way as if
> >they are pieces of wire being stretched. This is what your ICRP model does.
> >The physical chemistry of dilute solution
> >molecular interactions at the living system
> >molecule level is where you have to begin. I
> >mean, do you even knopw what an affinity
> >constant is and how to measure it? Im not saying
> >you should know, you will not have been taught
> >it. I have talked with a lot of health
> >physicists (and physicists in this area). They
> >know no chemistry and see the field as some
> >applied mathematics domain. But it is very
> >important to know these things or you get it
> >wrong. Did you know what happens at a decay
> >position in ionisation when a dipositive ion of
> >one element turns suiddenly into a tripositive
> >element of another element? Do you think that
> >matters? Its not factored into ICRP as a dose. Why?
More information about the RadSafe