ABHP question

["Les Slaback, Health Physics" <SLABACK@micf.nist.gov>]

My question turns out to be a good example of why they need careful reviews.
If it was left numberless (as written) then would would need to add the info th
at yy <<< zz (the HVL of the low energy photon was much less than that of the
higher energy photon).

The review process is essential.
The question generator frequently has unstated (obvious to him/her) facts
that are necessary to get to the right answer.  Getting those into the
question is considered important by some.  Others consider those unstated
data to be a priori knowledge the candidate should have.  Where to draw the
line is the challenge.

SLABACK@MICF.NIST.GOV
   ...a little risk, like a bit of spice, adds flavor to life