"Dino-radiation?" -Reply

[JMUCKERHEIDE@delphi.com]

Hi Paul,

This makes a lot of sense, but do you think there's evidence that the bones
would incorporate U such that the buried bones would be measurably higher than 
the surrounding rock/earth to enable detection? 

Regards, Jim Muckerheide

> Mark:
> 
> NaI detectors have been utilized for quite some time to locate dinosaur
> remains (there was a thread on Radsafe a couple of years back about
> this very subject). In fact, the radioactivity of these fossils can cause a
> little bit of a problem for some museums.
> 
> I don't pretend to know the chemistry involved, but the idea is more or
> less as follows. Uranium in the groundwater exchanges with minerals in
> the bones and the minerals that replace the bones. i.e. the minerals that
> create the fossil. The greater the amount of uranium around, the higher
> the activity. Obviously, Colorado is one area where dinosaur remains
> can be expected to contain substantial quantities of uranium. We have a
> couple of fossils from the Museum of Western Colorado that are quite
> warm. Within one minute we can obtain a beautiful spectrum of the
> uranium series counting one of these 20 cm away from a 10%
> germanium detector!
> 
> Its not just dinosaur fossils either. Some fossilized remains of trees can
> be easily detected with a NaI survey instrument (I have some fossilized
> wood like this from Moab Utah). It also common to hear about fossilized
> whale bones being radioactive. I've heard, but can't cite any references,
> that human bones will accumulate uranium over time and that some
> attempts have been made to date them using the uranium content. This
> approach to dating sounds somewhat implausible however.
> 
> Fun stuff
> 
> Paul Frame