RE: Ag 108m

["Frame, Paul" <FRAMEP@ORAU.GOV>]

The 418 year number is the more recent, and presumably the more
accurate.  This new half life for Ag-108m was mentioned on Radsafe about
a year ago. If you check the Radsafe archives, you might find a post
from Dale Boyce explaining why such uncertainty could exist, i.e., why
the half life measurement is so difficult.


Paul Frame
Professional Training Programs
ORAU
framep@orau.gov
http://www.orau.gov/ptp/ptp.htm

> 
> 	Looking at the litterature for the radioactive period 
> of Ag 108m, I
> find two values : 127 years and 418 years. I even found 5 years ! Any
> comment is welcome. Thanks
> 
> ***********************************
> Jean-Charles ABBE
> Ecole des Mines de Nantes
> Laboratoire SUBATECH
> BP 20722
> 44 307 NANTES CEDEX 3
> 
> Tel 33 (0)2 51 85 84 01
> Fax 33 (0)2 51 85 84 79
> 
> ABBE@SUBATECH.IN2P3.FR
> 
> 
> **************************************************************
> **********
> The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
> information can be accessed at 
> http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html
> 
************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html