[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re[4]: Radiography Events
You obviously are equating the parenthetical units with the
traditional/conventional units; viz., 1 rad = 0.01 Gy, & 1 rem = 0.01
Sv, whereas I used the association 'rad is to rem as Gy is to Sv',
without regard to coefficient.
Come on, you love being a nitpicker. Most analytical personality
types do. It's just part of our nature. Recently I pointed out the
misuse of 'affect' (produce an effect) and 'effect' (result or
consequence). Couldn't help it. I'm a nitpicker, and proud to be
one.
______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: Re[2]: Radiography Events
Author: radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu at guardian
Date: 1/20/99 7:20 AM
I hate to be a nitpicker, but since we have an archive that can be searched on
the web by students of all ages, (another current question) I feel I must.
> So that you won't 'gnash your
> teeth' unnecessarily, because of this error, as this error use to
> cause me to do, apply a QF/radiation weighting factor of 1, and the
> rad (Gy) becomes the rem (Sv). For peace of mind, if you can't beat
> them, join them, even though they are wrong. However, never fail to
> point this discrepancy out when the opportunity arises.
Shouldn't this read "rad (0.01 Gy) becomes the rem (0.01 Sv)" ? Units are
such slippery things even when you have a grasp of the concept.
Zack Clayton
zclayton@epa.state.oh.us
Ohio EPA
!
************************************************************************
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