Sentences with phrase «radiation source which»

These Ne - Kr clusters were then exposed to pulsed X-rays of the SPring - 8 synchrotron radiation source which, under the conditions chosen for the experiment, preferentially ionized Ne atoms.

Not exact matches

Incredible as it may seem, heat radiation is the greatest source of uncertainty when projecting which asteroids could hit Earth in the far future.

«Capacities,» which includes infrastructure projects such as genomics data banks, radiation sources, and observatories as well as funding for science - and - society programs, will also receive about $ 1 billion per year.

Among other sources of such radiation, scientists have proposed that interactions between bits of dark matter (which make up a large fraction of the universe's mass but haven't yet been directly detected) in a halo around the galactic center may be creating the surplus gamma rays.

When a transmitter drives an oscillating current in an antenna electromagnetic radiation — which carries both power and signals away from the source — is emitted.

Few foods are natural sources of vitamin D, which is more abundantly produced when ultraviolet radiation from sunlight strikes the skin and triggers synthesis.

All these accessories, plus a model rifle, were tagged with retroreflectors, which can reflect a beam of radiation back to its source regardless of the angle of incidence.

But the high - energy radiation from the source has shown no sign of dying down, which suggests that astronomers may have caught a star in the process of being ripped to shreds by a black hole.

«In the history of synchrotron radiation research, which is only about 45 years old, you can count the true breakthroughs on the fingers of one hand,» says David Moncton, Argonne's Associate Laboratory Director for the Advanced Photon Source.

This model describes three types of forces: electromagnetic interactions, which cause all phenomena associated with electric and magnetic fields and the spectrum of electromagnetic radiation; strong interactions, which bind atomic nuclei; and the weak nuclear force, which governs beta decay — a form of natural radioactivity — and hydrogen fusion, the source of the sun's energy.

They then looked at another source of data: that of the Clouds» and Earth's Radiant Energy System (CERES) satellite instruments which measure fluxes of reflected and emitted radiation from Earth to space, to help scientists understand how the climate varies over time.

The universe is opaque to ultraenergetic photons, or gamma rays, which are absorbed by the matter and radiation that lie between their source and Earth.

Their curse was the inverse square law, which states that the intensity of electromagnetic radiation is inversely proportional to the distance from the emitting source.

They say that the electromagnetic radiation, which took the form of γ - rays and seemed to exceed what known sources should produce, could be the result of dark - matter particles concentrating near the centre of the Milky Way and then colliding with and annihilating each other.

It is the source of hydrocarbon hazes, which absorb solar infrared radiation and warm the stratosphere by approximately 100 degrees Celsius, and of hydrogen, whose molecular collisions result in a 20 - degree warming in the troposphere.

The most important ionizing source is photoionization by solar ultraviolet radiation, which is produced in the outer layers of the solar atmosphere (i.e, the solar corona).

The group in which he works is involved in the instrumental development for the LISA PathFinder mission (ESA), a technology precursor mission for a future space - based gravitational - wave observatory, LISA, which will detect the gravitational radiation from low frequency sources like massive black hole mergers, inspiraling stellar compact objects into massive black holes, and galactic binaries.

In the last years he has focused in the emerging area of Gravitational Wave Astronomy, which consists in the detection and analysis of gravitational radiation emitted by cosmic sources (core collapse supernovae, compact binary coalescence, etc.).

Alvaro has contributed the design of the receiver optics components, which guide the radio signals from the antenna to the receiver (e.g. a plastic lens to re-focus the radiation from astronomical sources and the horn to collect these radio waves).

MAX IV, which was inaugurated in June 2016, is the leading synchrotron radiation facility in the world, while the European research facility ESS will be the world's most powerful neutron source when it opens for research in 2023.

Other radiation treatments that require targeting the tumor from an external source, which exposes healthy tissues and limits how high a dose can be safely delivered.

Such a telescope would use large arrays of ground - based telescopes to detect blue flashes of Cerenkov radiation, which are caused by very high energy gamma - ray photons from cosmic sources smashing into the atmosphere.

Unbeknownst to even NASA, the Air Force had conducted a high - altitude nuclear test, which created a radiation belt around Earth for a bit of time [source: Nelson].

Although Solar radiation and lightning (which has been detected by the ESA's Venus Express probe in 2007) should be producing large amounts of carbon monoxide (CO), the gas was found to be scarce, as if something was removing it (such as hydrogenogens, diverse bacteria and archaea that grow anaerobically utilizing CO as their sole carbon source and water as an electron acceptor to produce carbon dioxide and molecular hydrogen as waste products).

SESAME, which stands for Synchrotron - light for Experimental Science and Applications in the Middle East, is a light - source; a particle accelerator - based facility that uses electromagnetic radiation emitted by circulating electron beams to study a range of properties of matter.

Any source of radiation, which includes traveling by plane, getting mammograms in women, getting CT scans, lung X-rays, dental X-rays etc. has an effect on your system.

And for a vegan bodybuilder who must unfortunatelly play tetris with the food sources that he choses in order to give to his body the right ammounts of aminos, restricting SPI and soy foods so much does not make his goal any easier.There are sometimes that you need a meal thats complete with aminos and soy provides that meal with the additional benefits of lacking the saturated fats trans cholesterol and other endothelium inflammatory factors.I'm not saying that someone should go all the way to 200gr of SPI everyday or consuming a kilo of soy everyday but some servings of soy now and then even every day or the use of SPI which helps in positive nitrogen balance does not put you in the cancer risk team, thats just OVERexaggeration.Exercise, exposure to sunlight, vegan diet or for those who can not something as close to vegan diet, fruits and vegetables which contains lots of antioxidants and phtochemicals, NO STRESS which is the global killer, healthy social relationships, keeping your cortisol and adrenaline levels down (except the necessary times), good sleep and melatonin function, clean air, no radiation, away from procceced foods and additives like msg etc and many more that i can not even remember is the key to longevity.As long as your immune system is functioning well and your natural killer cells TP53 gene and many other cancer inhibitors are good and well, no cancer will ever show his face to you.With that logic we shouldn't eat ANY ammount of protein and we should go straight to be breatharians living only with little water and sunlight exposure cause you like it or not the raise of IGF1 is inevitable i know that raise the IGF1 sky high MAYBE is not the best thing but we are not talking about external hormones and things like this.Stabby raccoon also has a point.And even if you still worry about the consumption of soy... http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21711174.

And the new source, of course, the new kid on the block, is the smart meters... which create devastating amounts of radiation in the home, usually in a sheet that kind of goes horizontally through the house on the level where the smart meter is.

The source of light radiation for both high and low beams is a Bi-Xenon discharge lamp, which offers excellent visibility, thrifty running and a long service life.

Another homegrown approach to this trend was the Zona Maco Sur booth of Chicago's Carrie Secrist Gallery, where Brooklyn - based artist Dannielle Tegeder sourced a bunch of local glass (and some yellow Japanese radiation glass) which she cut and sandblasted for her site - specific installation that responded to the architecture of the city, fair, and booth.

*** «Gravitational redshift» is the process by which electromagnetic radiation originating from a source that is in a gravitational field is reduced in frequency, or redshifted, when observed in a region at a higher gravitational potential.

You're confusing the rate at which radiation intensity drops from the surface of a sphere as opposed to a point source.

So I am totally deaf to «lab experiments» where CO2 gas mixtures are subjected to radiation sources that are ten times the real earth ambient source Temperature, and therefore 10,000 times as bright as the earth surface, and emitting a completely different spectrum at one tenth of the real LWIR wavelengths, which have completely different interactions with the CO2.

And is this range which part «climate science» or the climate science pseudoscience think far infrared is a powerful source warming earth - this is the whole idea of back radiation: http://scienceofdoom.com/2010/07/17/the-amazing-case-of-back-radiation/

Instantaneously after adding the extra GHG, the temperature profile of the atmosphere has not yet changed, so the upward radiation, which is sourced by the ground and the lower atmosphere, remains the same within the bounds of the old photosphere.

But the downward radiation, which is sourced by the upper atmosphere, does not: At the radius of the old photosphere, before the addition of the GHG, the downward radiation was rather small, because there wasn't much of the sourcing GHG above it.

The only thing that is relevant to the GHE is the outgoing radiation budget, which is the only way the Earth loses the heat it picks up from the Sun (with an extremely modest addition from all other sources).

You are a Lukewarmer of the «second kind», meaning that you do not believe the Earth is warming due to back - radiation, but you do believe it is warming from some other source, which involves the (perceived) fact that the excess heat can not get out.

In the experiment, which was for pure gases and vapors, the absorbed and radiated infrared radiations came from sources of heat which included heated oil to 250 °C and heated copper ball to low redness.

If the answer is indeed # 2 (which my gut tells me is not so), then it must, according to the Laws of Thermodynamics, and the laws and properties of radiation physics, matter and energy, act to decreasethe energy of the source radiation.

Measuring with a spectrometer what is left from the radiation of a broadband infrared source (say a black body heated at 1000 °C) after crossing the equivalent of some tens or hundreds of meters of the air, shows that the main CO2 bands (4.3 µm and 15 µm) have been replaced by the emission spectrum of the CO2 which is radiated at the temperature of the trace - gas.

With one shell, you get a surface which radiates at twice the source radiation (not temperature but radiation).

Also, the back - radiation that we receive is diffuse (coming from all different angles) and so it can not be focused in the same way that solar radiation (which is approximately from a point source) can.

The cause of the BB radiation is obviously the energy from the source mediated by the BB Absorbtivity and Emissivity (which at certain wavelengths will be equal once radiative equilibrium is reached)

However, my main point was not so much about the «make up» of ozone but more about the possibility that as long as oxygen atoms and molecules absorb enough energy from UV radiation to alter their structure it may be that they also produce an increase in their heat content, which should be greater at any points nearest to the source — i.e..

The BB radiation doesn't determine the energy level of the source, though it will determine the rate at which the source's energy level will decrease.

In the case of the the source of the 333 W / m ^ 2 this is back radiated from a height in the atmosphere which is at a temperature lower than the ground surface and therefore this radiation can not be «Absorbed by the Surface».

No need, and yes, rather dumb * of me to forget the decay products (* or perhaps just evidence of lack of time on my part), although the broader point I made still stands, which is that some sources of radiation are otherwise chemically benign and others are not, though I admit much ignorance on the relative importance of chemical toxicity and wouldn't be surprised to find out it is generally quite small in such incidents like Fukushima and Chernobyl — but I don't actually know it; I thought perhaps it deserved clarification (and maybe — note that I'm not justifying this — that's why some people may see radiation from a pollutant as worse than radiation from natural source?).

... you say that most of the energy leaving the system via IR emission (from CO2 in your example) is sourced from insolation, which would mean that only a small portion of the escaping CO2 radiation energy originates from earth's IR.

BPL (84) you say that most of the energy leaving the system via IR emission (from CO2 in your example) is sourced from insolation, which would mean that only a small portion of the escaping CO2 radiation energy originates from earth's IR.