Talk:Epsilon radiation

WTF?

Well Slartibarfast1992, I constantly attempt to post certain things but for some reason Xihr keeps deleting my posts. All of which is true, as I have looked it up and are willing to share it. But for some reason I do not think that Xihr wants me to post but I shall be constant now. Infinity Warrior —Preceding undated comment added 01:55, 14 December 2010 (UTC).

Why did somebody put that epsilon radiation is composed of electrons? I know nothing of epsilon radiation, but I know that beta radiation is composed of electrons. DUH. Please get some REAL information about this, and if there isn´t any, just delete this article, because it just sounds like a dose of sci-fi and a hyperactive imagination put together. Not really Wikipedia material. Slartibartfast1992 21:53, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Read the entry. It's tertiary radiation, which means it's composed of electrons knocked out of nuclei atoms. Xihr 23:31, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Electrons knocked out of nuclei? That seems interesting, considering electrons orbit around nuclei. Please explain this concept, for if it is true, I would be very interested to learn about it, but for now, I am very doubtful of it. Citing some reliable sources would really help me lose my doubts, as a starter. Slartibartfast1992 00:48, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, that was a thinko. I meant atoms, not nuclei. Delta radiation is just these electrons being knocked out of atoms by other radiation. Epsilon radiation is electrons being knocked out of atoms by delta radiation. Xihr 22:08, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I understand. So Epsilon radiation is just electrons knocked out of atoms by Delta radiation which was other electrons knocked out of atoms by other radiation such as Beta radiation which is also composed of electrons. It really would be simple to just call them all beta radiation... so what are electrons knocked out of atoms by epsilon radiation called? This really should be clarified in the article for people who know nothing about this, such as myself five days ago. So is there some sort of difference between the structure of Beta, Delta, and Epsilon radiation or is it all just a stream of electrons? This is really interesting once you get to know what it's about. Slartibartfast1992 00:27, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

The original radiation does not have to be beta radiation. All ionizing radiation knocks electrons out of atoms, which includes alpha radiation, gamma radiation, as well as cosmic rays (mostly protons) and neutrons of different energies. Beta, delta, and epsilon radiation are all composed of electrons, nothing more. The distinction between them is whether they're primary (beta), secondary (delta), or tertiary (epsilon) forms of radiation. Xihr 04:32, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

But is there any structural difference between primary, secondary and tertiary radiation or do they all just "look" the same on a subatomic level? Do they have different quantities of energy in them? How would you tell one from the other, just from measuring it, not knowing which one they came from? Slartibartfast1992 22:05, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

They're free electrons, so no, they aren't different. They would have a distribution of energies dependent on the energy distribution of the primary (for delta) or secondary (for epsilon) radiation. Delta and epsilon radiation are just designations of how the radiation was created. Keep in mind these radiations were discovered and classified before there was any coherent theory of the atom in place, much less its constituent particles, so when discovered, it wasn't known whether delta and epsilon radiation were qualitatively different from the other types of radiation. Xihr 01:22, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Well, you've definitely answered all the questions I had on the topic. Let's put all the information you wrote here on the article, since I'm sure many people would ask themselves the same questions that I asked you upon finding the article Epsilon Radiation. Slartibartfast1992 21:43, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Sorry to drift off topic, but I left a message at your talk page and you blanked it and didn't answer. I checked the page history and I saw that you had blanked everyting anybody had ever put on your talk page. WTF? Slartibartfast1992 01:34, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

There is elegance in simplicity. Xihr 02:08, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, but one thing is simplicity, another is nothingness. But I won't bug you with that, it's your talk page, do what you like with it... but how do people contact you in Wikipedia? Slartibartfast1992 23:12, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Let's just add this information so I can forget this meaningless page. Slartibartfast1992 03:33, 28 April 2007 (UTC)