I was the only one in my school to do it as I learnt it myself because the teacher we had for astrophysics was awful. This year's paper was hard. Do you remember your answers to any of the questions?
I was the only one in my school to do it as I learnt it myself because the teacher we had for astrophysics was awful. This year's paper was hard. Do you remember your answers to any of the questions?
yea this paper was pretty difficult. I didnt get the first calculation to do with the eye. I remember getting 57% for the x ray calculation to do with 12mm. what about you?
What did you guys put for the test to see if it emitted beta as well?
Use a beta absorber, i.e. a few mm of aluminium. Then you can see if this result matches up with the result obtained at 0.9m by using the inverse square law of gamma radiation
"I said plot a graph of count rate against 1/r^2 and it should be a straight line if it is only gamma, but if it is beta it will not be a straight line."
Use a beta absorber, i.e. a few mm of aluminium. Then you can see if this result matches up with the result obtained at 0.9m by using the inverse square law of gamma radiation
I didn't mention aluminium at all . I said plot count rate against 1/distance squared and if it is a complete straight line then it is only a gamma emitter
I didn't mention aluminium at all . I said plot count rate against 1/distance squared and if it is a complete straight line then it is only a gamma emitter
I said plot a graph of count rate against 1/r^2 and it should be a straight line if it is only gamma, but if it is beta it will not be a straight line.
This better be accepted
I saw that in a past paper as an alternative method once. You still get the marks