Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Mythbusters to Test Cockroach Radiation Myth

Posted by Zonk on Fri Oct 19, 2007 03:43 PM
from the still-be-here-when-we're-gone dept.
redwoodtree writes "An article on the site for the Tri-City Herald sums it up perfectly: 'Contrary to popular belief, not a significant amount of research goes into cockroach radiation.' To test the old saw about 'the cockroaches being the only survivors of a nuclear war' Discovery Channel's Mythbusters are going out to Hanford Site, where plutonium was manufactured for the first nuclear bomb. It's the single most polluted nuclear waste site in the U.S. The Mythbusters are going to take cockroaches and other insects and apply successively higher doses of radiation in a controlled setting."
+ -
story

Related Stories

[+] Why Myths Persist 988 comments
lottameez recommends an article in the Washington Post about recent research into the persistence of myths. In short: once a myth has been put out there (e.g., "Saddam Hussein plotted the 9/11 attacks"), denying it can paradoxically reinforce its staying power. Ignoring it doesn't work either — a claim that is unchallenged gains the ring of truth. Over time, "negation tags" fall out of memory: "Saddam didn't plan 9/11" becomes "Saddam planned 9/11." From the article: "The conventional response to myths and urban legends is to counter bad information with accurate information. But the new psychological studies show that denials and clarifications, for all their intuitive appeal, can paradoxically contribute to the resiliency of popular myths... The research is painting a broad new understanding of how the mind works. Contrary to the conventional notion that people absorb information in a deliberate manner, the studies show that the brain uses subconscious 'rules of thumb' that can bias it into thinking that false information is true. Clever manipulators can take advantage of this tendency."
[+] Hardware: Robots Assimilate Into Cockroach Society 107 comments
sufijazz writes "Scientists have gotten tiny robots to not only integrate into cockroach society but also control it. 'This experiment in bug peer pressure combined entomology, robotics and the study of ways that complex and even intelligent patterns can arise from simple behavior. Animal behavior research shows that swarms working together can prosper where individuals might fail, and robotics researchers have been experimenting with simple robots that, together, act a little like a swarm.' The BBC also has a video story on this."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • by Joe The Dragon (967727) on Friday October 19 2007, @03:45PM (#21047881)
    Don't forget to test twinkies as well
  • Safety? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by guruevi (827432) <evi.smokingcube@be> on Friday October 19 2007, @03:46PM (#21047885) Homepage
    I wonder how they will handle the nuclear safety of their own and their crew.
    • Re:Safety? (Score:5, Funny)

      by purpledinoz (573045) on Friday October 19 2007, @03:56PM (#21048107)
      And, for the big finale, I wonder if they're going to set off a nuke. Those guys love to blow things up.
    • Re:Safety? (Score:5, Informative)

      by DrBuzzo (913503) on Friday October 19 2007, @03:57PM (#21048123) Homepage
      It shouldn't be too hard. I'd imagine that the reason they're going to hanford is not because the site is contaminated but because the they have the people and equipmnet to do this. It could be done rather easily with an x-ray beam or with a high energy radio isotopic source. There are chambers which can do this. Depending on the setup they're used for steralyzine medical equipment, calibrating radiation detectors and such. I have no idea how the procedure would go but Hanford is not contaminated to the point that it's dangerous to just be there. You just shouldn't put stuff you find on the ground in your mouth..
      • Re:Safety? (Score:5, Funny)

        by grogdamighty (884570) on Friday October 19 2007, @04:07PM (#21048293) Homepage

        You just shouldn't put stuff you find on the ground in your mouth..

        Note: this is generally good advice anywhere.

      • Re:Safety? (Score:5, Interesting)

        by smellsofbikes (890263) on Friday October 19 2007, @05:27PM (#21049545) Journal
        >Hanford is not contaminated to the point that it's dangerous to just be there.

        Maybe it isn't now, but I had friends working for Bechtel, who were doing radiochemical testing of natural ponds to try and figure out which one was going to go critical *first*. I'm not joking or exaggerating: there was so much leaked radioactive material on/in the ground that they expected it to concentrate through natural drainage to above critical mass. One friend told me about several of the criticality incidents they had, where waste plutonium had accumulated in oil-filled coolant ducts and started thermal runaway reactions (that boiled all the oil, displacing all the plutonium chips, which then settled back down to start the cycle again...) So while Hanford might be okay now, I wouldn't go there unless I was with someone who had worked there a long, long time. That's the only place I've ever visited where they gave me a heavy steel tag with a number stamped on it, for rugged identification, along with the film badge.
      • Re:Safety? (Score:5, Informative)

        by osjedi (9084) on Friday October 19 2007, @07:15PM (#21050901)
        DrBuzzo is correct. They are using an irradiation facility at Pacific Northwest National Lab. Basically you've got a shielded room containing a shielded radiation source. Place things in the room, seal it up, and then using remote control the radiation source is exposed for the pre-determined exposure time and then re-shielded. When the room is no longer 'hot' you can go in and get your stuff out. The facility they are using is used to calibrate dosimeters and other equipment.

        It's nice to see my home-town being used for such an awesome mythbusters episode. : )

        This is osjedi, reporting live from Tri-Cities, WA. Home of the world's best apples, grapes, hopps, cherrys, and weapons grade plutonium.
    • Re:Safety? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by MichaelKaiserProScri (691448) on Friday October 19 2007, @04:00PM (#21048181)

      Gamma irradiator. Basically, big lead tube with a gamma source inside. You can't get it out. You can't expose the source to the outside world. There is a lead "airlock". You put the roach inside. Irradiate. Release. I went to a High School that had a gamma irradiator. We DID this experiment. Exposed roach to greater than 1000, but less than 10000 roentgens. We weren't real precise. But the roach lived long enough for us to decide we better squish it before it reproduced.

      Oh, yes, "stuff doesn't glow when you expose it to radiation". Not 100% true. Some stuff DOES. Namely most crystals. One of the most impressive examples is Sodium Chloride. Yep, table salt. Irradiate it overnight. The gamma rays knock the electrons up to a higher energy level. But since salt has a very tight crystaline structure, they don't snap back down immediatly. Remove from irradiator, and over the course of the next 24 hours, it glows pretty brightly (bright as a glow stick) in a funky red-orange light (spectra of sodium). Eventually all the electrons snap back down to their ground state and it quits glowing. Not radioactive at any point while this is going on. The only thing it emits is red-orange photons which are not "radiation" by most people's standards. (Well it is, but ALL light is...)

      • Dude! (Score:5, Funny)

        by markov_chain (202465) on Friday October 19 2007, @04:05PM (#21048257) Homepage
        Where exactly did you go to high school? :)
        • Re:Safety? (Score:5, Interesting)

          by MichaelKaiserProScri (691448) on Friday October 19 2007, @08:14PM (#21051425)
          That's a different animal entirely. It's "Cerenkov radiation" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cerenkov_radiation [wikipedia.org] . The speed of light in a vacuum is the absolute hard maximum speed most particles can travel at. (ok, just below it for anything with mass). But the LOCAL speed of light varies by medium. Speed of light through air is a bit slower. Speed of light through water is a LOT slower. The blue glow comes when a particle is emited near the speed of light through air and hits the water. It momentarily exceeds the speed of light through water (allowed since it is not exceeding the speed of light in a vacuum), but has to slow down. Slowing down ditches energy which must go somwhere, a blue photon in this case.
    • by palladiate (1018086) <palladiate@@@gmail...com> on Friday October 19 2007, @04:10PM (#21048331)

      In a former life, I worked as an NDT technician. One of our biggest jobs was industrial radiography. Which, long story short, involves radioisotope cameras and lots of safety training. With an radiation safety expert, radiation alarms, survey meters, and proper equipment they'll be plenty safe.

      The biggest problem for them would be to properly dose the cockroaches. What kinds and levels of radiation will they be receiving? Any clown can x-ray a roach until it dies, but what would the fallout profile of a world-ending nuclear war look like? What's the long-term effect of radioisotopes in their bodies? How much ionizing radiation will they receive?

      There's alpha, beta, gamma, neutron... What kind of radiation are they going to use? Safety, while incredibly important for an experiment like this, is relatively easy to accomplish if they get an expert. Attacking the correct problem may prove far more troublesome.

  • by AmIAnAi (975049) * on Friday October 19 2007, @03:47PM (#21047905)
    Lets hope they don't get besieged by PETA, who seem to want to protect the rights cockroaches now [cbs2chicago.com]
    • by DrSkwid (118965) on Friday October 19 2007, @03:53PM (#21048045) Homepage Journal
      So what is your criteria for what you will and won't murder ?

      • by tftp (111690) on Friday October 19 2007, @04:02PM (#21048205) Homepage
        Historically speaking, humans usually murder everything and everyone if that is in any way beneficial or entertaining.

        But really the question is not that simple. Would you savagely murder one fluffy dog to save 100M people from a deadly virus? Would you savagely murder one human to save 100M people from a deadly virus? Would you savagely murder 1M humans to save 100M people from a deadly virus? Where is your threshold? I believe this is what Protectors of the Ringworld couldn't wrap their mind about.

        • Deadly virus? (Score:5, Insightful)

          by SatanicPuppy (611928) * <Satanicpuppy AT gmail DOT com> on Friday October 19 2007, @04:36PM (#21048769) Journal
          Hell, I might do it for fun.

          These kinds of "dilemma's" are nothing but intellectual masturbation. I'll tell you right now: in a real world situation, that man or that dog would be a greasy spot if it was only thought that their death would save 100,000 people.

          And as for the reverse, you can bet, in a quarantine situation, they would kill as many as it took (or as they could) to keep the sick separated from the well. It's the only thing that can be done in that situation, 1, 100, or 1,000,000. The reverse also holds: if you were stuck in a quarantine, and you believed yourself or your family to be in danger of being infected, you'd do whatever you could to break quarantine, even at the risk of infecting countless others...That's why they defend barricades with guns, not pamphlets on disease control.

          The desire to protect yourself and your loved ones trumps it all, when it comes down to it. That's just human nature.
            • Hmph. (Score:5, Insightful)

              by SatanicPuppy (611928) * <Satanicpuppy AT gmail DOT com> on Friday October 19 2007, @06:14PM (#21050223) Journal
              Actually, I think that's morally indefensible.

              Who are you saving? What are you actually doing? You're just torturing some slob for dated information that's not going to help anyone. And torture is a crappy way of getting accurate information anyhow...Witness all the people who "confessed" to witchcraft during the inquisition, and the witch trials.

              Traditional intelligence gathering methods were sufficient to get the information that would have stopped 9/11, if the methods of analysis were good enough. Now, they're gathering so much more information, and I've seen no proof that their methods of analysis have improved by anything even resembling a similar amount...Basically, they're drowning themselves in un-analyzed crap information, while giving concrete examples to the people who think that we're corrupt torturers, that we are in fact, corrupt torturers, and screwing the people at home who're finding it hard to think we really are the good guys when we're torturing POWs, and yes, if we're "at war" with terror, then people we capture in the war, are POWs...That's what it means.

              In short, it's stupid, it's pointless, and it's immoral. We may be forgiven for taking the moral low road for an end like saving a million people, but when you take the moral low road for a worthless end, you should expect to be strung up by your nuts for it. Make no mistake; you sacrifice a human life because of something you think is right, that's still murder...If enough other people think you were right to do so, society may forgive you. Otherwise, they may put your ass in the electric chair.
            • Ha. (Score:5, Insightful)

              by SatanicPuppy (611928) * <Satanicpuppy AT gmail DOT com> on Friday October 19 2007, @07:29PM (#21051023) Journal
              Whereas you, noble and virtuous, will refuse. You will tell your pregnant wife, and your three kids, "Okay, we're all going to die so that the people outside can go on living their corrupt and venal lives like we don't exist."

              I haven't been in that situation, so I'm not quite sure what I'd do. It'll depend on a lot of things. How long do I stay in quarantine if there is no food? How long if no water? No vague attempt at medical aid from the outside? No idea.

              But you apparently know...Unlike all the "trample your fellow man" sheep of the world, you'd never act in anything but a selfless manner.

              Or you're talking out of your ass. I've seen a lot of people talk a big line, and the bigger the line, the faster they crack when the shit hits the fan.
      • by R2.0 (532027) on Friday October 19 2007, @04:03PM (#21048229)
        "So what is your criteria for what you will and won't murder ?"

        Objection, your Honor - Loaded Question (Or is it leading the witness?)!

        The correct question is "So what is your criteria for what you will and won't kill?"

        "Killing" is performing an action that causes something that is living to cease doing so.

        "Murder" is a legal definition, along with "manslaughter", "homicide", etc. By it's very definition, it is impossible to "murder" a cockroach.

        If you are going to troll, do it correctly.

      • by operagost (62405) on Friday October 19 2007, @04:53PM (#21049041) Homepage Journal

        So what is your criteria for what you will and won't murder ?
        That depends. Are you still beating your wife?
  • by User 956 (568564) on Friday October 19 2007, @03:49PM (#21047943) Homepage
    The Mythbusters are going to take cockroaches and other insects and apply successively higher doses of radiation in a controlled setting.

    So, what precautions do they have on hand in the event one of them grows to enormous size and goes on a rampage?
    • by david.given (6740) <dg@c o w l a rk.com> on Friday October 19 2007, @04:38PM (#21048795) Homepage Journal

      So, what precautions do they have on hand in the event one of them grows to enormous size and goes on a rampage?

      Adam will whip up something out of a chainsaw, some mysterious plumbing he found at the junk jard, and a large tank of napthalene that he happened to have out back. The result will have a major design flaw but will spew flaming death anyway. The result will be bolted onto Jamie's customised vending machine robot. With the addition of about twelve wireless video cameras, the result will go out and kick ass. Adam will get overexcited.

      Does that answer your question?

  • COAP? (Score:5, Funny)

    by Red Flayer (890720) on Friday October 19 2007, @03:49PM (#21047961) Journal
    FT(Third linked)A:

    All the bugs will go back to San Francisco. But instead of flying, a Mythbusters employee is having to drive the bugs back. Airlines, it seems, don't like cockroaches on a plane.
    I don't know about the airlines, but I'd always assumed coach class was named so as a contraction of cockroach, since flying coach makes me feel like a cockroach.
    • Re:COAP? (Score:5, Funny)

      by markana (152984) on Friday October 19 2007, @03:59PM (#21048147)
      You can't legally treat animals (or insects) as badly as the airlines treat their passengers...

      Cockroaches are used to better living conditions than coach anyway... certainly better food.
  • by Sloppy (14984) on Friday October 19 2007, @03:55PM (#21048069) Homepage Journal
    Sheesh, this is obviously an attempt to create giant monsters to ravage America. Why do Mythbusters hate America?
  • by CrazyJim1 (809850) on Friday October 19 2007, @03:55PM (#21048073) Journal
    Cockroaches are spread out and hidden in walls so they're in places that less radiation will hit. After nuclear winter, they can eat all the carcasses of higher life forms and just plain survive. I never thought,"Hey, cockroaches can withstand more heat than other living organisms." We all know the bacteria that lives in deep sea vents will last because it doesn't get it's energy from the sun, and its shielded from the radiation above ground. Life will continue after nuclear winter, that is certain, but will human life continue is the question.
  • Not studied? (Score:5, Informative)

    by Anonamused Cow-herd (614126) on Friday October 19 2007, @03:55PM (#21048079)

    'Contrary to popular belief, not a significant amount of research goes into cockroach radiation.'

    Funny, it seems that a lot of scientists have done just that. [google.com]

    For a pretty decent explanation: the mysterious Dr. Karl! [abc.net.au]
  • According to "The World Without Us", by Alan Weisman - most of the roaches in the industrialized world will be Dead within 3 years of humanity disappearing! [worldwithoutus.com] Thats without even the radiation. So don't worry... when we go, the roaches will go with us.
  • by autophile (640621) on Friday October 19 2007, @04:01PM (#21048189)

    ...otherwise his mustache will become huge and go on a rampage!

  • Boric Acid (Score:5, Funny)

    by curmudgeon99 (1040054) <curmudgeon99@NOspam.gmail.com> on Friday October 19 2007, @04:01PM (#21048195) Homepage
    As a proud resident of cochroach-ridden New York City, I can report that the little devils are immune to everything but Boric Acid which--apparently--causes them to become constipated.
  • take care (Score:5, Funny)

    by clem (5683) on Friday October 19 2007, @04:05PM (#21048271) Homepage
    Don't get bitten by any of those radioactive cockroaches. Lord knows the superpowers you'd acquire.
    • by iknowcss (937215) on Friday October 19 2007, @04:34PM (#21048747) Homepage
      Hmmm:
      • Fear of light
      • Lives mostly indoors
      • Hunched over
      • Content with junk food
      *looks at "computer nerd" checklist*
      *looks at "Cockroach-Man" checklist*

      Oh my God.

      I HAVE SUPER POWERS
  • I've done this (Score:5, Interesting)

    by rimcrazy (146022) on Friday October 19 2007, @05:39PM (#21049731)
    I use to radiate parts for Motorola back when I worked for the Military Electronics group. We use to use the Gamma cell over at ASU. We put in a cockroach one Friday and came back Monday to check on it. Can't remember if it was the new gamma cell or the old one. The new one was around 20KRads/Min the old one was around 1KR/min. Either way, it was in the chamber for about 3 days or about 4320 mins. Bounded it got between 86Mega Rads or 4.3Mega Rads. It lived. There is little or no water in a cockroach so there is nothing to absorb the radiation. To Gamma radiation, they are immune. To be a correct experiment they would need to expose across a broad range of particles and radiation and not just Gamma.
    • by fm6 (162816) on Friday October 19 2007, @04:11PM (#21048345) Homepage Journal
      I think you answered your own question.

      I heard an interview once with a scientist who wanted "endangered species" to include the less cuddly critters. He cited the fact that when the last surviving California condors were captured for breeding, the first thing that was done to them was a delousing. It never occurred to anybody that if a species is endangered, then their parasites must be endangered as well.
    • by ewhenn (647989) on Friday October 19 2007, @05:38PM (#21049701)
      Yeah, that "life is valuable" line is a bunch of bull shit. If you look back over human history you would come to the conclusion that as a whole, humans do not believe other humans lives are valuable.


      To all of those whining "oh, how can they just kill those living things???". Put down your fucking hamburger, take off your leather shoes, and head off into the woods. Go take up your own cause and live naked in a cave you overzealous assholes.