Collectively, these studies tell me one very important thing: If there is an effect, it is not a large one. And not worth worrying about.

OK. I'm tired of seeing the "lack of options" complaint. Not because of the lack of validity, particularly in this case. There is clearly a lack of options! It is time to fix this problem. Please, please automate the poll options! No one can foresee all possible choices. In some cases, one cannot see the obvious choices. (Do a search for "lack of options" and count the results.) Salt the poll with the choices but allow a method for new choices to be included on the fly. You're smart. I'll leave it to you to figure out how. Hell, crowdsource the solution, even. But fix this oft repeated irritation. Thank you.

Today, aparently. This is the only working item on the home page. Where'd you go Slashdot?

There is no difference in removing radioactive materials from seawater than removing non-radioactive materials. Each atom of I-131 is exactly Iodine until that moment when it decides to decay and transform into Xenon-131, a stable isotope. This method may be useful only if it can remove contaminants at very low mass concentrations. The total amount of I-131 released at Fukushima is only around 100 grams, assuming the values in the news are correct. The reported concentration at one of the outfalls, at several thousand times the drinking water limits, works out to about 0.03 PPB.

My wife came up with the best multiverse theory I've heard. She said that if there are an infinite number of universes and everything that could happen happens in some universe, then there must be a universe somewhere without (the need for) a multiverse. And if there is one, then it must be the one we're living in. QED: No multiverse

Come on. Are we so jaded now that life-in-space research (even if it is just an amino acid found on a comet) is just ho-hum news? Speaking as one of the generation that sat up all night watching blurry images of men walking on the Moon, we did not expect this. Everything we knew then eliminated the bulk of the solar system as being able to support life. Sure, we did expect to be out to Jupiter by now but that we would already be on the verge of proving that life is not limited to this one planet is incredible. I just want to be around when the first critter comes skittering in front of a rover's camera.

My wife and I watch a lot of Netflix download movies, anything new that's halfway good plus I watch the older science fiction ones in the afternoon she doesn't care that much about. The ISP is DSL but the movies are very watchable on a 42" screen. (some stutter occasionally.) Plus, I surf YouTube, Reddit, Slashdot, etc. daily. About four months ago, my nephew put a hi def Slingbox in our house for his overseas tour of duty and it is on for a few hours every day. Luckily he is 13 hours away so he watches mostly in the AM when we're at work, we found we can't do both at once. My ISP has not said one word about it nor has there been any indication that we're causing problems. Sure, occasionally a bird will land on the phone wire and burst into flames, but that's about it.

The reflection of the x-rays is actually greater for skin than metal due to the elements--hydrogen, oxygen, and carbon shine brighter than iron. That's the basic trick used, to be able to see through higher number elements such as metals by looking only a type of relection called Compton Scattering. I did some more reading and I was _wrong_ about the penetration of the skin. The reason the risk is low is just that not much x-ray is used.

At the risk of being lost in the noise... Not the same at all. X-rays pass through you and leave some deposited energy inside. (The least dose would be from an X-ray tuned so far up the spectrum that you appear totally invisible.) Gamma and other things from space that you're exposed to when you fly do essentially the same. However, the backscatter X-rays are so soft that they only penetrate clothing and not very far (epidermis? dermis?) into you. If they deposit no energy inside the cells, there is no known mechanism that leads to damage (cancer, birth defects, cataracts, general life-shortening, etc.)

Is the site melting or do I just need Chrome?

Oh please. I am a radiation expert in real life. I have been to Chernobyl. It is no more "eerily silent" there than it is in the non-contaminated areas. The surrounding area is mostly farmland and was cleared many years ago. Perhaps the simplest explanation is that the plants and animals are just not as sensitive to radiation as the movies and sci fi shows suggest. That plus the fact that most of the isotopes released (iodine-131 for example) have long decayed away. Humans are more sensitive to the effects of radiation than most other creatures. When we protect humans we end up protecting the environment. That said, even though I full expect the plants to grow healthy in the downwind zone, I would not eat them for fear of further concentrating any remaining contamination they contain and raising my risk of cancer. But I don't smoke, either, for similar reasons.

Buzz Off?