• Thank you for visiting the Cafe Rad Lab Forum
  • We present & discuss radiation health, science & news
  • To keep you informed about vital nuke information.
Hello There, Guest! Login Register


Thread Rating:
  • 2 Vote(s) - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
WEBCAM December 2015
#61
The cameras are located a distance from the radioactive sources.  A and B would be stopped by the thickness of the lens and camera casing, G might penetrate if the source was close enough.  I surmise that the radioactive steam/fog emissions are transporting the A, B, or G close enough to the camera sensor to cause sparking on the sensors.  I have not found a spark on both cameras at the same time.  The sparks aren't firing in the air to be picked up as a visual signal.  IMO, the camera sensors are sparking because the emissions sometimes drift close to the cameras.

12-18 Found a new light shining on the r3 wall while I was looking for cam4 sparks.  

   

   

   

   

   
"The map is not the territory that it is a map of ... the word is not the thing being referred to."
 
Reply
#62
(12-25-2015, 05:16 PM)Chasaha Wrote: Clarification:  
So are you saying that the sparks could be in the camera's  sensors, as opposed to 'literal'  flying through the air ionized particles?

Has a spark event ever been captured on both cams at the same time that we know of?   I am guessing not.   But, I don't know for sure.

Huh   Wondering   Smile

Chasaha and Pia, thanks for asking for clarification of the sparking activity.  My hypothesis is that the sparks are the effects of radiation striking the Charged Coupled Devices in the camera.  In the early days, as I watched, they were often blinking in the background, lots of radiation and lots of sparking.  I’ve worked with various cameras in industrial settings and the sparks stood out as an anomaly to me.  TEPCO covered and cooled the melts and pools; the sparking became less noteworthy as we watched and blogged about more noticeable events; and with only time lapse recordings to review the sparks mostly disappeared.  Why do we have so few normal speed recordings to look at?  Without being able to explain exactly what and how and why the sparks were, counting them was easy enough.  I think the spark counts are measuring the radioactivity of the off-gassing melts and pools.   Off-gassing vapor, clouds of charged particles drift in the air.  I wonder what type of radiation the sparks are.  

Quote:Alpha particles and beta particles are considered directly ionizing because they carry a charge and can, therefore, interact directly with atomic electrons through coulombic forces (i.e. like charges repel each other; opposite charges attract each other).

The neutron is an indirectly ionizing particle. It is indirectly ionizing because it does not carry an electrical charge. Ionization is caused by charged particles, which are produced during collisions with atomic nuclei.

The third type of ionizing radiation includes gamma and X rays, which are electromagnetic, indirectly ionizing radiation. These are indirectly ionizing because they are electrically neutral (as are all electromagnetic radiations) and do not interact with atomic electrons through coulombic forces.

http://www.who.int/ionizing_radiation/ab..._is_ir/en/

A and B are charged particles which could be the nuclei of Fuku fog.  G is wave energy.  I picked up the term 'gamma sparks' from the chat at the ISS feed.  People were calling the sparks a gamma storm, even though the particles coming off the sun as solar wind are thought to be positively charged.  Radiation does affect ccd camera sensors but little info is in the public domain.  One source says Alpha is most likely to be the cause.  LWH points out that A and B don’t travel far and are easily blocked and gamma only travels maybe yards so how could it be measuring sources that are much further away.   The radioactive steam coming off the melts and rising from the pools can concentrate in the air over the plant under certain weather conditions and that could put radioactive sources closer to the cameras.  Even if I’m not knowledgeable enough about radiation detection yet, and I’m here to learn, the evidence I’ve gathered with a count of the sparks supports the premise that the ccd cameras are measuring some type of radiation at Daiichi.    I’m glad others are taking notice and helping me figure out what the sparks are telling us.
"The map is not the territory that it is a map of ... the word is not the thing being referred to."
 
Reply
#63
12-27 08:45 cam4 looks like it's snowing at Daiichi. The snow looks like a storm of white sparks in daytime. Cam1 had morning sun glare, not showing the snow.
"The map is not the territory that it is a map of ... the word is not the thing being referred to."
 
Reply
#64
(12-26-2015, 07:51 PM)Horse Wrote: 12-27 08:45 cam4 looks like it's snowing at Daiichi.  The snow looks like a storm of white sparks in daytime.  Cam1 had morning sun glare, not showing the snow.

I  have a video clip of that
https://www.dropbox.com/s/b28fws4t143ucs...1.mp4?dl=0
 
Reply
#65
(12-26-2015, 08:47 PM)NILSEN62 Wrote: I  have a video clip of that
https://www.dropbox.com/s/b28fws4t143ucs...1.mp4?dl=0

Hi Nilsen62, welcome to CRL, good clip you posted. First time I saw it snowing in the daylight sun sorta freaked me out. At least I hope it's snowing, wouldn't want to see that kind of spark activity.
"The map is not the territory that it is a map of ... the word is not the thing being referred to."
 
Reply
#66
(12-26-2015, 08:47 PM)NILSEN62 Wrote:
(12-26-2015, 07:51 PM)Horse Wrote: 12-27 08:45 cam4 looks like it's snowing at Daiichi.  The snow looks like a storm of white sparks in daytime.  Cam1 had morning sun glare, not showing the snow.

I  have a video clip of that
https://www.dropbox.com/s/b28fws4t143ucs...1.mp4?dl=0

Welcome to CRL
"All models are flawed, some are useful."
George E. P. Box
 
Reply
#67
Star 
(12-26-2015, 06:32 AM)Horse Wrote:
(12-25-2015, 05:16 PM)Chasaha Wrote: Clarification:  
So are you saying that the sparks could be in the camera's  sensors, as opposed to 'literal'  flying through the air ionized particles?

Has a spark event ever been captured on both cams at the same time that we know of?   I am guessing not.   But, I don't know for sure.

Huh   Wondering   Smile

Chasaha and Pia, thanks for asking for clarification of the sparking activity.  My hypothesis is that the sparks are the effects of radiation striking the Charged Coupled Devices in the camera.  In the early days, as I watched, they were often blinking in the background, lots of radiation and lots of sparking.  I’ve worked with various cameras in industrial settings and the sparks stood out as an anomaly to me.  TEPCO covered and cooled the melts and pools; the sparking became less noteworthy as we watched and blogged about more noticeable events; and with only time lapse recordings to review the sparks mostly disappeared.  Why do we have so few normal speed recordings to look at?  Without being able to explain exactly what and how and why the sparks were, counting them was easy enough.  I think the spark counts are measuring the radioactivity of the off-gassing melts and pools.   Off-gassing vapor, clouds of charged particles drift in the air.  I wonder what type of radiation the sparks are.  

Quote:Alpha particles and beta particles are considered directly ionizing because they carry a charge and can, therefore, interact directly with atomic electrons through coulombic forces (i.e. like charges repel each other; opposite charges attract each other).

The neutron is an indirectly ionizing particle. It is indirectly ionizing because it does not carry an electrical charge. Ionization is caused by charged particles, which are produced during collisions with atomic nuclei.

The third type of ionizing radiation includes gamma and X rays, which are electromagnetic, indirectly ionizing radiation. These are indirectly ionizing because they are electrically neutral (as are all electromagnetic radiations) and do not interact with atomic electrons through coulombic forces.

http://www.who.int/ionizing_radiation/ab..._is_ir/en/

A and B are charged particles which could be the nuclei of Fuku fog.  G is wave energy.  I picked up the term 'gamma sparks' from the chat at the ISS feed.  People were calling the sparks a gamma storm, even though the particles coming off the sun as solar wind are thought to be positively charged.  Radiation does affect ccd camera sensors but little info is in the public domain.  One source says Alpha is most likely to be the cause.  LWH points out that A and B don’t travel far and are easily blocked and gamma only travels maybe yards so how could it be measuring sources that are much further away.   The radioactive steam coming off the melts and rising from the pools can concentrate in the air over the plant under certain weather conditions and that could put radioactive sources closer to the cameras.  Even if I’m not knowledgeable enough about radiation detection yet, and I’m here to learn, the evidence I’ve gathered with a count of the sparks supports the premise that the ccd cameras are measuring some type of radiation at Daiichi.    I’m glad others are taking notice and helping me figure out what the sparks are telling us.


With all due respect...
I am not sure if I agree with the 'sparks' on cam hypothesis.    However, I will say it's a good one and highly probable.

On the other hand,  my opinion,  at this time, is that most of the observed sparks are literal sparks ionizing in the highly radioactive gaseous atmosphere above the meltdowns.  

Here are some reasons why I think a 'Hypothesis 2' is also possible.

1. Based on Bionerd (youtube user) videos where cams are hit with radiation and he shows you the results.     The results look nothing like these sparks.

2. When Kodak film is exposed is looks like little white spots moving randomly.

3.  This may be more what it looks like when a cam takes a big gamma hit.  IMO
10/18/2012  (via nuckelchen)
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/2099954/Rad%20T...%20001.jpg
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/2099...%20001.JPG

4.  The 'sparks'  tend to move/fly in an upward direction.  

5.  I recall observing a 'spark' that moved behind a crane arm.  In other words, it was on the far side of the crane and the arm blocked view momentarily.  Sorry, don't have the screen shot of that particular one.

6. Most sparks just don't seem to move or have the 'feel' of a digital screen blip.  
(This is kind of a vague statement, but it's the best way I could put it.)

Here's a bright blue double spark I took on 2012/06/29
I remember watching them walk up the screen.
Not a good day at Fuku.   [Image: Rad%20SteamFog%20Blue%20Spark%20002.jpg]

The reason I inquired as to if anyone had captured a spark on both cams was that would be one way of verifying it's not just in the cam.     Idea

Arrow We do agree that somehow we are seeing the results of FALLOUT from ongoing TRIPLE MELTDOWNS.
 
Reply
#68
(12-26-2015, 11:47 PM)Chasaha Wrote: With all due respect...
I am not sure if I agree with the 'sparks' on cam hypothesis.    However, I will say it's a good one and highly probable.

On the other hand,  my opinion,  at this time, is that most of the observed sparks are literal sparks ionizing in the highly radioactive gaseous atmosphere above the meltdowns.  

Here are some reasons why I think a 'Hypothesis 2' is also possible.

1. Based on Bionerd (youtube user) videos where cams are hit with radiation and he shows you the results.     The results look nothing like these sparks.

2. When Kodak film is exposed is looks like little white spots moving randomly.

3.  This may be more what it looks like when a cam takes a big gamma hit.  IMO
10/18/2012  (via nuckelchen)
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/2099954/Rad%20T...%20001.jpg
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/2099...%20001.JPG

4.  The 'sparks'  tend to move/fly in an upward direction.  

5.  I recall observing a 'spark' that moved behind a crane arm.  In other words, it was on the far side of the crane and the arm blocked view momentarily.  Sorry, don't have the screen shot of that particular one.

6. Most sparks just don't seem to move or have the 'feel' of a digital screen blip.  
(This is kind of a vague statement, but it's the best way I could put it.)

Here's a bright blue double spark I took on 2012/06/29
I remember watching them walk up the screen.
Not a good day at Fuku.  

The reason I inquired as to if anyone had captured a spark on both cams was that would be one way of verifying it's not just in the cam.     Idea

Arrow We do agree that somehow we are seeing the results  of FALLOUT from ongoing TRIPLE MELTDOWNS.

“…are literal sparks ionizing in the highly radioactive gaseous atmosphere above the meltdowns.  “

Totally respect that point of view.  No sparks have been found on both cams at the same time.  Don’t expect they would be under either hypothesis.  In the sensor or in the air, I can count them to get an idea of radiologic activity.  

1. Bionerd, haven’t found the pics you refer to yet, will keep looking.
2. Film exposure is a sample over some period of time, the ccd sensor picks up each instant.  
3. Big gamma hit, tend to agree.  Found lots of camera distortion ala Nuck’s pics when sparks are flying fast and furious.  
4. Sparks flying upwards.  I don’t see that, a single frame grab gives no indication of movement, looking at a collection shows a random pattern.
5. Sparks don’t move, here one frame gone the next.
6. Vague, yes I have trouble finding words to describe the sparks.

“We do agree that somehow we are seeing the results of FALLOUT from ongoing TRIPLE MELTDOWNS.”  

Yes, and not just the fallout like the webs in the rain, but the steaming radioactive emissions from ongoing TRIPLE MELTDOWNS out of containment and those hot spent fuel pools.
"The map is not the territory that it is a map of ... the word is not the thing being referred to."
 
Reply
#69
12-26 20:00:00 to 20:59:59 one hour, counted 17 sparks and 2 distortions.
"The map is not the territory that it is a map of ... the word is not the thing being referred to."
 
Reply
#70
(12-27-2015, 09:31 AM)Horse Wrote: 12-26 20:00:00 to 20:59:59 one hour, counted 17 sparks and 2 distortions.
  
27 December 2015 via Majia Sunrise After Night of Heavy Emissions: Fukushima Japan majiasblog.blogspot.com.au/2015/12/sunrise-after-night-of-heavy-emissions.html
   
Pia
just pm me if needed.
 
Reply
#71
Lightbulb 
(12-27-2015, 01:28 AM)Horse Wrote: “…are literal sparks ionizing in the highly radioactive gaseous atmosphere above the meltdowns.  “

Totally respect that point of view.  No sparks have been found on both cams at the same time.  Don’t expect they would be under either hypothesis.  In the sensor or in the air, I can count them to get an idea of radiologic activity.  

1. Bionerd, haven’t found the pics you refer to yet, will keep looking.
2. Film exposure is a sample over some period of time, the ccd sensor picks up each instant.  
3. Big gamma hit, tend to agree.  Found lots of camera distortion ala Nuck’s pics when sparks are flying fast and furious.  
4. Sparks flying upwards.  I don’t see that, a single frame grab gives no indication of movement, looking at a collection shows a random pattern.
5. Sparks don’t move, here one frame gone the next.
6. Vague, yes I have trouble finding words to describe the sparks.

“We do agree that somehow we are seeing the results of FALLOUT from ongoing TRIPLE MELTDOWNS.”  

Yes, and not just the fallout like the webs in the rain, but the steaming radioactive emissions from ongoing TRIPLE MELTDOWNS out of containment and those hot spent fuel pools.

1. Bionerd vid:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JVGpYAatb8E
(couldn't find the original one.  It might of been by anti-proton (user)?)
Here's another one... similar:
Modified CCD Camera
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OgaSs-QP3SU

2. True.. but the white splatter effect looks similar.
(note: I have observed this type of visual splatter on the Fuku web cams many times in the early days of observation)

3. Yep.

4. I have indeed observed 'some' sparks that move in a vertical direction for multiple frames.(2012 - 2014)
I tend to note that in my descriptions.  (The enenews archives)  I have not been observing lately like I used to.    

5. See 4.

6. Yep.
___________

On the 'spider' webbing observations I would say most are cam lens water (refraction/reflection) , but not all.  
Maybe we have a spark combination, some on cam, some in the air?    Huh
 
Reply
#72
1 and 2.  Chasaha, thanks for posting the video links.  The second one uses americium to generate sparks, an alpha emitter. Noted that the ccd was modified, removing protective coverings that could block alpha. Many of the daughter products of americium emit gamma-rays and neutrons which have a long penetration depth.  Both vids show in normal time, a multitude of sparks blinking on the screen.  When I recorded the ISS 'gamma storms' what looked to be a multitude of sparks in normal time turned out to be a series of instantaneous sparking events seen frame by frame.  The tepcams have all their protective covers filtering alpha yet we still see instantaneous individual sparks blinking.  

3. The distortion looks like a hit to the electronics, gamma seems likely.  

4 and 5.  I think I see some patterns; like more over the r3 pit or the r1 open roof; sparking in the clear sky in front of a rising cloud of emissions.  It looks random in the spark collections.  Maybe our view is more zoomed than the early days and events aren’t as active to get that perspective.   Started looking thru archives for sparks, prefer normal speed recordings but can work with the 2x like fuku1long, and posted some here to look for patterns.  

6. When I see an increase in sparks there is an increase in emissions, the radioactive stew in the air thickens.  The pink splotch floating in front of the camera, what type of vapor was that.  A yellow cloud rises over r1 on both cams at the same time.  The radioactive fallout in the rain sticks to the lens for awhile to blur the view with webs.  All are vague signs of the radioactivity in the air over the disaster site.  Might be hard to prove sparks are exploding on cam or in air but we can collect data and make our guesses.
"The map is not the territory that it is a map of ... the word is not the thing being referred to."
 
Reply
#73
   

   

   
"The map is not the territory that it is a map of ... the word is not the thing being referred to."
 
Reply
#74
(12-28-2015, 08:30 AM)Horse Wrote: 1 and 2.  Chasaha, thanks for posting the video links.  The second one uses americium to generate sparks, an alpha emitter. Noted that the ccd was modified, removing protective coverings that could block alpha. Many of the daughter products of americium emit gamma-rays and neutrons which have a long penetration depth.  Both vids show in normal time, a multitude of sparks blinking on the screen.  When I recorded the ISS 'gamma storms' what looked to be a multitude of sparks in normal time turned out to be a series of instantaneous sparking events seen frame by frame.  The tepcams have all their protective covers filtering alpha yet we still see instantaneous individual sparks blinking.  

3. The distortion looks like a hit to the electronics, gamma seems likely.  

4 and 5.  I think I see some patterns; like more over the r3 pit or the r1 open roof; sparking in the clear sky in front of a rising cloud of emissions.  It looks random in the spark collections.  Maybe our view is more zoomed than the early days and events aren’t as active to get that perspective.   Started looking thru archives for sparks, prefer normal speed recordings but can work with the 2x like fuku1long, and posted some here to look for patterns.  

6. When I see an increase in sparks there is an increase in emissions, the radioactive stew in the air thickens.  The pink splotch floating in front of the camera, what type of vapor was that.  A yellow cloud rises over r1 on both cams at the same time.  The radioactive fallout in the rain sticks to the lens for awhile to blur the view with webs.  All are vague signs of the radioactivity in the air over the disaster site.  Might be hard to prove sparks are exploding on cam or in air but we can collect data and make our guesses.

Good job horse.   

I usually try to start with Fuku1long if no normal speed exists.   Even there though, the video is not always posted or is shortened.  

I have not been as active on watching this year.  But I do look at what other watchers are observing and try to comment based on my prior observations.  

Arrow Collecting data.   Someday this may be very important historical information.   I think it already is.
 
Reply
#75
(12-29-2015, 12:35 PM)Chasaha Wrote: Good job horse.   

I usually try to start with Fuku1long if no normal speed exists.   Even there though, the video is not always posted or is shortened.  

I have not been as active on watching this year.  But I do look at what other watchers are observing and try to comment based on my prior observations.  

Arrow Collecting data.   Someday this may be very important historical information.   I think it already is.

Thanks Chasaha. Your prior observations are important because they keep changing the cam views and new watchers won't be see what we were seeing. Your comments and links help the discussion, keep 'em coming.

12-26 pm spark count update

20:00:00 to 20:59:59 one hour, counted 17 sparks and 2 distortions.

21:00:00 to 21:59:59 one hour, counted 12 sparks and 2 distortions.

22:00:00 to 22:59:59 one hour, counted 11 sparks and 1 distortion.

23:00:00 to 23:59:59 one hour, counted 21 sparks and 1 distortion.
"The map is not the territory that it is a map of ... the word is not the thing being referred to."
 
Reply
#76
Chasaha asked if sparks had been seen in both cams at once and the spark activity on cam4 was an opportunity to check it out since sparks don’t usually show on cam4 and 12-28 had a few.  Looked for sparks on cam1 while cam4 was so active and cam1 was active too.  The events were clustered in the same time frame, even if not exact.  

   

   

   

   

   

   

   
"The map is not the territory that it is a map of ... the word is not the thing being referred to."
 
Reply
#77
Thumbs Up 
(12-30-2015, 02:03 AM)Horse Wrote: Chasaha asked if sparks had been seen in both cams at once and the spark activity on cam4 was an opportunity to check it out since sparks don’t usually show on cam4 and 12-28 had a few.  Looked for sparks on cam1 while cam4 was so active and cam1 was active too.  The events were clustered in the same time frame, even if not exact.  





Cluster Sparking.    That really is phenomenal.    I am not sure what to make of it.  

Just the fact that the sparks have been 'captured' so close in 'area' and 'time' is telling us something.  Undecided




 
Reply
#78
Quote:chargedbarticle
December 29, 2015 at 1:42 pm
I don't believe those links are to live videos. When I click on one I see a Play button, which means the picture is not live. When I click on Play nothing happens. I used to be able to watch on several different platforms, but this has become increasingly difficult.
http://enenews.com/forum-fukushima-webca...13-present

@chargedbarticle, those links are on TEPCO’s website to TEPCO’s north and south camera live feeds.  TEPCO has turned off all the old direct links we used previously and delivers the feeds only thru their Flowplayer.  I know it to work with Windows 7 and up IE browsers.  If it won’t play for you, try allowing it in your firewall settings.  As to the live part, when you hit play the feed re-buffers and starts playing at the ‘current’ jst time displayed in the title bar of the feed.  


(12-30-2015, 08:17 PM)Chasaha Wrote: Cluster Sparking.    That really is phenomenal.    I am not sure what to make of it.  

Just the fact that the sparks have been 'captured' so close in 'area' and 'time' is telling us something.  Undecided

@Chasaha, yes, sparks blink in clusters.  I had looked once before briefly at a c4 spark and didn’t find anything on c1, this time I looked a bit longer because there were a few c4 sparks, not just one.   It surprised me, especially the timing; sparking, a gap, then the next burst.  The timing gets lost in the series of screenshot’s in the spark collections; the graphs were a lot of extra work and didn’t seem to convey the bursts of spark activity very well.  The clustering shows in the 12-26 spark counts, too.  Something is causing those sparks and I think we have cameras acting as radiation detectors.
"The map is not the territory that it is a map of ... the word is not the thing being referred to."
 
Reply
#79
a mystery - - -

http://youtu.be/AqgVsFPpCpE
 
Reply
#80
2015 spark count summary  

   

   

Started a spreadsheet to track where I was in spark counting.  Really fell behind in projects because documenting sparks is tedious and time consuming.  I've counted more of July, more to do, to compare spark counts to known rad reading spikes.  7-8 shows some higher counts and takes twice as long to count and document.  Will flowplayer change spark counts?  Was it introduced to control video output to conceal increasing activity?  I thought the 11-8 orange clouds seen on both tepcams coming out of r1 was a significant event and wondered if any radiation monitors would spike when that cloud went over.  

links

9-12 r1 roof panel removal / pink splotch
http://caferadlab.com/thread-29-post-97.html#pid97

11-8 orange clouds out of r1.
http://caferadlab.com/thread-230-post-771.html#pid771

11-30 puffs of orange over r1.
http://caferadlab.com/thread-282-post-871.html#pid871
"The map is not the territory that it is a map of ... the word is not the thing being referred to."
 
Reply
  


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  WEBCAM December 2017 Horse 11 1,775 01-01-2018, 08:14 AM
Last Post: Felibi
  WEBCAM December 2016 Horse 55 25,925 01-01-2017, 09:31 AM
Last Post: Horse
  WEBCAM November 2015 Horse 60 66,487 12-11-2015, 07:07 AM
Last Post: missFrill

Forum Jump:


Browsing: 1 Guest(s)