Settings

Theme

Muons used to test the condition of a road bridge in Estonia

news.err.ee

229 points by Fethbita 9 months ago · 53 comments

Reader

csours 9 months ago

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luis_Walter_Alvarez

Alvarez proposed muon tomography in 1965 to search the Egyptian pyramids for unknown chambers. Using naturally occurring cosmic rays, his plan was to place spark chambers, standard equipment in the high-energy particle physics of this time, beneath the Pyramid of Khafre in a known chamber. By measuring the counting rate of the cosmic rays in different directions the detector would reveal the existence of any void in the overlaying rock structure.[48]

  • kulahan 9 months ago

    They were indeed able to do this after all [1], and found some unknown voids.

    [1] https://spectrum.ieee.org/muon-imaging-finds-hidden-chamber-...

    • lazide 9 months ago

      At least one was confirmed to indeed be exist - quite fascinating.

      One day hopefully we can find out if the remaining giant looking open area exists too!

      • Cthulhu_ 9 months ago

        Wouldn't there be other ways to detect voids? Strong X-Rays, penetrating radar, or sound wave / seismic measurements taken from every outside and accessible inside space, combined into a 3d model / visualisation. Or is the stone used that impenetrable? I have no idea about these things.

        • lazide 9 months ago

          Those other methods do get used, but are of limited utility because the stone is that impenetrable - and it’s a masonry structure with a significant amount of joints, random small voids, etc.

          It really does benefit from something like muon/neutron radiation, where absorption is quite low/penetration quite high, so we can ‘see’ pass the first couple centimeters to meters.

megadata 9 months ago

Muons were also recently on hackaday. DIY ground penetrating radar ...

Building A DIY Muon Tomography Device For About $100

https://hackaday.com/2025/02/26/building-a-diy-muon-tomograp...

tagami 9 months ago

Here is an example used in the mining industry. I heard them present at a NASA/USGS conference last month regarding in situ resource ultilization: https://ideon.ai/

rdtsc 9 months ago

Neutrons can be used for these things as well. The advantage, say from x-rays, is attenuation is not by material density, where all metals will just look dark, but by thermal neutron absorption cross section. So boron might be dark, but metals won't be.

Muons are much nicer as you don't have to carry a neutron source around with you.

> However, if anyone is now thinking of standing under the bridge to get their body scanned, they shouldn't bother. First, they'd have to stand still for an hour, and second, the security patrol would be there within minutes.

Security patrol will come and bother you if you hand around the bridge for a few minutes?

  • thinkingQueen 9 months ago

    > Security patrol will come and bother you if you hand around the bridge for a few minutes?

    There’s a land war in Europe. Hundreds of thousands have lost their lives during the past few years. There have been cases of sabotage against the Baltic states as well as the Nordic states. Things are pretty grim there and lurking around basic infrastructure pretty much guarantees a talk with the police.

    • jldugger 9 months ago

      Plus Estonia in particular is 200km away from St Petersberg, and 800km from Moscow. They are all but guaranteed to succumb to Russian expansion if allowed to continue unchecked.

    • mschuster91 9 months ago

      And it's not just Europe either. The US has suffered from multiple attacks on electrical substations [1] as well with unknown perpetrators (the suspicion is white supremacists), and on top of that come rednecks shooting at power lines and god knows what else.

      Paranoia surrounding critical infrastructure is skyrocketing at the moment, and I'd say for a bunch of very good reasons.

      [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore_County_substation_attack

      • theultdev 9 months ago

        the "rednecks" are the ones fixing power lines for you.

        your neck may not be red because you get to sit inside while they keep your power on for you.

        meanwhile you sit inside writing your hateful, elitist, garbage.

        the conspiracy theories related to event you linked are ridiculous.

        • mschuster91 9 months ago

          > your neck may not be red because you get to sit inside while they keep your power on for you.

          Before I got into IT I was working in construction for our local telco provider, believe me I have seen shit.

    • rdtsc 9 months ago

      That's certainly a good reason. Thanks for explaining!

      • chrisweekly 9 months ago

        Here I was thinking it had something to do with trolls...

        Sorry, couldn't resist. Agreed, it's a helpful explanation.

      • barrenko 9 months ago

        It's a three days ride (at a leisure pace of like 40 km/h) from Crimea to Bruxelles.

schoen 9 months ago

I did not know this was a thing!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muon_tomography

teamonkey 9 months ago

Muons can be picked up by a standard DSLR. Put the cap on (remove the lens if possible), set it to continually take long exposures of 30s or more, put it in a sealed plastic box with some silica gel packets and put the whole thing in the fridge for a while.

Most of the frames will just show noise from the sensor and electronics (the low temperature minimises that), but occasionally you'll see a bright streak as a muon hits it.

  • agnishom 9 months ago

    How do you know it's related to a muon?

    • kimixa 9 months ago

      I'd think it's pretty much any high-energy ionizing radiation that causes those streaks - probably very few of which are muons. There are "local" sources of ionizing radiation pretty much everywhere.

      And if [0] is correct about the approximate muon flux - being that "about one per second passes through a volume the size of a person’s head.", the volume of a the CCD sensor that it would have to interact with is so much smaller (being some 10 microns thick) that I doubt it'll be "Take a few 30s exposures" sort of chance, so much as "Winning the lottery" level chance to actually have a muon pass through the sensor, and interact.

      [0] https://home.cern/science/physics/cosmic-rays-particles-oute...

      • teamonkey 9 months ago

        It doesn't have to hit the sensor, it needs to pass through it, so the thinness of it doesn't matter as much as the orientation; it's a matter of flux density.

        You would expect ap to 2-3 muons per minute to pass through a typical sensor but you might not capture all of them.

        • kimixa 9 months ago

          It has to interact, otherwise it wouldn't be visible at all, as it's the interactions that the CCD detects.

          And as muons don't interact often, the can pass through a lot of matter without anything noticing - that's the reason why they can pass through the atmosphere to still be detected on the ground - or even deep underground, as many imaging detectors are used, to avoid other radiation sources that could cause noise while still penetrating the rock you want to image. Compared to hundreds of metres of rock in a deep mine, a fridge and roof is nothing.

          • teamonkey 9 months ago

            The muon’s charge excites electrons as it passes through an atom’s electromagnetic field. The camera is detecting this trail of ionisation as the muon passes between the atoms of the sensor (and these sensors are very good at detecting excited electrons). The muon does NOT need to decay or to strike the atoms of the sensor directly in order to be detected.

            In open air at sea level, you would expect 1 muon to pass through any square cm of ground every minute, on average. With a sensor measuring 2-3 sq cm, oriented correctly, and exposing for a long enough time you would certainly expect to catch a few.

            Unlike x-rays or gamma radiation, muons can pass through several km of dense matter and penetrate deep inside the earth before they decay. They can pass through solid lead. Direct particle collisions are rare but more likely when passing through large amounts of dense matter. The ionisation process can also reduce the speed and trajectory. Muon tomography works by comparing how much the muon count has been reduced compared to an expected background level.

            The practice of capturing muons on camera is quite well established, see for example https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10220736/

      • Sharlin 9 months ago

        Not a lot of local radiation can make it to a sensor inside a camera inside a fridge, though.

        • kimixa 9 months ago

          Radioactive isotopes are everywhere, in the air, in the plastic box you put the camera in, in the camera frame itself.

          • Sharlin 9 months ago

            I guess that by far the most likely local source would be potassium-40 which is a gamma emitter and relatively abundant in organic stuff. Due to the low penetration of alpha and beta radiation, the source would have to be inside the camera to even have a chance of hitting the sensor, limiting the rate of such events.

            • kimixa 9 months ago

              [0] seems to imply the vast majority of radiation the average person experiences is gases, like Radon and Thoron decay (itself just an isotope of Radon), which would likely be as prevalent inside the fridge (and so inside the camera frame itself) as anywhere else.

              [0] https://www.epa.gov/radiation/radiation-sources-and-doses

              • Sharlin 9 months ago

                That's because there's gaseous radon-222 continuously released from soil and rock, as a decay product of natural uranium. But it's an alpha emitter so is stopped by anything, including a few cm of air, or a sheet of paper – or the glass filter in front of a digital camera sensor.

                • kimixa 9 months ago

                  But the lens and camera assembly isn't a vacuum, if there's radon in the air around the camera I'd expect radon to be inside the camera too, right by the CCD.

                  • Sharlin 9 months ago

                    Yes, but that amount of air is going to contain a rather insignificant amount of radon atoms. And as I said, even alpha particles emitted inside the camera have little hope of actually making it to the sensor, which is sandwiched between several layers of filters and the backside electronics and the camera chassis. (4He nuclei from space, making up around 10% of cosmic rays, on the other hand can have enough energy to penetrate the atmosphere and up to tens of meters of solid matter, so you might certainly capture some of those, besides the muons.)

IndrekR 9 months ago

Bit more info about the startup behind it: https://www.gscan.eu/

aigen000 9 months ago

If I recall correctly, a similar method was used to discover a hidden passageway in the Egyptian pyramids.

dzhiurgis 9 months ago

Wonder if one could use muography to detect passing submarines

tomcam 9 months ago

> This week, a new technology was tested in Jõgisoo, Harju County, as part of a nearly €1.3 million research project.

I’m already using the €235,999 Harbor Freight version for my bridge tests

aitchnyu 9 months ago

Is there a diagram of this? I'm imagining a plate that "see" at a 180 degree field of vision when cosmic rays hit it from every angle from the sky there are opaque things between the sky and sensor.

dinkblam 9 months ago

on that topic, rust costs us 3.4 trillion per year [1] and the (public) construction industry has not even started to address the issue

[1] http://impact.nace.org/economic-impact.aspx

krzysiek 9 months ago

They still do, but they used to too.

Keyboard Shortcuts

j
Next item
k
Previous item
o / Enter
Open selected item
?
Show this help
Esc
Close modal / clear selection