

Scariest animated GIF ever: Path of radiation leakage in Japan - jawns
http://www.spiegel.de/images/image-191816-galleryV9-nhjp.gif

======
gus_massa
I found the original article where this image appears. This is a simulation,
not a measurement of the actual radiation.

Original Article (German)
[http://www.spiegel.de/wissenschaft/natur/0,1518,750835,00.ht...](http://www.spiegel.de/wissenschaft/natur/0,1518,750835,00.html)

Google Traslation:
[http://translate.google.com.ar/translate?js=n&prev=_t...](http://translate.google.com.ar/translate?js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&sl=de&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.spiegel.de%2Fwissenschaft%2Fnatur%2F0%2C1518%2C750835%2C00.html)

EDIT: More information

The Original Original Article is from ZAMG. They have many updates and
variations. I will link only two:

The I-131 in the title means Iodine-131. They have the linked map and a
wordwide map of the (simulated) distribution of C-137 (Caesium-137):
[http://translate.google.com.ar/translate?js=n&prev=_t...](http://translate.google.com.ar/translate?js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&sl=de&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.zamg.ac.at%2Faktuell%2Findex.php%3Fseite%3D1%26artikel%3DZAMG_2011-03-15GMT08%3A26)

Simulation of the radioactive material distribution if they do a short-term
release whith optimal winds and if they do a continual release with changin
winds:
[http://translate.google.com.ar/translate?js=n&prev=_t...](http://translate.google.com.ar/translate?js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&sl=de&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.zamg.ac.at%2Faktuell%2Findex.php%3Fseite%3D1%26artikel%3DZAMG_2011-03-12GMT12%3A19)

------
GHFigs
No, what's scary is that there are people who think radiation is measured in
_cubic millimeters_ (m^-3). I'm not about to claim it's a well-made chart, but
nobody should be drawing any conclusions from any chart without knowing what
it's measuring (a plume) or what the units are (m^-3).

~~~
timrobinson
"units m^-3" is another way of saying "units per m^3", i.e. radiation per
cubic metre. For comparison, speed is "m s^-1" and acceleration is "m s^-2".

Radiation per cubic millimetre would be "units mm^-3".

------
FreshCode
Looks like more irrational fear-mongering akin to
<http://stevebeckow.com/2011/03/nuclear-fallout-map-fraud/>

Who is the original source?

~~~
JoachimSchipper
Well, der Spiegel is a well-known German newspaper...

------
timrobinson
What are the units on this?

~~~
gus_massa
And how much is dangerous?

~~~
timrobinson
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sievert>

But I don't know how many Sieverts the map represents. Or if it's even
depicting rate of dose over time.

~~~
_delirium
The caption mentions "units/m^3", which would seem to indicate that the
"units" would be some sort of particle count, and the colors on the map are
particulate density? Just a guess, though. Radiation dosage wouldn't typically
be given in units per volume, would it?

If we assume (no idea if this is accurate) that the units are proportionally
related to radiation dosage, though, and correlate them with other reports,
the map bands might be roughly nano-sieverts per hour.

Completely rough and unreliable calculation to arrive at that: This animation
shows a plume over the Tokyo area in the 10^3 to 10^4 units range on March 15,
and peak values over the plant in the 10^5 to 10^6 units range. Other reports
have radiation in Tokyo peaking roughly on the order of 1 micro-Sv, and levels
at the plant on the order of hundreds of micro-Sv. So if the units were nano-
Sv per hour, the orders of magnitude are about right.

Not sure what the total release given as "0.10E+19 Units" at the top would
mean then. Anyway, why would someone make a technical-looking graph where
everything is labeled in mysterious "units"?

