On Thu, 12 Feb 1998, Brent Thompson wrote: > > There's a difference between EMR and particle radiation. When we say > > something is "radioactive", we mean it emits particle radiation. > > Wrong! Gamma radiation is EMR, and things emitting gamma radiation are > definitely considered "radioactive". Your statement is true only for alpha > and beta radiation, by far the least penetrating of the kinds of radiation. Well, as someone that has worked in the field a little bit, I think you both have some points, but I think the way to settle this is the dictionary. So I looked it up, and here's what I found online at <http://www.m-w.com/netdict.htm> Main Entry: ra·dio·ac·tiv·i·ty Pronunciation: -ak-'ti-v&-tE Function: noun Etymology: International Scientific Vocabulary Date: 1899 : the property possessed by some elements (as uranium) or isotopes (as carbon 14) of spontaneously emitting energetic particles (as electrons or alpha particles) by the disintegration of their atomic nuclei; also : the rays emitted While gamma rays may be emitted as well, I think that if something is radioactive, it undergoes a change to a different element on an atom by atom basis, and that usually (perhaps always) involves particle emission. FWIW, I believe that some of the rare earth phosphors in your crt are radioactive, but then some of the Carbon 14 in your wooden desk is radioactive too. Hell, the sun and everything around us is radioactive, it's more a question of how much. Personally, I think drying the chiles on top of the monitor is a good idea. I just dried some of those Jamaican Hots my friend bought me in my toaster oven (set on keep warm), but maybe I'll try the next batch on my monitor. Chuck Demas Needham, Mass. Eat Healthy | _ _ | Nothing would be done at all, Stay Fit | @ @ | If a man waited to do it so well, Die Anyway | v | That no one could find fault with it. demas@tiac.net | \___/ | http://www.tiac.net/users/demas