Sub-atomic Particles Used To Map Pyramid 41
firegate writes "Yahoo News is reporting on a pyramid-mapping project focusing on an ancient Aztec site in Teotihuacan, Mexico. Scientists are attempting to map an ancient pyramid by detecting muons - sub-atomic particles which are left as remnants of ancient cosmic rays. A similar method was used to scan Egypt's Khephren Pyramid in the 1960's."
Cool.. (Score:2, Funny)
FP by the way..
Bad News (Score:5, Funny)
<cantresist>In the meantime, I welcome our new Goa'uld overlords.</cantresist>
Re:Bad News (Score:2)
What, again?
"Alvarez proved there were no hidden chambers in that pyramid and it is now in scientific literature," said Menchaca
So no, no Stargate found. No teleport rings either. Unless they covered it up.
And are you sure it wouldn't be Tlak'khan technology hidden in that kind of a pyramid instead?
Re:Bad News (Score:1, Flamebait)
So how does it work, exactly? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:So how does it work, exactly? (Score:4, Informative)
Re:So how does it work, exactly? (Score:2, Informative)
This *looks* like a normal decay equation which assumes that the number of particles decaying/getting anhiliated at any time is a fraction of those present.
The article says "Since there are fewer muons in an empty space than in solid rock or earth.."
So, if we assume muons are formed when the cosmic rays pass through the walls(which is what the article sasy) and assume that empty space offers lesser resistance to the rays than, say a brick wa
Re:So how does it work, exactly? (Score:4, Informative)
The article is written by a scientific illiterate (Score:5, Informative)
The system works a lot like a CAT scanner, where the absorption of penetrating radiation is measured over a variety of different paths through the object to be scanned. The only real difference is that the radiation is muons rather than X-rays (less easily absorbed, thus able to provide detectable signals through a hundred meters of rock - you should see what Fermilab uses to absorb muons so they can do neutrino experiments) and the source is natural. If you had enough money you could make your own muon source and scan the thing yourself, but when nature has been so obliging there's really no great need.
Next week, on a very special Stargate SG-1... (Score:1)
Re:Next week, on a very special Stargate SG-1... (Score:2)
Actually, we should be much more worried about crystal skulls that teleport people to offworld caverns populated by giant white aliens [gateworld.net]. Oh, and some old geezer named Nick who sees dead people.
1960s!? (Score:5, Interesting)
Come to think of it, it might have been useful in my old house...
Re:1960s!? (Score:1)
Useful resources on this technique (Score:5, Informative)
An abstract [if.usp.br], a presentation [unimelb.edu.au] on applying similar techniques to volcanoes, a citation [L. Alvarez et al, Science 167, 832 (1970)] (accessible only to subscribers of Science, I'm afraid), a Physics Today [physicstoday.com] article, a useful paper [bnl.gov].
is the conference where the experiment was originally proposed. [www.smf.mx]
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Replacement for the X-Ray machine? (Score:4, Informative)
Generating muons would require a particle accelerator. This is already pushing the cost beyond that of standard x-ray gear.
Then you have to consider the interaction of muons with the human body. They are penetrating ionizing radiation, and they decay into more fast ionizing particles once they are inside the body. Not something you really want.
Best to stick with metal detectors at airports I think.
Nah.... (Score:2)
Some PET systems and NM applications require a particle accelerator right at the lab- they make the compounds and then they are carried (or shot) right up into the patient.
A large NM detector scans the body over looking for tumours that pic
Re:Replacement for the X-Ray machine? (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Replacement for the X-Ray machine? (Score:2)
Teotihuacan is not Aztec (Score:5, Informative)
The culture of Teotihuacan predates the Aztecs by a few hundred years. It climaxed around 500, went under around 600 (my sources say 700). The so-called Aztecs arived around 1200 and gave the site its name, but that's the only Aztec connection to Teotihuacan.
Re:Teotihuacan is not Aztec (Score:5, Informative)
Actually, they didn't live there. They lived nearby, and considered the enormous ruins a holy site. They thought that that city was where humans came into being ("Teotihuacan [mexicocity.com.mx]" means "City of the Gods" in the Aztec language, Nahuatl [iastate.edu].) In the literature, it really is referred to as a Mysterious Teotihuacan Culture (also called "Toltec" because this is what the Aztec called the Mysterious Teotihuacano Culture.) They had an enormous empire, conquering and trading with groups as far as 1500 km [wikipedia.org] to the south, and Teotihuacan was the FIRST major urban center in the New World. It was enormous, with big, government-issue apartment complexes, sewage systems, and public market places.
Aztecs thought it a high compliment to be considered Toltec-ish, since when they established themselves in the area a thousand years after the place had peaked they claimed legitimacy by claiming to be at least the spiritual descendents of the Toltec (hey, look, they were fierce warriors and so are we!) even though they and everyone else acknowledged that they were entirely different peoples.
And this really is just about the extent of what we do know about the truly Mysterious Teotihuacano Culture (with some other random speculations about how they came to be the only big culture in the New World without someone like a king, how and why the city of hundreds of thousands came to be burned to the ground and abandoned within about 50 years, et cetera.) We know a hell of a lot about the Aztec. They were separated by time, space and culture. Saying 'what's the difference' between Aztec and Teotihuacano is like saying 'what's the difference' between you and an Ancient Greek.
Re:Teotihuacan is not Aztec (Score:2)
Must have been one hell of a commute when you don't got wheels.
Re:Teotihuacan is not Aztec (Score:2)
Muons (Score:5, Informative)
Muons can react with matter, but such interaction is very unlikely. If the matter is denser, such as stone, they are more likely to interact. By placing detectors inside the pyramid and counting muons coming from overhead for a long time, the scientists can estimate how much matter. They have another estimate of the matter is there by comparing to the number they would expect if they had passed through air. If that experimental estimate of the matter present is somewhat less than the expected amount based on the thickness and density of the pyramid above the detector and the density of the stone, there much be less stone than expected, possibly due to a secret chamber.
Disturbing mention... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Disturbing mention... (Score:1)
Nothing, but you have to convince some knucklehead to give you the money and nothing hits home like a terrorist threat.
Similar project at UT (Score:5, Informative)
They have a fairly sparse website [utexas.edu], but there's a quite good PDF of a slides from a talk [utexas.edu] that Roy Schwitters (former director of the Superconducting Supercollider) gave.
MuT at UT (Score:3, Informative)
The basic concept is similar, except our detectors use modern HEP technology. Our detector is smaller and more versatile than the one in the article. The smaller detector will permit us to use it in a harsh enviroment. We plan to use it in a unexplored pyramid (still buried) in La Milpa, Belize. Read: in the middle of the jungle, as opposed to a well stu
Re:MuT at UT (Score:2)
Old news (Score:1, Funny)
IIRC it didn't work (the 60s version), did it? (Score:1)
After the method was verified, they tried to apply it to at least one Gizeh pyramid. The measurement was really weird, and with contradictory results, that at least seem to suggest that either we know shit about the internals of those pyramids or the method didn't really work completely then.
Established Egyptology still derives the Cheops/Chufu connection to th
Re:IIRC it didn't work (the 60s version), did it? (Score:4, Informative)
Quite contrary, it did work, but the results weren't interesting. Nothing new was found in the pyramid. Go read the paper.
Selling up (Score:4, Informative)
"Teotihuacan is up there with Rome, one of the biggest pre-industrial cities in the world. Constantinople is also maybe there but no Chinese city was of this magnitude. Egypt didn't even have cities," Manzanilla said.
Rome had over a million inhabitants at its peak in antiquity, and Constantinople just about the same by the time of Justinian according to most sources, and even those who lowball the populations of both places put them no lower than 400,000. Even classical Athens had 300,000 residents, and second-century Xi'an in China had at least 400,000 during the time Teotihuacan was inhabited with 150,000 according to the article.
Yes, it's a very large city for antiquity, but it's far from the largest.
Incidentally, one might quibble with the definition of a "city", but Memphis in Old Kingdom Egypt had a population of 30,000, which was the largest settlement in the world at the time. I think we can safely call that an Egyptian city.
Hmm (Score:1)