From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

X rays used in the space or other planets

Other planet species or aliens seens 171.61.226.180 ( talk) 18:35, 5 January 2022 (UTC) reply

I'm guessing this a reference to the potential for interstellar communication using X-rays. However, this is just theoretical at the moment. NASA has tested X-ray communication systems, but only between Earth and the ISS. 2A00:23C7:99A4:5001:3533:7B73:616:5C0 ( talk) 00:44, 10 July 2022 (UTC) reply

Wiki Education assignment: Technical and Scientific Communication

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 22 August 2022 and 9 December 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Sthomason27 ( article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Brennam29 ( talk) 15:21, 21 September 2022 (UTC) reply

I am a student editor doing a project for my Scientific Communication class. Through my research I have done for the past few weeks I have added contributions about X-ray harm. I think that is a very common worry for patients and on this Wikipedia page there should be more information about it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sthomason27 ( talkcontribs) 12:58, 5 October 2022 (UTC) reply

Mathematical inconsistency

The introductory paragraph says that X-rays have a frequency range of 30 PHz to 30 EHz, so that the limit frequencies are a factor of 1000 apart. Since photon energy is directly proportional to frequency, X-rays should therefore cover a range of energies with a 1000-fold difference between the highest energy and the lowest energy.

However, the energy range given for X-rays in the same paragraph is 145 eV (electron volts) to 124 KeV; the extremes differ not by a factor of 1000, but of approximately 855.

WolframAlpha says that 30 PHz corresponds to a photon energy of 124 eV, not 145 eV. Should I therefore change the lower energy limit of "145 eV" to "124 eV"?

Boatman4 ( talk) 19:27, 30 January 2023 (UTC) reply

"Energy Ranges": X-Rays Vs. Gamma Rays

I wonder if it would make sense to consider X-Rays to be a low-energy form of gamma rays.


Just as the color red is a low-energy (long wavelength) form of visible light, might not X-Rays be a low-energy "color" of gamma rays?


I would be very interested in any thoughts upon this matter... The Grand Rascal ( talk) 07:10, 1 May 2024 (UTC) reply

There is absolutely no physical reason to have different names for x-rays and gamma rays - and also IR, UV, etc. All these are either historical terms or are specific to human physiology. In any case, Wikipedia isn't the entity to introduce new terms... Evgeny ( talk) 09:04, 1 May 2024 (UTC) reply
Cool thanks for sharing this info to me 😁 222.153.163.70 ( talk) 08:36, 16 May 2024 (UTC) reply
The appropriate Wikipedia policy WP:COMMONNAME: "...the name most typically used in reliable sources is generally preferred." -- Chetvorno TALK 16:07, 16 May 2024 (UTC) reply

X-ray emission from diodes?

Hi, vaguely recall a discusson about using a vacuum encapsulated silicon diode driven far beyond avalanche breakdown generating a stream of electrons that were later used as "the E-beam source for a CRT" but have heard no more about it. With the advent of vacuum ultraviolet (160nm) LEDs it might be worth investigating if such a device can be leveraged to create a new X-ray source with some modifications. In this case the drift velocity seems to be a critical factor so such a source would also be monochromatic which is desirable for physics and engineering applications. A possible device would use a helium (low mean free path) fill with such a diode, accelerating electrons from the VUV chip recombination region using a micro-piezoelectric transformer and pulse forming network onto a low work function (likely Sr , Mg or Ba) electrode for the actual X-ray emission to occur. This might actually work with some early UV-C LEDs notably the TO-5 variety as they have an open structure. It would potentially only need 4KV internally which would be unprecedented. 91.190.161.160 ( talk) 04:55, 8 June 2024 (UTC) reply