Talk:Soft radiation

g/cm^2 ?

Are those units correct? (It seems to me that g/cm^3 makes more sense) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.161.164.161 (talk) 17:56, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

It is correct, this is the normal convention. It is expressing the mass of material which radiation would have to pass through per square centimetre of surface. This is a true mass indication. g/cm3 is a measure of density and does not carry the information of the total depth and thereby the mass to penetrate. Dougsim (talk) 17:19, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Fundamental Contradiction

The article did say

"Soft radiation is energetic enough to penetrate 5 g·cm⁻² of brass but not energetic enough to penetrate 167 g·cm⁻² of lead. Thus soft radiation includes:

• p with energy greater than 0.4 MeV,
• μ with energy >80 MeV
• e and γ with energy >10 MeV)"

Which is saying that soft radiation cannot penetrate a large mass but has higher energy, which is contradictory.

Dougsim (talk) 17:30, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Merge (2018) to ionizing radiation

I suggest that this article, soft radiation, be merged to ionizing radiation. For the discussion, see Talk: Ionizing radiation#Merge (2018) from Ultrasoft radiation & soft radiation & hard radiation to Ionizing radiation -- 65.94.42.219 (talk) 11:23, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

Moved to Talk:Ionizing radiation § Merge (2018) from Ultrasoft radiation & soft radiation & hard radiation to Ionizing radiation