Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : The Epic American Credit and Bond Bubble Laboratory -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: grusum who wrote (63424)	6/12/2006 10:37:36 AM
From: shades	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 110194

Since we are going to be storing it way deep down in the vaults of GLD or fort knox - what does it matter? Only if you expect gold coins to be going back and forth over 7 billion people's daily transactions would it matter eh? You don't really expect the world to wake up tomorrow and say hmmm - nope - can only pay for my SI membership if I fed ex some GOLD COINS to SI DAVE - and he won't like those radioactive ones. madsci.org So, with this as a backdrop, let's look at gold. Gold has only one stable isotope, so all natural gold has an atomic weight of about 197 (called Au- 197), and this isotope has a reasonably high neutron activation cross- section. So exploding a nuclear weapon would probably lead to a lot of radioactive gold. However, there is only one isotope of gold that has a half-life of more than a few days (Au-195, 186 days), and it is impossible to produce this isotope by neutron irradiation. So any radioactive gold would lose its induced radioactivity within a month or so.