From: Daniel Haude
Subject: Re: How do I measure watch battery life?
Date: 17 Sep 2002 07:18:11 GMT
Organization: stoptrick: animated films
NNTP-Posting-Date: 17 Sep 2002 07:18:11 GMT
User-Agent: slrn/0.9.7.4 (Linux)
On Mon, 16 Sep 2002 15:55:59 +0100,
John Woodgate wrote
| I read in sci.electronics.design that Bob Wilson wrote (in ) about 'How do
| I measure watch battery life?', on Mon, 16 Sep 2002:
| >There "might" be a radiation hazard associated with a nuclear reactor? I
| >think the obvious answer to that is "Well, duh!"
| A nuclear reactor presents a radiation *hazard*, but, if properly
| shielded and controlled, the *risk* of adverse effects is as near zero
| as makes very little difference.
| In this context, terminology is crucial and very frequently misused,
| intentionally or otherwise. A 'hazard' is a *potential* threat. The
| 'risk' is the probability of it becoming an actual threat.
I'd venture to say that a 'risk' is more like the probability of an
accident multiplied by the magnitude of the possible effects of that
accident. Thus I find nuclear power quite risky -- not to mention the
burden that the radioactive waste puts on future generations. Just imagine
we'd still have to guard and protect every steam locomotive that was ever
"The obvious mathematical breakthrough would be development of an easy
way to factor large prime numbers." -- Bill Gates, "The Road Ahead"