Talk:Bubble chamber

message: The 1974 photograph of Palmer and Samios was only tentatively identified by them as a charmed baryon. They were unable to rule out other possibilities, they did not fully trust the calibration of their new equipment, and they were unable to find a second example. They only released the photograph several months after Richter and Ting. In retrospect, the baryon has been identified as the Σc++, but it cannot be said that this picture led to the discovery of charm.--192.35.35.34 20:02, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I have been told (the always-reliable "classroom rumor" research source) that Glaser came up with the idea while studying (ahem) the bubble in a glass of beer... are there any authoritative sources for this story, or is it just silly? -FZ 13:37, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  beer, anyone? 

message: What about the Bethe-Bloch Equation, describing the energy loss in bubble chambers? I do not have enough experience in this field to edit the article, but i'm pretty sure that kinetic energy can be measured pretty accurately. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by MikkelR (talk • contribs) 12:33, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  No way of measuring kinetic energy? 

message: Bubble chambers are neither large nor massive enough to analyze high-energy collisions, where all products should be contained inside the detector.It's not clear why the mass of the bubble chamber has an effect on being able to measure high energy collisions. When discussing scientific subjects of this nature, it should be understood that words like "massive" have a more precise meaning than colloquial English, ie specifically relating to mass. However, if the mass of the detector is significant, it should be explained in more detail.Silas Maxfield (talk) 22:52, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Massive enough? 

message: Bubbles grow in size as the chamber expands
This makes no sense without some explanation of how the expansion of the chamber plays its part in the overall process.  Showing a "piston" with an arrow doesn't do the trick for me.  Does the chamber expand naturally over time?  Is it expanded gradually over the course of the experiment, or is it only done after the experiment is complete, as a method of enlargement?  I can sort of imagine a sort of 3D expansion, but without any common real-world analogs I think it's a stretch to expect the reader to deduce this.  In the context of super-heated liquid hydrogen at 30,000 degrees (gleaned from other sources [does this seem absurdly extreme to anyone else??]), how is all this accomplished?  I think these sorts of things should be addressed to some extent. AgentFriday (talk) 00:21, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  chamber expansion 

message: should the more current bubble detector be presented as an evolution of these huge devices?
Inside the detector, tiny droplets of superheated liquid are dispersed throughout a clear polymer. When a neutron strikes a droplet, the droplet immediately vaporizes, forming a visible gas bubble trapped in the gel. The number of droplets provides a direct measurement of the tissue-equivalent neutron dose.
it is also left out in Dosimeter and Particle_detector in a cursory examination.
 
Robin den hertog (talk) 11:14, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  bubble detector 

message: Substituted at 10:27, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment

message: Is not a bubble chamber! Chris2crawford (talk) 12:52, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Snolab