Was I One Of The First To Have My Temperature Measured By A Thermometer Reading The Radiation From My Ear?
Last week, a doctor read my body temperature, by using an electronic thermometer, that read the temperature inside my ear.
But it wasn’t the first time!
That must have been in 1968 or 1969, when I was working at ICI in Runcorn.
ICI had a problem, in that they needed to read the temperature of chemical reaction vessels.
- Temperatures could be higher, than 1,000 °C.
- Some mixtures could be highly corrosive.
- Safety needed to be as high as possible.
My colleague; John Baxendale was assigned the problem.
John came up with a solution based on black bodies and their unique black body radiation.
These two paragraphs, from the Wikipedia entry for black body, explain the principle.
A black body or is an idealised physical body that absorbs all incident electromagnetic radiation, regardless of frequency or angle of incidence. The radiation emitted by a black body in thermal equilibrium with its environment is called black-body radiation. The name “black body” is given because it absorbs all colours of light. In contrast, a white body is one with a “rough surface that reflects all incident rays completely and uniformly in all directions.”
A black body in thermal equilibrium (that is, at a constant temperature) emits electromagnetic black-body radiation. The radiation is emitted according to Planck’s law, meaning that it has a spectrum that is determined by the temperature alone, not by the body’s shape or composition.
Note, that I have very mildly edited, what Wikipedia says, to the King’s English.
John had developed some clever electronics, that read the spectrum of the radiation and by decoding the spectrum, he was able to calculate the temperature.
Early on in the testing, John found that nearly all of us, have two black bodies on the side of our heads; our ears, so he could measure the temperature inside them.
City Airport May Help Others To Take Flight
The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on The Times.
This is the sub-heading.
The government’s decision to lift the cap on permitted passengers at London City airport is a compromise that could be a template for future growth
These are the first two paragraphs.
Planning decisions always upset someone. Still, credit to housing secretary Angela Rayner and the transport supremo Louise Haigh for annoying all sides with one of the first from the new Labour government: allowing London City airport to lift its cap on permitted passengers a year to nine million from the present 6.5 million.
Their verdict hacked off Newham council, which has long opposed the airport’s expansion, leaving it “deeply concerned” over the noise impact on local residents. It angered environmental campaigners, with Greenpeace saying it’d “undermine the UK’s climate leadership”. And it even “disappointed” the airport’s boss, Alison FitzGerald, who wanted an end to the 24-hour flight curfew from 12.30pm on Saturday but failed to get it pushed out to 6.30pm.
The government seem to have chosen a good compromise that has annoyed several parties.
The article goes on to argue, that we should make the best use of the thirty regional airports in the UK.
So shouldn’t the priority be to utilise regional capacity better, via airline and airport incentives if necessary, to minimise journey times to airports and spread the noise and air pollution around? Only then should ministers consider big new projects.
That seems very sensible to me.
Consider.
- Technology will bring us quieter and more environmentally-friendly aircraft, that will benefit those near the airport.
- Electric aircraft are closer to service entry than you think.
- Good public transport links to an airport, would surely cut car usage for both passengers and employees.
- Bus networks to many airports could be improved and made more attractive to passengers, by using modern electric or hydrogen buses. Even Gatwick is taking this route!
- Cranbrook station and Exeter Airport were supposed to have a bus link, but nothing has happened.
- Several airports are near main railway lines and it would be possible to build a station. It will be interesting to see how passenger traffic at the new Inverness station develops.
- East Midlands, Edinburgh, Glasgow, Leeds/Bradford and Liverpool Airports are larger regional airports, that are close, but not directly connected to the rail network.
- Carlisle and Exeter Airports don’t have the best of websites. Humberside sets a good standard.
- Doncaster Sheffield Airport has everything except a rail link and scheduled services.
Some of these improvements are not major and would surely be worthwhile, especially with a small amount of compromise.
The Anonymous Widower 