plate, and in causing phosphorescent or fluorescent effects in certain substances. In each of these methods the fraction of the rays which is absorbed and transformed into another form of energy is different for each type of ray. Even when one specific kind of ray is under observation, comparative measurements are rendered difficult by the complexity of that type of rays. For example, the β rays from radium consist of negatively charged particles projected with a wide range of velocity, and, in consequence, they are absorbed in different amounts in passing through a definite thickness of matter. In each case, only a fraction of the energy absorbed is transformed into the particular type of energy, whether ionic, chemical, or luminous, which serves as a means of measurement.
The rays which are the most active electrically are the least active photographically. Under ordinary conditions, most of the photographic action of uranium, thorium, and radium, is due to the β or cathodic rays. The α rays from uranium and thorium, on account of their weak action, have not yet been detected photographically. With active substances like radium and polonium, the α rays readily produce a photographic impression. So far the γ rays have been detected photographically from radium only. That no photographic action of these rays has yet been established for uranium and thorium is probably due merely to the fact that the effect sought for is very small, and during exposures for long intervals it is very difficult to avoid fogging of the plates owing to other causes. Considering the similarity of the radiations in other respects, there can be little doubt that the γ rays do produce some photographic action, though it is too small to observe with certainty.
These differences in the photographic and ionizing properties of the radiations must always be taken into account in comparing results obtained by the two methods. The apparent contradiction of results obtained by different observers using these two methods is found to be due to their differences in relative photographic and ionizing action. For example, with the unscreened active material, the ionization observed by the electrical method is due almost entirely to α rays, while the photographic action under the same condition is due almost entirely to the β rays.
It is often convenient to know what thickness of matter is sufficient to absorb a specific type of radiation. A thickness of
