Jump to content

Talk:Barn (unit)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 76.21.117.175 (talk) at 04:08, 9 April 2010 (→‎Time for Fermilab to achieve an inverse femtobarn: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Barn is not listed

The barn is not listed on the official table of accepted non-SI units that is linked in the article...perhaps it was removed? I'll remove that statement in a while, unless someone objects. --Bmk 14:52, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The barn is used in documentation from the early nuclear era. I don't think it's much found these days (though I'm not up in the field, so I could well be mistaken). I would rather see it added to the page of unofficial units than have the link deleted from here.--King Hildebrand 16:26, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It is still commonly used in high-energy physics, both particle and nuclear. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.138.77.201 (talk) 13:00, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to offer, as a nuclear physicist, the barn was in my 3rd year textbook. furthermore it should not be denied SI status for having a humorous name.--Fx303 (talk) 04:50, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The "barn" is a legitimate unit used all the time by nuclear physicists and particle physicists. It is a common everyday unit in the field and one cannot work without it. On the other hand, in 23 years in the field, I've never ever heard of "shed" or "outhouse", which seem like obvious joke terms to me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.90.119.70 (talk) 19:29, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Origin

I had it explained to me a few years back as this: researchers had expected that neutrons would have to have a direct strike on a nucleus to trigger the fission, but then found that it would still trigger it when passing close by. This meant that the cross-sectional area for triggering the reaction was much larger than expected - i.e. like hitting a barn door. I don't have any reference to back this up though, so I don't want to blindly change the explaination in the article. Andrewjrallan 14:50, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think it was in Fermi's biography that I read his code name for the Manhattan Project at Los Alamos was "Henry Farmer". And that the "barn" came from the old American baseball saying, "He couldn't hit the broad side of a barn." My Flatley (talk) 16:28, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Uranium nucleus?

Gold nuclear radius ~ 3 x 10-14 metres so about 10 barns??? Uranium nucleus is one barn? was looking for link or conversion factor for barns (area) to nuclear(atomic) radius. Gadolinium neutron absorption cross section (49000barn) versus (180 picometer) atomic radius. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shjacks45 (talkcontribs) 10:44, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Error in shed size ?

See shed - it says 10-48 m2, but if it is 10-24 b, then it should be 10-48 *cm*2, or 10-52 m2. See also Wikipedia entry for 'shed'. Main article corrected accordingly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.61.45.41 (talk) 03:06, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect from "Barns"

I changed the redirect from "Barns" from "Barn (unit)" to "Barn (disambiguation)", since I think those searching for "barns" are more likely to be interested in the buildings than the units of measurement. Giles Martin (talk) 15:32, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Time for Fermilab to achieve an inverse femtobarn

I found a press release from Fermilab to indicate how long it took to achieve a femtobarn and replaced the "citation needed". However the reference seems to indicate that run II started March 2001 and one femtobarn had been achieved by June 2005. This refutes the claim that it took over a decade. Perhaps the claim is including the time of run I (how long?).