Talk:Muography
Appearance
![]() | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
|
![]() | The contents of the Muography page were merged into Muon tomography on 23 October 2022 and it now redirects there. For the contribution history and old versions of the merged article please see its history. |
Muography vs. Muon tomography
[edit]- The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
- To merge Muography into Muon tomography on the grounds that this is the currently more popular name; use the (better) structure of Muography for the merged page; discuss differences in term use on the page. Klbrain (talk) 09:41, 23 October 2022 (UTC)
There is another article titled Muon tomography. Is it the same technique as Muography? If so, the two articles should be merged. If it is not the same, the difference should be explained in both articles. --TuomoS (talk) 09:14, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
- It is the distinction between radiography and tomography, as I understand it from the articles. So Muography is one projection where as muon tomography is a reconstructive volume imaging method using multiple projections. Looking at both articles though it was not clear to me how the direction of the muon is measured.Billlion (talk) 13:31, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
- Just posted a merge proposal on both pages. Hopefully, someone can clear this up. --Inc (talk) 21:28, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
- The technique is the same. As well with myons you create a 3D image. That is acquired by placing separate detectors at different sides of the object. Creating a distinction on the basis sometime someone would go with 2D image is not a good argument. For the direction of the muons, the detectors are 3-dimensional in themselves. So one detector element can measure myon energy and it's trajectory (like in bubble chamber), so prior metering of the myon climate on the research site is not strictly necessary (the cosmic radiation might not be precisely uniform around the globe, but it's deviation is known). Weather the article should be named myography, myon radiography, myon tomography or myon imaging, I don't know. Myon tomography is the new (fashionable?) name, imaging would be too layman language. You must defend your professional jargon... Radiography refers to the fact myon is a radioactive particle that does decay away in microseconds. In Finnish WP it's myon radiography as there are few mentions in Finnish anyway and those few use that name.
- But clearly a merge is needed. Funny to see two fully developed articles on this rather niche subject, and even the newer one is from 2016 :). First merge and then think about the best name. --J. Sketter (talk) 18:17, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
- Muon radiography and muon tomography are two different imaging techniques. Muon radiography is also known under the name of absorbtion/transmission muography, and muon tomography as deviation muography. As the muon passes through a material, it interacts with it in various proccesses which result into energy loss and into deviation of the muon from its initial trajectory. Muon radiography is concerned about the energy loss, and muon tomography about the deviation. 86.121.125.243 (talk) 18:26, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- But clearly a merge is needed. Funny to see two fully developed articles on this rather niche subject, and even the newer one is from 2016 :). First merge and then think about the best name. --J. Sketter (talk) 18:17, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
- Support merge: the pages overlap very heavily, using different definitions and no clear distinction between the topics. For examples, we have sections on Muography# Projectional muography and Muography#Muon tomography, which parallel sections on Muon tomography#Muon transmission imaging and Muon tomography#Muon scattering tomography on the other page. They're hence best discussed together as currently we have coverage of the full scope of the topic on both pages. Perhaps Muon tomography has the better title, but Muography the better structure; so merge to the former, using the structure of the latter for the merged article. Klbrain (talk) 04:49, 11 September 2022 (UTC)
I agree with this proposal. As you say, however, it is important to note the differences in terminology (see e.g. Kaiser,2019), which based on the papers I've looked at, not all authors appear to agree upon!!
Edwin of Northumbria (talk) 10:32, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
(Klbrain's proposal, that is)
Edwin of Northumbria (talk) 10:41, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Merger complete. Klbrain (talk) 09:41, 23 October 2022 (UTC)