CLOSING REMARKS
Eveerne P. Cronxire

Dr. Cronxits. Dr. Dunving, Col. Maxwell,
T certainly must admit that I accepted this

rather reluctantly, not being by training and
experience really qualified te interpret all of the
different diverse disciplines and talents that
have been discussed here, However, I did

accept it, and if you will bear with me for afew

moments, I will go over some ofthe things which
I primarily looked at perhaps as a physician.
The objectives were to try to get someidea
of what should be done, some idea of what is
actually well known, and where to go fromhere.
I will try to take each section rather briefly.
Thefirst topic on decay constants, weathering
and shielding, produced some rather interesting
facts that I had personally not appreciated.
Dr. Nagler of the Weather Burcau outlined the
input data for their model for the prediction of
fallout which embraces the necessary physical
paramcters that must be put into Stokes law.
However, I detected a rather simple statement
that he made as he went over this, that in
reality they took past experience and fed past.
experience into their machines, and then predicted the fallout, rather than used the actual

mathematical model.

This seems to indicate

thatin this area, not only for the ratherdiffuse
planar distribution of fallout material, but
particularly to get practical information on
drift, turbulence, piling up end inhomogencities
that must certainly exist in areas, particularly
in urban areas, if fallout should oceur, is really

actually measured inside this aluminum build-

ing seemed to be somewhat in conflict with the
concepts that were later presented by Dr. Borg
and Dr. Bond.
It appears that many more empiric studies of
this sort are indicated to try to bring together
experiment and theory. Dr. Breslin pointed
out the great effectiveness of simple types of
washdown provided the conditions of wetting

and adequate volame flow are maintained.

The data presented by Dr. Zobel on the
emission of fission products very carly after

fission confirms the calculations of Borg and

gives much further useful information that can

be fed into the experimental models.
Dr. Mather’s contribution was a most
practical point.

The spectrometry readings

varied considerably with angle from the surface

of the ground, and pointed out the practical
problemsof shielding, and thatshielding is most
effective against the horizon.
Dr. Borg pointed out that the Spencer-Fano
equations for gamma radiation can be used

most effectively to define the spectrum at any
point in space from a monoenergetic or polyenergetic source when the necessary factors

are fed into the model.

The meanor effective

Dr. Graveson presented encoureging data on

energy of a polyenergetic source is useless.
The source mustbe treated as separate, discrete
fragments, to study the behavior of each with
distance using the appropriate buildup factors
to describe the condition in space in which one
is biologically interested.
Hepointed out that the actual measurements
in the field were initial radiation, and those

is comparable in its dimensions to the average
American home. It appeared that these measurements gave very significant protection,
However, the diminution in the intensities

method could be well applied to the analysis
of the spectrum from afallout field, and in fact,
preliminary calculations have indicated its

an urgent field for further mathematical and
practical study.

theeffectiveness of shielding by a building that

predicted by theory are veryclose, indecd.
Dr. Borg further pointed out that a similar

233

Select target paragraph3