StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Archaeologists and physicists are at loggerheads over ancient Roman lead—a substance highly prized by both camps for sharply diverging reasons. Very old lead is pure, dense and much less radioactive than the newly mined metal, so it is ideal for shielding sensitive experiments that hunt for dark matter and other rare particles. But it is also has historical significance, and many archaeologists object to melting down 2,000-year-old Roman ingots that are powerful windows on ancient history.

"Are these experiments important enough to destroy parts of our past, to discover something about our future?" says Elena Perez-Alvaro, an archaeology graduate student at the University of Birmingham in England, who wrote a paper on the dilemmas involved in Rosetta (pdf), an archeological journal published by the University of Birmingham. Some physicists argue that getting hold of the metal is worth fighting for. "These experiments can reveal some of the most fundamental properties of the universe, and answer questions such as what are we and where we come from," says physicist M. Fernando Gonzalez-Zalba of the University of Cambridge, who collaborated with Perez-Alvaro's investigation. "I think it's worth it."

Ancient Roman lead has been used in the Cryogenic Dark Matter Search (CDMS), an experiment in Minnesota that aims to detect the particles that make up the invisible dark matter thought to contribute much of the universe's mass. The same metal has also been used in the CUORE (Cryogenic Underground Observatory for Rare Events) project in Italy, which will soon begin searching for a theorized particle decay process called neutrinoless double beta decay, which, if found, could explain why matter dominates antimatter in the universe. These experiments and others require extreme shielding to block out any extraneous particles that might be mistaken for the rare signals they hunt.

The lead in question once went into the making of coins, pipes, construction materials and weapons in the ancient Roman civilization. It is most commonly found now at shipwreck sites, where private companies harvest it and melt down the Roman ingots into standard bricks before passing them on to customers—many of whom are physicists. "None of us take it casually—you don’t want historical artifacts to be destroyed unnecessarily," says physicist Blas Cabrera of Stanford University, who leads the CDMS project. Nevertheless, ancient lead is the best material available for shielding dark matter detectors, he says, because it releases so little radiation, or background particles. "The kind of background levels that you're achieving with ancient lead are roughly 1,000 times below that of commercially available lead."

All lead mined on Earth naturally contains some amount of the radioactive element uranium 235, which decays, over time, into another radioactive element, a version of lead called lead 210. When lead ore is first processed, it is purified and most of the uranium is removed. Whatever lead 210 is already present begins to break down, with half of it decaying on average every 22 years. In Roman lead almost all of the lead 210 has already decayed, whereas in lead mined today, it is just beginning to decay. (Of course, many lead 210 atoms have already decayed in this ore, too, but the supply is constantly replenished by uranium in unprocessed lead). "The longer since it was originally processed, the lower its intrinsic radioactivity," Gonzalez-Zalba says.

The Romans were not the first lead brick makers—the ancient Greeks were also manufacturing the building material about 200 years earlier. Whereas this lead probably also finds its way into some physics experiments, it is scarcer. And the supply of Roman lead is not exactly plentiful, either. "We may lose all ancient Roman lead—and therefore the information about ancient technology, shipping, trade, etcetera it can offer—if its use for this kind of purpose becomes widespread," says archaeologist John Carman, Perez-Alvaro's advisor at the University of Birmingham. By preserving the ingots, archaeologists hope to learn more about the technology, industry and culture of the Romans. Future technology may be able to pry more secrets out of the artifacts than present studies can do, so leaving the objects undisturbed, preferably at the shipwreck site, is ideal.

Thanas wrote:The main damage is not really just the lost ingots, it is also the fact that taking lead out of shipwrecks will involve in many cases the destruction of the shipwrecks. IMO this is little more than graverobbing done by idiots (= physicists) who don't understand a thing about the subjects involved.

fgalkin wrote:

Thanas wrote:The main damage is not really just the lost ingots, it is also the fact that taking lead out of shipwrecks will involve in many cases the destruction of the shipwrecks. IMO this is little more than graverobbing done by idiots (= physicists) who don't understand a thing about the subjects involved.

So we know a little less about the Romans. So fucking what? How does that advance humanity as a species? It doesn't.

I mean, the physics stuff they're working on is literally groundbreaking. The ingots? Roman shipwrecks? If no one bothered to put them in a museum in all those centuries they've been there, I guess they weren't very important, were they?

Eternal_Freedom wrote:

Thanas wrote:Who of the people declaring those pieces of technology useless actually has a degree in archeology? Nobody? Moving on. [/quote[

Do you have a science degree even vaguely related to the fields these physicists are investigating?

Thanas wrote:Who of the people declaring those pieces of technology useless actually has a degree in archeology? Nobody? Moving on.

Sure it does. Our society and culture is advanced by every new discovery, no matter the field.

It is generally preferred by archeologists today to leave wrecks as they are. Less issues with conservation. Most wrecks are not able to be raised anyway. Not without blowing the GDP of several small countries. That money is not there, nor should that much money be spent on things we can just leave as they are and be perfectly fine with it for the next centuries at least.

In most fields of archeology, we constantly make discoveries to make future excavations better and more productive. Case in point - back when the Limes in Germany was first excavated, people did not know a lot of it. So they went into a frenzy to excavate and preserve - by encasing things in protective concrete. Turns out a few decades later such concrete is actually harmful to the excavated materials. Whooops. So people don't like to excavate things unless absolutely necessary or they can assure that it is done in a responsible way. With shipwrecks the technology is not there yet.

Also, things look completely unimportant to the untrained eye yet actually to trained eyes they are amazing. Take this piece of lead:

Looks just like a useless lead pipe, right? Nobody would ever miss it, so let us melt it down. Oh wait, actually it is the final piece in a puzzle which has astounded people for centuries. How the Romans were able to transport fresh fish from Britain all the way to Rome without it spoiling. Yeah, why wouldn't we ever be interested in that and the science of that operation?

Private companies scavenging shipwrecks are the biggest problems underwater archeologists face. People encouraging them is pretty maddening. It is grave-robbing and it is destroying things we will never get back. It also is not as if phsysicists could never work without anything else, it would just make it harder. Not impossible. But it is impossible to regain things which do not exist anymore.

Thanas wrote:

Eternal_Freedom wrote:

Thanas wrote:Who of the people declaring those pieces of technology useless actually has a degree in archeology? Nobody? Moving on. [/quote[

Do you have a science degree even vaguely related to the fields these physicists are investigating?

No, but I am not proposing destroying future discoveries and potentially whole fields of research to gain a minimal advantage in mine because I am not willing to wait a few decades, am I?

fgalkin wrote:Who of the people declaring those pieces of technology more important than the physics experiment actually has a degree in physics? Nobody? Moving on....

Cute. Except it's not really a discovery. Re-discovery at best.

If they are just sitting there, then you have no right to complain when they are actually being used for something productive.

And the importance of that discovery to anyone other than specialists in the field is? We have refrigeration.

So, keep one ingot for study and melt down the rest. The physics research is literally revolutionary. There is nothing that an ancient civilization can give us that is even remotely comparable.

Dass.Kapital wrote:*Raises hand*

Um...why is Roman lead better at what the Physicists want to do with it than "Today's lead" exactly?

Why aren't metallurgists etc trying to figure out how the difference was achieved?

Um.....So...it's cheaper to stumble across Roman ruins/wrecks and hope they have useable lead to scavenge...More than it is to try and 'remake' said stuff today?

How does that even work?

Sorry...some one who's completely ignorant in all fields.

Much cheers to all.

All lead mined on Earth naturally contains some amount of the radioactive element uranium 235, which decays, over time, into another radioactive element, a version of lead called lead 210. When lead ore is first processed, it is purified and most of the uranium is removed. Whatever lead 210 is already present begins to break down, with half of it decaying on average every 22 years. In Roman lead almost all of the lead 210 has already decayed, whereas in lead mined today, it is just beginning to decay. (Of course, many lead 210 atoms have already decayed in this ore, too, but the supply is constantly replenished by uranium in unprocessed lead). "The longer since it was originally processed, the lower its intrinsic radioactivity," Gonzalez-Zalba says.

Thanas wrote:Another example: The Romans were able to supply Rome with five times the water per head than we were able to do today, with zero carbon emissions. Nobody would care about that either apparently.

Dass.Kapital wrote:snip

Thanas wrote:Another example: The Romans were able to supply Rome with five times the water per head than we were able to do today, with zero carbon emissions. Nobody would care about that either apparently.

Note that I have no issue whatsoever with the way the Italian museum did it. They photographed the stamps, weighed the ingots, took samples and generally documented the ingots. before smelting them down. That is okay.

bilateralrope wrote:The amount of water supplied per head of population doesn't sound that impressive without knowing how the population numbers compare.

This is a very reasonable compromise.

madd0ct0r wrote:it's a bit better then a minute advantage Thanas - you're talking about reducing a huge source of background noise by 1000 times.

and you've already stated a lead selling procedure that'd satisfy you - so just set up a license system and all are happy.

It is most commonly found now at shipwreck sites, where private companies harvest it and melt down the Roman ingots into standard bricks before passing them on to customers—many of whom are physicists.

madd0ct0r wrote:Seeing as scavenging is already illegal and there's an avenue for a legal supply, what do you propose?

You're seeing red over this single line:

It is most commonly found now at shipwreck sites, where private companies harvest it and melt down the Roman ingots into standard bricks before passing them on to customers—many of whom are physicists.

which dosen't actually tell us anything about the private companies, where they operate, the quality of their operations or indeed whether they're being licensed by the government already. Is that worth checking before declaring them to be immoral grave robbers?

Stas Bush wrote:I'm seriously wondering what to make of it. Humanity is like that. We poison lakes and rivers to make way for science and industry since a very, very long time. It is also true that we are careless with history. Some people expected less of it when we transitioned to advanced science. I expect more of it. I expect cyberpunk.

fgalkin wrote:

Thanas wrote:The main damage is not really just the lost ingots, it is also the fact that taking lead out of shipwrecks will involve in many cases the destruction of the shipwrecks. IMO this is little more than graverobbing done by idiots (= physicists) who don't understand a thing about the subjects involved.

So we know a little less about the Romans. So fucking what? How does that advance humanity as a species? It doesn't.

I mean, the physics stuff they're working on is literally groundbreaking. The ingots? Roman shipwrecks? If no one bothered to put them in a museum in all those centuries they've been there, I guess they weren't very important, were they?

Have a very nice day.
-fgalkin