Skip Navigation


Radiation Protection Dosimetry Advance Access originally published online on July 23, 2008
Radiation Protection Dosimetry 2008 129(4):495-497; doi:10.1093/rpd/ncn176
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
129/4/495    most recent
ncn176v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by German, U.
Right arrow Articles by Alfassi, Z. B.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by German, U.
Right arrow Articles by Alfassi, Z. B.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2008. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Letters to the Editor

U. German1,*, M. Weinstein1, A. Abraham1 and Z. B. Alfassi2

1 NRC – Negev, Beer Sheva, Israel
2 Ben Gurion University, Beer Sheva, Israel

* Corresponding author: gur118@inter.net.il

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.

Sir,

Comments to the author's response to our letter on ‘The thermoluminescence dose–response and other characteristics of the high-temperature TL in LiF:Mg,Ti (TLD-100)’ by Y. S. Horowitz, L. Oster and H. Datz.

The response of Horowitz(1) to our comments(2) to the above-mentioned article(3) contains inaccuracies which must be addressed. We object to the response to our previous letter to the editor(2) in the following respects.


   RESPONSE TO OUR COMMENTS 1 AND 2
 
Even the most ardent believer in his cause should take care not to ignore facts and thereby come to biased conclusions, especially in a scientific dispute. In the opening sentence of his response to our comments 1 and 2, Horowitz incorrectly ‘quotes’ our claim that ‘the high-temperature thermoluminescence (HTTL) dose response is consistent with linearity’(1). It is definitely not what we mentioned in point 2(2). We must stress again that our true claim is that, for the low dose range, the gamma non-linearity . . . [Full Text of this Article]


   RESPONSE TO OUR COMMENT 3
 

   RESPONSE TO OUR COMMENT 4
 

   RESPONSE TO OUR COMMENT 5
 

   RESPONSE TO OUR COMMENT 6
 

   RESPONSE TO OUR COMMENT 7
 

   RESPONSE TO OUR COMMENT 8
 

Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?