<x-charset Windows-1252>Yes, it is the same. The effects of radiation are cumulative, minor damage over time builds up, so it can be nearly the same as higher rates of exposure over shorter periods of time. There are, of course, limits. To much heat will incinerate the paper, something that wouldn't happen even if it was exposed to very high heat below its ignition point for a long period of time. But what counts here is mimicking the type of long-term damage with high levels of short-term exposure. The problem with respect to the current thread concerning ozone is that only so much ozone exists in any environment. As another poster remarked, that ozone will react with the dyes quickly and is then depleted. Unless more ozone is introduced, the damage due to ozone will have ended. Wilhelm needs to devise a method to continuously introduce ozone and other oxidizing pollutants (to replace those consumed by reactions with the dyes and papers) in order to simulate long-term exposure to these contaminants. Dave Grenier Olympia, WA >Date: Fri Jun 30 09:46:26 2000 >From: Mr645@aol.com >Subject: Re: Wondering at how Wilhelm arrives at his numbers > >There is a basic problem with accelerated testing. > >For instance. > >To cook a turkey you need to cook it at 325 degrees for 10 hours, can we test this by >cooking it at 3250 degrees for 1 hour? > >Is this the same as testing photography outputs with much higher than normal lighting and> >heat? - Turn off HTML mail features. Keep quoted material short. Use accurate subject lines. http://www.leben.com/lists for list instructions. </x-charset>