[ RadSafe ] Testing bombs

John R Johnson idias at interchange.ubc.ca
Mon Jun 30 12:10:21 CDT 2008 

All

Unless the X-Rays result from a nuclear reaction.

John
***************
John R Johnson, PhD
CEO, IDIAS, Inc.
4535 West 9th Ave
604-676-3556
Vancouver, B. C.
V6R 2E2, Canada
idias at interchange.ubc.ca

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Geo>K0FF" <GEOelectronics at netscape.com>
To: "Brennan, Mike (DOH)" <Mike.Brennan at DOH.WA.GOV>; <radsafe at radlab.nl>
Sent: Monday, June 30, 2008 9:46 AM
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Testing bombs


> Sure Mike, I know that, but technically speaking and being precise, any 
> reaction dealing with elements (atoms) are atomic by nature. Reactions 
> dealing with the nucleus are nuclear.
>
> Hence, Gamma Rays are nuclear, X-Rays are atomic.
>
>
>
> Positronium is sometimes considered an atom. If it is, then sometime 
> positron annihilation is nuclear, other times it is atomic.
>
> ATOMIC: Pertaining to the atoms
>
> Nuclear: Pertaining to the nucleus of an atom.
>
> from Electronics and Nucleonics Dictionary, 3rd ed. Markus, McGraw Hill.
>
> Therefore all chemical reactions are technically and correctly called 
> atomic in nature.
>
> By the way, once in a while I offer a for sale item on Radsafe, this was 
> pre approved by the list owner. If members don't like it, I will take them 
> elsewhere and charge fair market value. my policy has always been to offer 
> to the trade, especially students at a low price first. These mare my own 
> personal items have been upgraded by newer or more capable equipment in my 
> private lab.
>
> George Dowell
> New London Nucleonics Lab
> GEOelectronics at netscape.com
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Brennan, Mike (DOH)" <Mike.Brennan at DOH.WA.GOV>
> To: <radsafe at radlab.nl>
> Sent: Monday, June 30, 2008 11:11 AM
> Subject: RE: [ RadSafe ] Testing bombs
>
>
> Hi, George.
>
> Speaking as someone who at one point was a qualified Weapons Officer in
> the Navy's nuclear weapons program, the way we divided up things that go
> BANG! was:  (1) energy from chemical sources - conventional  (2)  energy
> from fission - atomic
> (3) energy from fusion (usually deuterium - tritium) - nuclear.  This
> was useful because all our strategic weapons had all three components,
> and we needed to be able to discuss how they worked together.
>
> As to the Trinity test, if I remember correctly the package was the same
> as the one used in Fat Man, but it was not put into the casing suitable
> for dropping from and airplane, and the triggering system was obviously
> different, so I'd say it was a "device" rather than a "weapon", but with
> no enthusiasm for arguing the point.  Based on a fair amount of reading,
> there was a great desire to test to make sure the weapons would work,
> and it was decided to test only the plutonium design because (1) there
> wasn't enough purified U235 for two weapons, and wouldn't be for some
> time, and (2) the plutonium design was much more technically
> challenging.  The challenge came not from whether or not a chain
> reaction was possible in plutonium, but from whether or not the large
> number of conventional explosive charges could be detonated with the
> extreme precision necessary to make the reaction happen.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl [mailto:radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl] On
> Behalf Of Geo>K0FF
> Sent: Saturday, June 28, 2008 7:38 PM
> To: Maury Siskel; Steven Dapra
> Cc: radsafe at radlab.nl
> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Testing bombs
>
> All these bombs are nuclear bombs., that is having to do with the
> nucleus The fusion bombs are "Hydrogen bombs". All other explosive, TNT
> etc. are atomic bombs by definition, that is having to do with atomic
> reactions outside the nucleus.
>
> George Dowell
> NLNL
> New London Nucleonics lab
>
> GEOelectronics at netscape.com
> ----- Original Message -----
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Maury Siskel" <maurysis at peoplepc.com>
> To: "Steven Dapra" <sjd at swcp.com>
> Cc: <radsafe at radlab.nl>
> Sent: Saturday, June 28, 2008 9:19 PM
> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Testing bombs
>
>
>> If memory serves (and it certainly may not) Trinity was a test of an
>> atomic explosive device, not of either Little Boy or Fat Man. The test
>
>> simply confirmed that the explosive device did in fact work. Little
>> Boy and Fat Man both were explosive  devices in suitable shapes
>> suitable for release from a B-29 bomber. Little Boy weighed about 4.5
>> tons and had an explosive yield of about 13 KT; Fat Man was larger
>> with  an explosive yield of about 21 KT.  Both employed nuclear
>> fission and were the only bombs completed then by the US . They were
>> transported aboard the cruiser, USS Indianapolis to Tinian and then
>> dropped first on Hiroshima and a few days later on Nagasaki.
>>
>> So called nuclear bombs were developed after the war and employed
>> nuclear fusion. These used a fission 'trigger' to start the fusion
>> process. Thus far, they have never been used in warfare -- the two
>> atomic devices were the only ones ever used in war.
>>
>> Nuclear weapons development and testing ensued for some years
>> including the largest known single weapon yield by Russia which
> exceeded 50 MT.
>> Present day testing to the best of my understanding is done by means
>> of simulations along with some destructive reliability tests of some
>> components. Concerns are related to the deterioration of some
>> components as a function of age.
>>
>> Most others, including Franz, on this List are far more capable than
>> am I of telling this story. Everyone must have begun their July 4th
> vacations.
>> Google also will quickly yield good accounts. (Pun intended)  <g>
>> Cheers, Maury&Dog
>>
>> ==================
>> Steven Dapra wrote:
>>
>>> June 28, 2008
>>>
>>>     From time to time I have read that one of the Hiroshima and
>>> Nagasaki bombs had to be tested before it was used, and that one did
>>> not --- that the engineers were so certain the latter bomb would
>>> explode that they didn't bother testing it.  I also read recently
>>> that hydrogen bombs must be tested.  Of these three types of bombs,
>>> which ones must be tested, and why?  For the one that did not have to
>
>>> be tested, why not?  (I don't have any bombs I want to test, I am
>>> merely curious.)
>>>
>>> Steven Dapra
>>> sjd at swcp.com
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
>>>
>>> Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and
>>> understood the RadSafe rules. These can be found at:
>>> http://radlab.nl/radsafe/radsaferules.html
>>>
>>> For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings
>>> visit: http://radlab.nl/radsafe/
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
>>
>> Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and
>> understood the RadSafe rules. These can be found at:
>> http://radlab.nl/radsafe/radsaferules.html
>>
>> For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings
>> visit: http://radlab.nl/radsafe/
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
>
> Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood
> the RadSafe rules. These can be found at:
> http://radlab.nl/radsafe/radsaferules.html
>
> For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings
> visit: http://radlab.nl/radsafe/
> _______________________________________________
> You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
>
> Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood 
> the RadSafe rules. These can be found at: 
> http://radlab.nl/radsafe/radsaferules.html
>
> For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings 
> visit: http://radlab.nl/radsafe/
>
> _______________________________________________
> You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
>
> Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood 
> the RadSafe rules. These can be found at: 
> http://radlab.nl/radsafe/radsaferules.html
>
> For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings 
> visit: http://radlab.nl/radsafe/

More information about the RadSafe mailing list