On Mar 2, 8:06*am, Fred J. McCall wrote:
Brad Guth wrote:
On Mar 1, 10:54*am, Stuf4 wrote:
From Fred J. McCall:

Stuf4 wrote:
From Fred J. McCall:
David Spain wrote:
Rick Jones wrote:
David Spain wrote:
Rick Jones wrote:
Sputnik was a hollowed-out nuclear weapon???

rick jones

Well it had the proper geometry...

A sphere was/is the proper geometry for the warhead on an ICBM?

Tisk, tisk; you said nuclear weapon, you did not say warhead...

;-)

And he certainly didn't say RV, which is something else again.

Seeing how spheres *were* used by the Soviet Union, I'd say that it is
a totally feasible geometry for the weapon, the warhead AND the RV.

I take it they don't let you do engineering or design work...

Open-minded thinkers who know what is feasible - instead of just doing
things out of habit - make better engineers and designers than those
who lack such attributes.

Of course, as is repeatedly demonstrated on this forum, there are many
who will not hold such a view. *It is FAR more comfortable to keep
one's thought processes so restrained as to remain well within the
confines of the perceived 'box'.

...and if anyone comes along to challenge limited thinking, do not so
much as peek outside your box, for therein lies the discomfort.

--
"Ignorance is preferable to error, and he is less remote from the
*truth who believes nothing than he who believes what is wrong."
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *-- Thomas Jefferson

(Well said, TJ.)

~ CT

Fred is master of his cozy box.

Fred wants all of us to fit into the exact same mainstream status-quo
box.

However, a large hollow sphere of plutonium is relatively harmless,
unless it contained a few tonnes of weaponized VX or something other
that's biologically lethal.

And this from the same man who raves about the dangers of MOX?

--
"Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is
*only stupid."
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * -- Heinrich Heine

Perhaps Brad would care to rub his hands over a plutonium sphere and
see if it has any ill effects on him.