|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
The Space Race was about Power Projection - Miles O'Brien
On Saturday, January 7, 2017 at 1:24:38 AM UTC-5, Fred J. McCall wrote:
"Scott M. Kozel" wrote: On Thursday, December 29, 2016 at 10:10:35 PM UTC-5, Fred J. McCall wrote: "Scott M. Kozel" wrote: Likewise nobody has ever tested a cobalt bomb. A cobalt bomb would blow up one third of the world, so there is no place to safely test one. Don't be silly. The cobalt adds nothing to the explosion. The way it was explained was that a large hydrogen bomb is encased in a cobalt casing, and when it detonates a fission-fusion-fission reaction takes place, and the explosion is so large that it would blow up one third of the world. Utter nonsense. Most modern bombs are fission-fusion-fission and use HEU for the 'jacket'. Older designs used less fissionable NU or DU, which made the bombs physically larger and heavier than modern designs. Cobalt isn't normally fissionable so it adds nothing to the force of an explosion if it is used for a 'jacket'. See how close cobalt is to iron in the periodic table? No energy of fission available there. In the past war planners worked scenarios such as "which city will we blow up", or "whose country will we blow up". With a cobalt bomb the question would be "whose one third of the world will we blow up". Utter nonsense. Since there is no place to test a cobalt bomb safely, it is unproven as to the outcome of detonating a cobalt bomb. But nobody would want to try it. A 'cobalt' bomb is a large RADIOLOGICAL bomb. What the cobalt does is produce ****loads of really nasty and long lived fallout isotopes (Co60). This then spread around huge chunks of countryside, making it uninhabitable for very long times, since its half-life is measured in years. It adds NOTHING to the force of the explosion. Let me say it again, since you didn't get it the first time I said it. A COBALT JACKET ADDS ***NOTHING*** TO THE EXPLOSIVE FORCE OF A THERMONUCLEAR WEAPONS. So you indicate that a cobalt bomb would be extremely deadly. About how many people do you think that a cobalt bomb would kill? |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
The Space Race was about Power Projection - Miles O'Brien
"Scott M. Kozel" wrote:
On Saturday, January 7, 2017 at 1:24:38 AM UTC-5, Fred J. McCall wrote: "Scott M. Kozel" wrote: On Thursday, December 29, 2016 at 10:10:35 PM UTC-5, Fred J. McCall wrote: "Scott M. Kozel" wrote: Likewise nobody has ever tested a cobalt bomb. A cobalt bomb would blow up one third of the world, so there is no place to safely test one. Don't be silly. The cobalt adds nothing to the explosion. The way it was explained was that a large hydrogen bomb is encased in a cobalt casing, and when it detonates a fission-fusion-fission reaction takes place, and the explosion is so large that it would blow up one third of the world. Utter nonsense. Most modern bombs are fission-fusion-fission and use HEU for the 'jacket'. Older designs used less fissionable NU or DU, which made the bombs physically larger and heavier than modern designs. Cobalt isn't normally fissionable so it adds nothing to the force of an explosion if it is used for a 'jacket'. See how close cobalt is to iron in the periodic table? No energy of fission available there. In the past war planners worked scenarios such as "which city will we blow up", or "whose country will we blow up". With a cobalt bomb the question would be "whose one third of the world will we blow up". Utter nonsense. Since there is no place to test a cobalt bomb safely, it is unproven as to the outcome of detonating a cobalt bomb. But nobody would want to try it. A 'cobalt' bomb is a large RADIOLOGICAL bomb. What the cobalt does is produce ****loads of really nasty and long lived fallout isotopes (Co60). This then spread around huge chunks of countryside, making it uninhabitable for very long times, since its half-life is measured in years. It adds NOTHING to the force of the explosion. Let me say it again, since you didn't get it the first time I said it. A COBALT JACKET ADDS ***NOTHING*** TO THE EXPLOSIVE FORCE OF A THERMONUCLEAR WEAPONS. So you indicate that a cobalt bomb would be extremely deadly. About how many people do you think that a cobalt bomb would kill? It is only 'more deadly' because of the half-life of Co60. I think it would kill the same number as a similarly sized bomb without the cobalt as long as people avoided the contaminated areas thereafter. The difference is that using a cobalt jacket (not case) leads to longer lived fallout and so makes areas uninhabitable for every long periods of time, where a 'normal' weapon with an HEU jacket produces fallout that decays to relatively safe levels very quickly. Why do you not get this? -- "Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar territory." --G. Behn |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
The Space Race was about Power Projection - Miles O'Brien
On Sunday, January 8, 2017 at 7:43:12 PM UTC-5, Fred J. McCall wrote:
"Scott M. Kozel" wrote: On Saturday, January 7, 2017 at 1:24:38 AM UTC-5, Fred J. McCall wrote: "Scott M. Kozel" wrote: On Thursday, December 29, 2016 at 10:10:35 PM UTC-5, Fred J. McCall wrote: "Scott M. Kozel" wrote: Likewise nobody has ever tested a cobalt bomb. A cobalt bomb would blow up one third of the world, so there is no place to safely test one. Don't be silly. The cobalt adds nothing to the explosion. The way it was explained was that a large hydrogen bomb is encased in a cobalt casing, and when it detonates a fission-fusion-fission reaction takes place, and the explosion is so large that it would blow up one third of the world. Utter nonsense. Most modern bombs are fission-fusion-fission and use HEU for the 'jacket'. Older designs used less fissionable NU or DU, which made the bombs physically larger and heavier than modern designs. Cobalt isn't normally fissionable so it adds nothing to the force of an explosion if it is used for a 'jacket'. See how close cobalt is to iron in the periodic table? No energy of fission available there. In the past war planners worked scenarios such as "which city will we blow up", or "whose country will we blow up". With a cobalt bomb the question would be "whose one third of the world will we blow up". Utter nonsense. Since there is no place to test a cobalt bomb safely, it is unproven as to the outcome of detonating a cobalt bomb. But nobody would want to try it. A 'cobalt' bomb is a large RADIOLOGICAL bomb. What the cobalt does is produce ****loads of really nasty and long lived fallout isotopes (Co60). This then spread around huge chunks of countryside, making it uninhabitable for very long times, since its half-life is measured in years. It adds NOTHING to the force of the explosion. Let me say it again, since you didn't get it the first time I said it. A COBALT JACKET ADDS ***NOTHING*** TO THE EXPLOSIVE FORCE OF A THERMONUCLEAR WEAPONS. So you indicate that a cobalt bomb would be extremely deadly. About how many people do you think that a cobalt bomb would kill? It is only 'more deadly' because of the half-life of Co60. I think it would kill the same number as a similarly sized bomb without the cobalt as long as people avoided the contaminated areas thereafter. The difference is that using a cobalt jacket (not case) leads to longer lived fallout and so makes areas uninhabitable for every long periods of time, where a 'normal' weapon with an HEU jacket produces fallout that decays to relatively safe levels very quickly. Why do you not get this? A pattern of cobalt bombs could render a vast area uninhabitable, say for example the size of France, so that it might be impossible for most of the people to escape the contaminated areas; therefore tens of millions of people might die from the Cobalt 60 -- would that be a correct assessment? |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
The Space Race was about Power Projection - Miles O'Brien
|
#35
|
|||
|
|||
The Space Race was about Power Projection - Miles O'Brien
Jeff Findley wrote:
Yes, it's the fallout that renders the area uninhabitable. But, it's not the "single bomb that can destroy the world" that urban legend seems to indicate. I've heard the urban legend version too, that one has never been tested because even the test would "destroy the world". It's simply not true. Too many poeple extrapolating from Dr. Strangelove and Cobalt-Thorium-G?-) rick jones -- firebug n, the idiot who tosses a lit cigarette out his car window these opinions are mine, all mine; HPE might not want them anyway... feel free to post, OR email to rick.jones2 in hpe.com but NOT BOTH... |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
The Space Race was about Power Projection - Miles O'Brien
|
#37
|
|||
|
|||
The Space Race was about Power Projection - Miles O'Brien
"Scott M. Kozel" wrote:
On Sunday, January 8, 2017 at 7:43:12 PM UTC-5, Fred J. McCall wrote: "Scott M. Kozel" wrote: On Saturday, January 7, 2017 at 1:24:38 AM UTC-5, Fred J. McCall wrote: "Scott M. Kozel" wrote: On Thursday, December 29, 2016 at 10:10:35 PM UTC-5, Fred J. McCall wrote: "Scott M. Kozel" wrote: Likewise nobody has ever tested a cobalt bomb. A cobalt bomb would blow up one third of the world, so there is no place to safely test one. Don't be silly. The cobalt adds nothing to the explosion. The way it was explained was that a large hydrogen bomb is encased in a cobalt casing, and when it detonates a fission-fusion-fission reaction takes place, and the explosion is so large that it would blow up one third of the world. Utter nonsense. Most modern bombs are fission-fusion-fission and use HEU for the 'jacket'. Older designs used less fissionable NU or DU, which made the bombs physically larger and heavier than modern designs. Cobalt isn't normally fissionable so it adds nothing to the force of an explosion if it is used for a 'jacket'. See how close cobalt is to iron in the periodic table? No energy of fission available there. In the past war planners worked scenarios such as "which city will we blow up", or "whose country will we blow up". With a cobalt bomb the question would be "whose one third of the world will we blow up". Utter nonsense. Since there is no place to test a cobalt bomb safely, it is unproven as to the outcome of detonating a cobalt bomb. But nobody would want to try it. A 'cobalt' bomb is a large RADIOLOGICAL bomb. What the cobalt does is produce ****loads of really nasty and long lived fallout isotopes (Co60). This then spread around huge chunks of countryside, making it uninhabitable for very long times, since its half-life is measured in years. It adds NOTHING to the force of the explosion. Let me say it again, since you didn't get it the first time I said it. A COBALT JACKET ADDS ***NOTHING*** TO THE EXPLOSIVE FORCE OF A THERMONUCLEAR WEAPONS. So you indicate that a cobalt bomb would be extremely deadly. About how many people do you think that a cobalt bomb would kill? It is only 'more deadly' because of the half-life of Co60. I think it would kill the same number as a similarly sized bomb without the cobalt as long as people avoided the contaminated areas thereafter. The difference is that using a cobalt jacket (not case) leads to longer lived fallout and so makes areas uninhabitable for every long periods of time, where a 'normal' weapon with an HEU jacket produces fallout that decays to relatively safe levels very quickly. Why do you not get this? A pattern of cobalt bombs could render a vast area uninhabitable, say for example the size of France, so that it might be impossible for most of the people to escape the contaminated areas; therefore tens of millions of people might die from the Cobalt 60 -- would that be a correct assessment? Sure, but you could do the same thing with current bombs with no cobalt at all. Let me try this again. THE ONLY REAL DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A BOMB WITH A COBALT JACKET AND ONE WITHOUT IS THE LENGTH OF TIME THE FALLOUT REMAINS DANGEROUS. A regular bomb will contaminate an area for a few years. Cobalt 60 has a half-life of over 4 years, so it will remain at dangerous levels for a much longer time. I keep saying this and you keep thinking that somehow cobalt makes a bomb 'deadlier'. It doesn't. -- "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 |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
The Space Race was about Power Projection - Miles O'Brien
From Scott Kozel:
On Thursday, December 29, 2016 at 12:41:41 PM UTC-5, Stuf4 wrote: snip And even is someone has the full plan explained to them, it's easy to picture them giving all kinds of reasons why such a plan would not work. Consider these trick plays in football: "Greatest Trick Plays in Football History" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fj8G9dGuNkU There was a coach somewhere who dreamt up these plays. And there were probably people around that coach saying why these plays will never work. Yet they were tried. And they worked. I have seen that video in the past, and there is no comparison between a football play designed to score 6 points, and some kind of one-shot nuclear trick against a nuclear superpower who will rain down thousands of A-bombs and H-bombs all over your nation. You would be committing suicide, national suicide. A huge amount of effort was put into first strike planning. And I am sure that a lot of creativity went into some of them. As for the lack of viability, that would be the easiest explanation as to why it never happened. But regarding the dismissal of comparing to football trick plays, that would be like me offering an analogy of a football defensive strategy to rolling columns of armored tanks to use the element of surprise to overrun a neighboring country. One might be inclined to dismiss this to say that "there is no comparison of football plays to the maneuver of armored columns." Yet the NFL still sees fit to refer to the onslaught across the line of scrimmage immediately at the whistle as "The Blitz". Football analogies to military strategy are firmly entrenched as the norm. Look at that term used right there. 'Entrenched'. Football war analogies come from both WWI and WWII. I extend that to the Cold War, and suddenly it is seen as unkosher. ~ CT |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
The Space Race was about Power Projection - Miles O'Brien
On Friday, January 13, 2017 at 1:48:56 AM UTC-5, Stuf4 wrote:
From Scott Kozel: On Thursday, December 29, 2016 at 12:41:41 PM UTC-5, Stuf4 wrote: snip And even is someone has the full plan explained to them, it's easy to picture them giving all kinds of reasons why such a plan would not work. Consider these trick plays in football: "Greatest Trick Plays in Football History" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fj8G9dGuNkU There was a coach somewhere who dreamt up these plays. And there were probably people around that coach saying why these plays will never work. Yet they were tried. And they worked. I have seen that video in the past, and there is no comparison between a football play designed to score 6 points, and some kind of one-shot nuclear trick against a nuclear superpower who will rain down thousands of A-bombs and H-bombs all over your nation. You would be committing suicide, national suicide. A huge amount of effort was put into first strike planning. And I am sure that a lot of creativity went into some of them. As for the lack of viability, that would be the easiest explanation as to why it never happened. But regarding the dismissal of comparing to football trick plays, that would be like me offering an analogy of a football defensive strategy to rolling columns of armored tanks to use the element of surprise to overrun a neighboring country. One might be inclined to dismiss this to say that "there is no comparison of football plays to the maneuver of armored columns." Yet the NFL still sees fit to refer to the onslaught across the line of scrimmage immediately at the whistle as "The Blitz". Football analogies to military strategy are firmly entrenched as the norm.. Look at that term used right there. 'Entrenched'. Football war analogies come from both WWI and WWII. I extend that to the Cold War, and suddenly it is seen as unkosher. Rhetoric and language is different from reality. There are several orders of magnitude difference in scale between a football play and a putative national strategic military attack against a nuclear superpower. As another poster pointed out, there is no cobalt bomb that will blow up 1/3 of the world. |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
The Space Race was about Power Projection - Miles O'Brien
"Scott M. Kozel" wrote:
Do you think that a de-orbital surprise attack with a small cobalt bomb would do the trick, win that war outright? Stop talking nonsense. What such an attack would do is get the entire country of the attacker vaporized. -- "Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is only stupid." -- Heinrich Heine |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Miles O'Brien has arm amputated after accident | Jeff Findley[_4_] | Policy | 2 | February 26th 14 11:19 PM |
CNN's Miles O'Brien was oh-so-close to being the first U.S. newsmanin space. | Terrell Miller | History | 0 | May 28th 05 06:05 PM |
CNN's Miles O'Brien was oh-so-close to being the first U.S. newsmanin space. | Terrell Miller | Policy | 0 | May 28th 05 06:05 PM |
CNN's Miles O'Brien was oh-so-close to being the first U.S. newsmanin space. | Terrell Miller | Space Shuttle | 0 | May 28th 05 06:05 PM |
Miles O'Brien (of CNN) is soooo suave | AldoNova | History | 1 | January 5th 04 07:01 AM |