It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
The energy loss to radiation always overcompensates the gains due to the reaction. This is true even with rather extravagant assumptions concerning the reactivity of nitrogen nuclei in the air.
originally posted by: theworldisnotenoughWhat you and the other respondents apparently choose to allow to fly over your heads is that Edward Teller's concerns about ignition of the atmosphere were CONFIRMED by his colleagues albeit at a low probability of happening.
So, this raises the question: back then, what were the calculated odds of an ignition of the atmosphere by a nuclear bomb test... one out of 1,000,000,000 or one out of 1,000,000 or one out of 1,000? Were people lying about the odds of such an event just to get the Manhattan Project back on track? Let me tell you: there's a lot of lying coming out of governments and the mainstream media these days.
originally posted by: theworldisnotenough
originally posted by: theworldisnotenoughWhat you and the other respondents apparently choose to allow to fly over your heads is that Edward Teller's concerns about ignition of the atmosphere were CONFIRMED by his colleagues albeit at a low probability of happening.
So, this raises the question: back then, what were the calculated odds of an ignition of the atmosphere by a nuclear bomb test... one out of 1,000,000,000 or one out of 1,000,000 or one out of 1,000? Were people lying about the odds of such an event just to get the Manhattan Project back on track? Let me tell you: there's a lot of lying coming out of governments and the mainstream media these days.
In an "All Experts" Internet forum at en.allexperts.com... , on the subject of nuclear ignition of the atmosphere, in a reply dated 3/17/2009, NK chimed in with:
"Oppenhiemer, the head scientist that managed the Manhattan Project, theorized that it was possible that an atomic bomb could cause an exothermic reaction with atmospheric oxygen and nitrogen, but not probable. Before an atomic bomb was detonated, that group of scientists calculated that there was a slightly less than 3 to a million chance that the atmosphere would ignite."
A three-to-one-million chance is equivalent to 1 out of 333,333.
To put this into perspective, the odds of winning the top jackpot of the Jersey Cash 5 drawing on a one-dollar bet are 1:658,008, and people have won the top jackpot on a one-dollar bet.
I can continue with even slimmer odds of winning top lottery jackpots, but you readers should have already gotten the point.
P.M.
originally posted by: theworldisnotenough
Conducted as part of the Manhattan Project by the U.S. Army on July 16, 1945, the Trinity Test was the first ever detonation of a nuclear device.
The bomb's initial development was slowed by fears of project scientist Edward Teller who speculated that a fission bomb might ignite the Earth's atmosphere with a self-sustaining fusion reaction of nitrogen nuclei.
The above is from Youtube video entitled "5 Experiments that Could have Destroyed the World" with Youtube I.D. of A9S9gwhS6Yk starting at elapsed time of 1:24.
The video goes on to explain that recalculations were done proving that such an eventuality was highly unlikely, and so the project continued.
Well, that's all well and good for an atom bomb of that day.
Supposedly the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear complex has spent fuel rods in a precarious state which, if touched together, could set off a chain reaction fission event equal in power to 14,000 Hiroshima atomic bombs.
What will this do to the nitrogen atoms of the atmosphere? Will our atmosphere ignite due to Fukushima as Edward Teller feared during the Manhattan Project decades ago?
Does this mean that planet Earth can be turned into a miniature version of the sun if only momentarily?
Calling all physicists!
P.M.