Operation Vigilant Guard: Connect the Dots in Georgia

a reply to: Bedlam

We haven't found any appreciable effect, true. I would hazard to guess that any material that naturally existed in such a state wouldn't exist as such for very long. It would be extremely unstable.

From what I have read on Cohen's claims, however, reversion to a more stable configuration would not necessarily affect the material in an obvious way; it would simply change isotopes and nuclear mass as it ejected neutrons. Thus, it is possible that the infamous red mercury could be an isotope of mercury with a specific nuclear energy level. That makes some sense considering the scope of work performed by the Nazis during World War II, the supposed source of the technology.

TheRedneck

originally posted by: TheRedneck

From what I have read on Cohen's claims, however, reversion to a more stable configuration would not necessarily affect the material in an obvious way; it would simply change isotopes and nuclear mass as it ejected neutrons. Thus, it is possible that the infamous red mercury could be an isotope of mercury with a specific nuclear energy level.

The only issue being that neutrons aren't all that useful for producing fusion. You need a heavy neutron flux to change Li6D into something useful during the pre-detonation phase, to be sure, but neutrons alone won't do the job.

In addition, Cohen never states that you get neutron flux from 'red mercury', at least not that I ever heard. Grant you, there is a lot of post-Cohen speculative red mercury lore, but from the guy's mouth, it's heat and x-rays. Have you found differently?

Mayor Kasim Reid attended the last Bilderberg Meeting...

a reply to: Bedlam

I'm thinking in terms of fission, not fusion.

The neutron production is implied. While neutron radiation is the basis of the chain reaction in both, fission produces more toxic radiation than fusion, the concept behind the neutron bomb Cohen worked on. In addition, I have discovered several references to uranium contents below critical mass ('mini-nukes') being possible due to the use of this red mercury. That would only be possible with an external source of neutron radiation to duplicate the traditional chain reaction.

Admittedly, I am playing catch-up on this subject, but using red mercury to produce neutrons just seems to be a common topic throughout his work.

TheRedneck

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: Bedlam

I'm thinking in terms of fission, not fusion.

Most of his red mercury comments refer to miniaturized fusion weapons. Which have ungodly issues.

The neutron production is implied.

Ballotechnics produce nothing but heat. Yet, Cohen consistently speaks of it as producing both heat and high energy EM, which is another thing entirely.

While neutron radiation is the basis of the chain reaction in both, fission produces more toxic radiation than fusion, the concept behind the neutron bomb Cohen worked on.

Neutrons are the basis for fission weapons. You don't actually have a chain reaction in fusion. Once you get the heat up high enough to violate the Coulomb barrier and start smacking light nuclei together, and you can hold it long enough, you get fusion. In modern weapons, you need a lot of neutron flux up front to convert the Li6D to tritium and deuterium. But without neutron flux to do the conversion pre-detonation, pressure, heat, and containment, you can't get a fusion stage to go.

Fusing d-t mix produces lots of energetic neutrons. They don't add to or enhance the fusion. The point of a nuke, either a thermonuke or a neutron bomb, is to let them go. A neutron bomb lets them go entirely by using a lead pusher and a thin case. A thermonuke will use them to fiss U238 in the reflector or casing or both.

In addition, I have discovered several references to uranium contents below critical mass ('mini-nukes') being possible due to the use of this red mercury. That would only be possible with an external source of neutron radiation to duplicate the traditional chain reaction.

Yet, you could just use the neutron flux from the supposed red mercury. And a ballotechnic, which Sam consistently identifies it as, does not emit neutrons. It does emit heat, but not x-rays. Cohen never directly mentions neutron emission, as far as I have found. Have you?

Admittedly, I am playing catch-up on this subject, but using red mercury to produce neutrons just seems to be a common topic throughout his work.

TheRedneck

Can you actually find HIS work, and not red mercury lore, that ever mentions the evolution of neutrons from the red mercury? Or the use of uranium and not a fusion reaction triggered by the supposed heat and x-ray emissions of red mercury?

Cohen's red mercury statements are what set off the lore, and there's a lot of it. And it blithely combines several different things, one of which is ballotechnics.

a reply to: Bedlam

Can you actually find HIS work, and not red mercury lore, that ever mentions ...

Eh, I think I did it again...

What you have been reading is essentially a stream of consciousness as it pertains to what I have been able to find thus far. I am still researching (and probably will be for some time now). This is a very bad habit of mine, and I humbly apologize.

Nothing you have posted is untrue. There are, however, different methods of looking at nuclear interactions. I am looking at the data on Sam Cohen, trying to sort out fiction from reality, and attempting to apply that reality through the lens of a slightly different model than you (along with 99% of the people on the planet) use. The model I refer to is something I started developing back in the mid 90s (if memory serves) and have in the past few years made some interesting breakthroughs on. At present, I am writing up what I have thus far, and it tends to color my thinking on other issues.

According to presently-accepted quantum mechanics models, red mercury as it is touted cannot exist. It is an impossibility, and therefore the claims are scams.

According to my model, red mercury as it is touted is an intriguing possibility that may or may not be realistic.

It is unfair of me to expound on details of the interactions between nucleoside without providing some framework, and that framework is as yet unpublished and incomplete. So let me suffice it say, you are not wrong, but I believe there are extant possibilities that a nuclear accelerant may indeed be possible.

(If you are around when I complete that model, I will also be very interested in getting your take on it.)

TheRedneck

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: Bedlam

Can you actually find HIS work, and not red mercury lore, that ever mentions ...

Eh, I think I did it again...

From my admittedly brief stint at Los Alamos as a redshirt, I may have gotten a slightly different view of it.

I read the red mercury lore for years, and while I wasn't personally familiar with Cohen (he was before my time) there were many who WERE, and the stories sort of formed a picture of where he was going.

However. Sort of in a Corso-ish way, they both did and didn't make sense. And not in a "I just don't understand that one" sense like when I try to envision how a Chrysler positraction junk works in my head or try to do twistors when two sheets to the wind, but in a "that can't possibly be true because it doesn't work that way" sense, the sort that sounds good to the unwashed but not to someone who's been baptized into some of the inner workings.

My impressions were - 1) he was getting mushy around the edges in his old age. Didn't seem likely, though.

2) it was a cover story to deflect serious inquiry into something better off unexamined, and he took one for the team at the end of his career

It sounds like a basis for a rousing thread, TBH. I actually have a "short" work week coming up, only 60 hours in four nights, then I get TWO nights off. Unless something bad happens. If not, I owe bassplyr some time looking at something he's interested in and I might scrape some bits and pieces of red mercury lore together and do a thread over on RATS.

a reply to: FissionSurplus

So you live in either Roswell or Alpharetta. I lived in ATL for six years and had a friend who lived in Alpharetta. Sometimes bc traffic was ridiculous, I would just take Roswell Road up North bc I lived next to Chastain Amphitheater. There are multiple roads that will take you North, South, East and West out of the city so your supposition that they are "trapped" is misleading and incorrect. Taking 85 on a good day during any of the three rush hours is a very bad idea. Millions of people don't for that exact reason.
Nice try at Doom porn though. If I didn't consider the A to be my second home, I would have been fooled.

originally posted by: PRSpinster
a reply to: FissionSurplus

So you live in either Roswell or Alpharetta. I lived in ATL for six years and had a friend who lived in Alpharetta. Sometimes bc traffic was ridiculous, I would just take Roswell Road up North bc I lived next to Chastain Amphitheater. There are multiple roads that will take you North, South, East and West out of the city so your supposition that they are "trapped" is misleading and incorrect. Taking 85 on a good day during any of the three rush hours is a very bad idea. Millions of people don't for that exact reason.
Nice try at Doom porn though. If I didn't consider the A to be my second home, I would have been fooled.

Reading comprehension is sooo very important. I did mention in the beginning of this thread that I do NOT live in the Atlanta metro area. I actually live in the National Forest 2 hours north, something which I am very grateful for. Traffic for me is non-existent, I only experience it when I have to go to Atlanta, either to the airport or for some other reason. I'm livin' the dream, not the nightmare.

Trying to create doom porn, am I? Pffft. I only suggested that people connect the various dots. What picture you create is entirely up to you.

Another thing someone local to that area who mad a tube video had said the person who reported it and was on the news was also the same lady who found a dead body on the tracks few months back or last year. I don't know if this is suspicious or not. But rather the life of a homeless person in a major city may expose you to many crimes.

As far as red mercury I'm sure in Africa it's a thing on the black market. I'm sure it's always fake but how did the man know of it or even the place he showed up saying he had it?

It's always suspect to me where there are drills there seems to be something that follows in the footsteps of the drill or along side it that is the same. Why is this ? I don't know but maybe just the energy in the air or. Hold and and they will come? You tell me. ..


a reply to: FissionSurplus

a reply to: FissionSurplus

Actually, you said you lived "in the area" which is typically used to describe the metro.
Then, there was this, "If you wanted to trap people in a major metro area with no egress, that bridge was an excellent one to destroy. If there was a sudden call to evacuate, these people are trapped. You cannot drive through thick wooded areas with no roads. People that want to evacuate north and northeast are literally trapped
Comprehension, you say? You used different forms of "trap" three times in one paragraph, Killa. So, your pedantic attempt to talk down to me failed.