It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: chr0naut
The Manhattan Project began in 1939, with it really hitting its stride in 1942. Most of the cost was building the factories to build the fissile material, but they had over 30 sites across three countries working on the bomb design and production. They spent three years designing the weapon, as well as refining the fissile material before the first detonation in 1945. The work on different types of bombs had been going on for at least two years before the types were detonate. The designs took at least two years to perfect. You don't detonate one type of nuclear bomb, then suddenly go "hey, this works better" and change the design and have one in a couple of days.
originally posted by: dragonridr
a reply to: Bornsecrets
OK you seem confused positrons are not anti matter.
The positron or antielectron is the antiparticle or the antimatter counterpart of the electron.
No doubt that was the case and maybe still is (see my earlier post in this thread about that), but what's getting some people excited are claims that the cost of making and storing positrons has the potential for drastic cost reductions. Even if that's true which it very well may be, reducing the cost even by 1000x would probably still be too expensive compared to the cost of weapons we already have.
Then it's it's small amounts a couple of particles at a time. And the cost is rediculous like in the millions of dollars for a couple of particles. So in other words no chance of using as a weapon of any type.
a large fraction
of the pairs generated go on to produce additional
pairs, the reaction runs away and a cascade of antimatter
And not unsurprisingly, this process probably has been observed astrophysically decades ago, black holes & neutron stars.
Thinking about a phrase like "reaction running away"....wasn't something in Utah unexpectedly a whole bunch more sunburney than planned? Castle Bravoish? Like not taking into account QED?
By the way, the in orbit targeting of high explosives with charged particle beams (hard to imagine success on planetary scale because of magnetic fields, but whatever) is a potential strategy for ballistic missile defense---cause failures in the implosion explosives on warheads.
edit on 16-8-2017 by mbkennel because: (no reason given)edit on 16-8-2017 by mbkennel because: (no reason given)edit on 16-8-2017 by mbkennel because: (no reason given)edit on 16-8-2017 by mbkennel because: (no reason given)edit on 16-8-2017 by mbkennel because: (no reason given)