North Korea claims to have hydrogen bomb for long-range missile

a reply to: dianajune

No. A bomb such as this has a primary and a secondary. The primary is an explosion strong enough to create a secondary fusion explosion. In this case the primer a fission bomb or just a lot of explosives went off but didnt cause the secobdary effect of the fusion to occurr. So its still a failure and not an H Bomb.

a reply to: BASSPLYR

I don't know. They're still working out the bugs from the last time.

a reply to: penroc3

This is definitely nothing to sneeze at. Even if it was a secondary fizzle, the primary looks like it was better than anything they've done to date.

a reply to: Zaphod58

yeah but that was a mistake using liquid fuel, and not LiD

a reply to: penroc3

Sure it was, but it still shows the point I was going after. Hydrogen bombs took the early atomic weapons, and kicked it up about 15 notches.

a reply to: Zaphod58

I need to talk to my relative again soon, but they always remind me even when talking about megatons vs kilotons there is a math thing that people don't realize when saying something like "it's 10 times as strong"... something about the physics and powers of magnitude (any physicists want to chime in here? My relative is probably working overtime as we speak)...

a reply to: Zaphod58

True enough.

If China was helping them like in am hearing in the MSM I think they might have had there order of magnitude

Or they are working alone and these are the growing pains of nuclear development and Kim has bomb size embarrassment

120Kt would easily destroy my city so it's big enough

a reply to: SonOfThor

Yeah, it's exponentially stronger, similar to earthquakes, if I remember right. If you were to compare a 6.0 to a 4.0, while it's only two numbers off, the difference is the 6 is about 100 times stronger. With megatons and kilotons, you're talking terajoules and petajoules.

a reply to: penroc3

They still haven't confirmed that it was 120 kt. I've heard 10 kt on the low end, with a secondary fizzle, to 100 kt, with no secondary, to "OMFG" levels, although those are less likely. Last year, when they did the test, they hit a 5.1 on the scale, and that was a 10 kt weapon. So it's probably somewhere close to 100 kt, but if it was a true hydrogen device, that could confuse things.

It it just me, or do the recent pics of his new toy look ropey?
Im no nuclear physicist, but theres no way that big plastic lump looks like a nuclear device, James Bonds Blofeld prop, maybe. But real time boom-boom, I dont think so!

One of my hobbies is RC models of various types and throught that you become familiar with what other disciplines are faffing around with. Even their RC jet engines are of better build quality. Call me old fashioned, but construction of said bomb would be to minute machine tolerances, with every part being criticaly machined for its job....You think ? So why is Fat-Boys version held together by 10mm mild steel nuts & bolts ? No special inserts for high precision, drilled and tapped or whatever, every 10mm or so kinda thing ? Wiring seems to be common copper core to look at, not held particularly well and wrapped in plastic cable-wrap...come on !
a reply to: deviant300

originally posted by: SonOfThor
a reply to: Zaphod58

I need to talk to my relative again soon, but they always remind me even when talking about megatons vs kilotons there is a math thing that people don't realize when saying something like "it's 10 times as strong"... something about the physics and powers of magnitude (any physicists want to chime in here? My relative is probably working overtime as we speak)...

I think you are talking about the inverse square law. The propagation of kinetic energy follows the 1/n^2, so as the radius of the explosion increases, the force at any point on that sphere would be 1/distance^2 as strong as ground zero.

*not taking into account atmospheric resistance

a reply to: charlyv

Cheers! I appreciate you giving me a refresher. Funny I always remember hearing the reminder about atmospheric resistance as well...

That's what I get working in contract law not going to MIT...

a reply to: SonOfThor

I thought about getting into physics. And then Math started cheating and putting the alphabet and random Egyptian symbols into play, and my brain said "oh hell no".

originally posted by: SonOfThor
a reply to: charlyv

Cheers! I appreciate you giving me a refresher. Funny I always remember hearing the reminder about atmospheric resistance as well...

That's what I get working in contract law not going to MIT...

Let's all pray that we don't get a physical reminder of the principle in any nuclear context!

Now they're saying that F-22s and F-35Bs may be heading to Osan Air Base in South Korea.

originally posted by: SonOfThor
a reply to: charlyv

Cheers! I appreciate you giving me a refresher. Funny I always remember hearing the reminder about atmospheric resistance as well...

That's what I get working in contract law not going to MIT...

It's much more fun when 2pi is one made with apples, and the other, cherry!

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: dianajune

A straight nuclear weapon consists of one detonation. It's just a primary. A hydrogen bomb uses a nuclear detonation to start things off, and has two explosive components. It injects deuterium and tritium into the blast to amplify the explosion. That's the secondary I'm talking about. Fat Man and Little Boy were 21 and 15 kt. By comparison, the first hydrogen bomb we detonated, in the 1952 Ivy Mike detonation, was 10 megatons.

Ok. Now I understand. Thank you!

originally posted by: Zaphod58
Now they're saying that F-22s and F-35Bs may be heading to Osan Air Base in South Korea.

Are they nuclear-capable?

a reply to: Zaphod58

What a machine!

a reply to: dianajune

No theyre not and were not going to be using any nukes om north korea