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.

 

Wakefield Accelerators

page: 2
11
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 27 2018 @ 12:22 PM
link   
To affect material buried so deeply and not produce any surface activation you are most likely looking at a neutrino beam. HOWEVER... the most luminous neutrino beam currently in operation wouldn't do anything drastic to a nuclear reactor. The interaction rate is so low that even in the optimized detector suites located at the facility you are only looking at a hand full of interactions per spill. Simply not enough.

That and if I have my thoughts the correct way around, a neutrino beam would actually damp a nuclear reactor, not make it run away. Due to the size and power constraints id say... nope to that one



The other would be a neutron source/beam. Same issue as the above with the exception that you would get local activation of material from neutron capture. You would generate lots of radioactive isotopes around the beam/source with a typical half life of hours to days. Once again, to make the ractions run away, isn't simple. you need to hit resonant neutron energies, AFTER passing through all the rock. Not impossible but also not super likely. The power and size of said generator would also be large.

Citation of said event? so much of what is written sounds a bit like fantasy.




posted on Jul, 27 2018 @ 03:34 PM
link   
a reply to: blackcrowe




Why metallic hydrogen?

Either i don't understand correctly. Or.Possibly a slip on your part. Do you mean larger particle? And. Larger than the hadron?





Because it will hurt more! You twit!!



And actually, if metallic hydrogen were used, it actually would hurt more! The reaction of metallic hydrogen makes it ideal for a rocket propellant. The reaction has NASA drooling because you would need less to get more pushing power from it so if you wanted to hurtle yourself at ridiculous velocities and paste yourself against the cabin wall or your bucket seat you are strapped into, then yeah, go for it.

If you are interested in just blowing things up then oh, yeah!



PS - You, sir, are not a twit! I was making a Prince of Thieves reference. Ah, the late Alan Rickman!

PPS - Larger element like 115 from Bob Lazar fame. It is supposed to be metastable ring that powered the sport model UFO he was reverse engineering (or so he claimed). Thing is, when made in a nuclear reactor, it didn't last that long (less then a second), so it does not sound like it is actually stable. Or we could be making it wrong, I guess.




posted on Jul, 27 2018 @ 03:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: blackcrowe
a reply to: penroc3

My ignorance here.




Text



it would be interesting if they could use metallic hydrogen or maybe it would be better to have a larger molecule..


Why metallic hydrogen?

Either i don't understand correctly. Or.Possibly a slip on your part. Do you mean larger particle? And. Larger than the hadron?




Although Hydrogen is generally classed as a non-metal. It actually occupies a place in the periodic table which groups it with the alkali metals. In truth, Hydrogen is the "odd man out", showing attributes of a metal and also of a non-metal.

At Harvard University, under Isaac F Silvera and Ranga Dias, they have produced semiconducting Hydrogen and metallic Hydrogen at various compressions and research is being performed to find out if it can become metastable and will stay that way when the pressure is released.



posted on Jul, 27 2018 @ 03:53 PM
link   
a reply to: TEOTWAWKIAIFF

Thanks TEOTWAWKIAIFF.



Because it will hurt more! You twit!!


That's all i needed to know.




posted on Jul, 27 2018 @ 04:02 PM
link   
a reply to: blackcrowe


I haven't had time to read everybody's replies yet and that stuck in my head! Thanks for taking it the proper way!!

But I was thinking, instead of going bigger (as in element size) why not go smaller? If quark fusion is supposed to be even more powerful than hydrogen fusion then why not? But I suppose it is like anti-matter, we are talking about running before we can even walk.

Fun topic to think over! And there are a bunch of different applications. I know if a yahoo like me can think of it then it has already been thought of, researched, tried, and kept hidden until needed, like all the other black budget items we ponder over.



posted on Jul, 27 2018 @ 04:14 PM
link   
a reply to: ErosA433

test

and in the early times of north Korea one of these facilities suffered an 'accident' that was by all parties understood to be a never before seen accident or an intentional act of destruction by a foreign power, but with means unknown.
edit on 27-7-2018 by penroc3 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 27 2018 @ 04:23 PM
link   
a reply to: chr0naut




Although Hydrogen is generally classed as a non-metal. It actually occupies a place in the periodic table which groups it with the alkali metals. In truth, Hydrogen is the "odd man out", showing attributes of a metal and also of a non-metal.


Thanks chr0naut




posted on Jul, 27 2018 @ 04:31 PM
link   
a reply to: TEOTWAWKIAIFF




But I was thinking, instead of going bigger (as in element size) why not go smaller? If quark fusion is supposed to be even more powerful than hydrogen fusion then why not?


That would be interesting.



PS


Thanks for taking it the proper way!!


It was hilarious.
edit on 27-7-2018 by blackcrowe because: add more info



posted on Jul, 27 2018 @ 04:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: penroc3
a reply to: ErosA433

test

and in the early times of north Korea one of these facilities suffered an 'accident' that was by all parties understood to be a never before seen accident or an intentional act of destruction by a foreign power, but with means unknown.


Many things can produce lights in the sky, the problem i have with a couple of those images is that there are bright foreground objects, Doing night photography on colour film... not the best way to do it if these people wanted to say anything conclusive, and secondly... the shots need to be dark. Lens flares etc can easily give you weird glows. Given the photo of the car, and then the photo tech saying "Some of the images/all of the images are massively exposed" yeeeah, im siding on the film being over exposed by the people watching what ever it was. Out of those there are 5 which look 'normal'

The distant light in a straight line can indeed be a ground source. The distance however... unknown. it is indeed weird sure.

Now for the fun part. At the distance they are at, night time sunburn means lots of UV radiation. UV without any optical/visible light, is unlikely. Most chemical process would produce blackbody spectra so rules out chemical. Now its true that it could be result of a laser of some form. Which could be causing the atmosphere to fluoresce. You need to pump a lot of power for that and have a fair bit of infrastructure to produce that much light.


I don't really see how this at all relates to North Korea. As discussed if you are to make some kind of beam to penetrate a few Km of rocks...

Neutrinos -> Yes, but are very hard to produce in amounts needed without a enormous facility
Neutrons -> Yes, again, tricky to produce with the right luminocity and energy profile for what is proposed... especially given that most reactors are housed in nice neutron absorbing water tanks... We use an AmBe neutron source in the experiment i build couple three years ago now... we are only trying to punch through about 30 inches of shielding... we have a very powerful source and only get hand fulls of events per second.
Proton beam -> No, it would stop after 10-20 m into the rock, unclear what it'd do to a nuclear device
Electron Beam -> No, it would stop after even shorter distance
Muon Beam -> Maybe, though unclear what i'd to to the nuclear material, muons are minimum ionizing, so likely it'd just go right though, ionizing a bit of the material but little else.
X-ray /Gamma ray laser -> No, these again would stop after a few meters of rock, plus such devices don't exist... yet.

What is most likely to have happened is something when wrong and the North Koreans didn't want to admit it. Inspections where either none existent or inconclusive. North Korea, blames the west because.... why not.

Or Stux net style virus... Early virus designed to exploit control systems.



posted on Jul, 27 2018 @ 05:03 PM
link   
a reply to: ErosA433

im not saying that the test and the accdent are linked.

but in your first post you said that whatever it was would need ALLOT of power, and this test clearly demonstrates the ability to play with allot of power and was clearly a weapons test of something exotic.

i am having a hard time remembering the spelling of the area in NK that the explosion happened but it wasn't under KM of rock but was underground. 100-200M maybe.

and the international community was convinced it was a nuclear test, but when they went and did their tests they found none of the normal nucleotides associated with such things.


but the Vela incident shows that a normal underwater nuclear explosion can happen and we find nothing but the flash
edit on 27-7-2018 by penroc3 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 28 2018 @ 01:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: penroc3
a reply to: ErosA433
i am having a hard time remembering the spelling of the area in NK that the explosion happened but it wasn't under KM of rock but was underground. 100-200M maybe.


Right but thats still important, in the lab, with our powerful AmBe source neutrons from the source barely make it through rock and reach other experiments once it is in its storage location. The distance is probably about 100M straight run.

The issue with this is that to do this using a neutrino beam you need a facility the size of a village to generate the beam.

For a powerful neutron source, or beam, again you are talking about very heavy equipment to be moved and setup.

North Korea isn't the kind of place a western agency can just walk into with a huge truck of equipment and go park up close to a testing facility.

That then means either from the air, or through the Earth. Both of these make the challenge even more difficult to achieve because you are then looking at km of material and an object you really can not feasibly hide.


What is most likely is that there was a sustained criticality experiment, or, if they were trying to build a fusion bomb, they did it like the first American device which was basically a massive Dewar of Hydrogen. There could easily have been a storage accident causing the pressurization and explosion of a dewar. Depending on the size of storage, the result would be catastrophic, and it'd not leave anything behind other than the twisted metal.



posted on Jul, 29 2018 @ 04:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: penroc3
a reply to: delbertlarson

here's a head scratcher for you, you seem to know a little about particle physics.(seriously)


say i had a nuclear enrichment plant using centrifuges to separate Uranium buried into the bedrock/mountain side and that plant gave all the signs of a criticality accident/small yield detonation, but none of the normal post detonation radioisotopes were picked up.

this factory was totally destroyed, no nuclear contamination was discovered.

can you think of a mechanism or an exotic particle beam that would cause this type of accident?


Hydrogen burns explosively with Oxygen, leaving only heat & steam.

Suppose there was an attempt to trigger fusion in hydrogen (probably highly compressed & pure molecular Hydrogen), but instead there was an air-hydrogen explosion, leaving the triggers un-imploded and mechanically blowing open the tampers and casing.

I.e; just a conventional explosion in a thermonuclear bomb factory.

You clear out the remaining and largely intact actinides and there'd hardly be a trace that couldn't be argued away as natural background rads.

They could even re-use the components and re-manufacture a device from them.

edit on 29/7/2018 by chr0naut because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 29 2018 @ 05:49 AM
link   
a reply to: chr0naut

this factory was GONE, like nothing left.

and no nuclear isotopes picked up on flyovers of various assets indicating contamination or a normal detonation . or north korea stumbled on something messing around in some of their own black projects.

i think it was a message and the tin foil side of me thinking they got hit with a weapon with unknown mechanisms



posted on Jul, 30 2018 @ 07:00 PM
link   
a reply to: penroc3

like Chr0naut said, there are lots of ways in which you can cause a large explosion in such an environment. Mine would be a more exotic type explosion being a cryogenic one, but still, you'd not pick up any isotopes, possibly not even any fires. Just an obliterated area.



posted on Jul, 30 2018 @ 08:20 PM
link   
a reply to: penroc3

What year was this, after 2004-5 maybe?.
Who remembers the ammo train explosion in NK in 2004?
The ammo train that exploded just minutes after Dear leaders train left the station.

A few months earlier the Airforce put its largest single satellite in orbit, and it was so classified not even the Senate Intel committee was privy to the nature of the vehicle.
It was at payload limits and was considerably larger than any of the contemporary surveilence
vehicles at the time.
Also around the same time, while riffling through patent grants,I found a patent for a signal filter pertaining to a scalable(from orbital to vehicle mounted) high energy particle beam device that could be used to detonate high energy materials, such as explosives, even buried, and one noted usage would be IED sweeping.
The patent was granted to the DOD, via work at one of the lesser known Mil. labs on the east coast.
The impression i got was that this could be used to kick off any sufficiently energetic materials, even buried ones FROM SPACE.
I followed the industry journals at the time and a device showed up for testing with boeing that was for exploding road side IED's around 2008.
There were pics of the truck mounted antenae in a prelim article, but zero after that.
Somethings to think about.



posted on Jul, 31 2018 @ 01:01 PM
link   
citation required... far too many tall tales sounding stories coming out and a high concentration of people who just happen to be in the right place at the right time but all happen to be members of ATS... remember, if it sounds too good to be true... it likely is



posted on Aug, 1 2018 @ 09:44 PM
link   
a reply to: penroc3

Lol, I clicked this topic hoping to find SOMEONE discussing my absolute favorite thing on ATS.



posted on Aug, 1 2018 @ 10:03 PM
link   
a reply to: punkinworks10

I have a very strong suspicion it has to do with the following:

"Matter Wave Amplification"
arxiv.org...

"Matter-Wave Entanglement and Teleportation by Molecular Dissociation and Collisions"
American Physical Society › link › doi


"Our Friend the Positron"
Positron - NASA's Institute for Advanced Concepts
PDFwww.niac.usra.edu › Edwards_Kenneth

“Empty Space: the Multilayered, Multicolored. Superconductor
Modern Topics in Energy and Power Technical Meeting - Army Research Laboratory"
PDFArmy.mil › arl › ARL-SR-0358



Some other names/institutions of note:
Dr. Allen Mills
Dr. David Cassidy
Dr. Ronald Meyers
Penn State Applied Research
UT Austin - Texas Petawatt
University of Wisconsin
Rice University



posted on Aug, 1 2018 @ 10:54 PM
link   
a reply to: punkinworks10

forum.nasaspaceflight.com...

Maybe this guy? Or the DSP-22?



posted on Aug, 2 2018 @ 07:52 AM
link   
a reply to: ErosA433

Oh, yee of little faith.

X-Ray Laser
en.m.wikipedia.org...

GRASER (Need to copy and paste, as it links to PDF)
www.google.com...://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a506546.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwivsPmDtM7cAhWRyIMKHQ7QBpYQFjAGegQI ABAB&usg=AOvVaw37jj28LvtzGt3q8QIR4PSk

And a fun patent from Raytheon to tie in all together
patents.google.com...
edit on 2-8-2018 by DirtyBizzler because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
11
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join