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.
Originally posted by Frosty
exactly, it doesn't. It was a theoritical concept, like many others at Los Alamos including the 'tickling dragon'. They even quit experiments with heavy water after 43, you should know this rogue1 it states quite clearly in Rhodes's book.
Originally posted by rogue1
Well this theoretical concept was used to construct 2 weapons for the 1953 Upshot Knothole tests, which I have previously stated. SO even if you don't believe the device was proof tested at Port Chicago, it was definately tested twice in 1953 under Teller's direction. Shots Ruth and Ray.
This operation exposed exercise personnel to nuclear tests, and thus radiation, more aggressively than previous ones. Observation by troop formations were conducted at what was calculated to be the minimum safe separation distance, with many personnel being exposed to multiple tests. Under current occupational radiation exposure limits (0.3 rem/week and 5 rem/year) this would would limit maximum exposures to 3.3 rems over the 11 week operation. Approximately three thousand soldiers reached or exceeded this limit, with 84 exceeding the annual limit (the highest recorded exposure was 26.6 rem). These exposures do not produce observable symptoms, they simply increase the lifetime risk of cancer a small amount.
The effect on the downwind civilian population, taken together, was much worse. Uphot-Knothole released some 35,000 kilocuries of radioiodine (I-131) into the atmosphere (for comparison, Trinity released about 3200 kilocuries of radioiodine). This produced total civilian radiation exposures amounting to 89 million person-rads of thyroid tissue exposure (about 24% of all exposure due to continental nuclear tests). This can be expected to eventually cause about 28,000 cases of thyroid cancer, leading to some 1400 deaths. Chart of fallout exposures from "underground tests" (61 K, 539x577). From National Cancer Institute Study Estimating Thyroid Doses of I-131 Received by Americans From Nevada Atmospheric Nuclear Bomb Test, 1997. To go to the National Cancer Institute and get the full report, click here.
Originally posted by Peter Vogel
For those interested in the Port Chicago radiation questions, in addition to what I have written in comparison of shots Ruth and Ray to the Port Chicago Mark II detonation, see Ian Kluft's "Background Radiation Measurements near Port Chicago": ian.kluft.com...
Originally posted by Peter Vogel
I regret I do not have time, and won't for a while, to respond to all the posts, and thank you Rogue 1 for your contributions in replies.
For those interested in the Port Chicago radiation questions, in addition to what I have written in comparison of shots Ruth and Ray to the Port Chicago Mark II detonation, see Ian Kluft's "Background Radiation Measurements near Port Chicago": ian.kluft.com...
Those interested in the radiation questions should keep in mind that the proof detonation of the nominal 1 kt TNT-equivalent Mark II at Port Chicago 17 July 1944 was made at the reduced yield of 200-300 tons TNT equivalent. T'would have been a waste of the very limited and very expensive quantity of U-235 produced by 17 July 1944 to have made a proof of Mark II at the nominal 1 kt yield.
Successful field-scale proof of the Mark II at Port Chicago, with that reduced yield, proved the theory of large scale nuclear fission weapons. Proof of the successful detonation of Mark II within the context of the much large detonation of conventional WW II munitions was recognition of the unique, distinctive and typical manifestations of the Mark II nuclear fission fire ball, which on a larger scale (18,000 feet) would be duplicated by the Trinity test.
As the December 1944 Los Alamos document "History of 10,000 ton gadget reports, in forecast modeling the 16 July 1945 Trinity site Fat Man test, "Ball of fire mushroom out at 18,000 feet in typical Port Chicago fashion."
Typical: "Exhibiting the traits or characteristics peculiar to its kind, class, group, or the like; representative of a whole group; characteristic, distinctive; of the nature of, constituting, or serving as a type; emblematic."
MARK II NEUTRON ENERGY MODERATOR. Not heavy water -- deuterium and boron.
Read the pdf files !
One journalist, Peter Vogel, maintains the explosion was caused by a nuclear bomb, based on the discovery of a supposed Los Alamos document from 1944 which contains the line, "Ball of fire mushroom out at 18,000 ft in typical Port Chicago fashion" in the description of a hypothetical atomic weapon. [1]
However during the development of the first atomic weapons, it was common for Manhattan Project workers to use comparative explosions such as the one which happened at Port Chicago in order to give relative estimates on damage and explosive behavior, and for Vogel's theory to be true, all previous Manhattan Project historiography — which indicates that there would not have been enough enriched uranium or plutonium to construct an atomic bomb by July 1944 — would have to be incorrect, and all references to such a plan would have had to be systematically eliminated from documents and kept deeply secret for the many decades which have since passed. Though many of the former Manhattan Project scientists became very opposed to atomic weapons in their later years, none ever indicated any knowledge relating to crime of this scale. Furthermore the atomic bomb which detonated over Hiroshima produced many residual health effects on the survivors, none of which have ever been observed in Port Chicago survivors and city residents.
Originally posted by Zaphod58
That's actually pretty funny. I find it amazing that Hiroshima, where a bigger more radioactive bomb went off, is supposed to have normal background radiation, but Port Chicago, where the magic non-radioactive bomb went off, and nobody even got sick from radiation, has a higher than average background radiation level from it.
Originally posted by Frosty
And uh, heavy water is deuterium.
Originally posted by Seekerof
You know, no disrespect here or intended, but the tag-team aspect on this is amusing. No sooner than we began the serious trouncing of the truth on rogue1, then the respected Peter Vogel becomes a member and makes his voice heard. Most convenient. Interesting or ironic?
What I do find a bit humorous though is how wikipedia even seriously questions and virtually debunks the respected Peter Vogel, when it mentions:
Originally posted by Zaphod58
Now the author of the paper that you're citing as this great work says it's abnormally high, but YOU, the master of all things nuclear says it's normal. Which is it gonna be?
Originally posted by rogue1
Originally posted by Frosty
And uh, heavy water is deuterium.
Ummm NO, Deuterium is not heavy water Heavy water contains Deuterium. The natural form of deuterium is as a gas.
Hmmm, I thought you said you knew something about the subject - because this is a basic error.
Originally posted by Peter Vogel
"Again, why did they detonate a nuke in an American harbour? I know there is no point in my asking as you and Pete will never answer this and jsut tell us 'to read the pdf's'."
If you did read the pdf's, you wouldn't need to ask your question. However,
the theory of large scale nuclear fission weapons was expected to be proved by the anticipated successful detonation of Mark II at Port Chicago.
The U.S. military considered that a successful field scale proof of the theory of large scale nuclear fission weapons should be known to as few persons as possible, and especially that Germany, Japan, nor Russia would know that theory was proved by field scale detonation of the Mark II.
It was therefore necessary to obscure the successful proof of Mark II from all persons except those few in the military and Manhattan Project who were cognizant of the development of Mark II.
The most effective way to obscure that successful proof of the Mark II was to mask the anticipated successful detonation of Mark II within the anticipated much larger sympathetic detonation of 1,750 tons TNT and torpex charge weight of convention munitions aboard E. A. Bryan and emplaced upon the Port Chicago ship loading pier.