Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

DPRK and fusion test detection

page: 1
2
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 29 2013 @ 01:20 PM
link   
news.yahoo.com... from the link

Confirming North Korean N-test almost impossible

Detecting a Fusion test is almost imposable , but the question is:
Is there?
Is there any sign or detection of past or future test that would with out a doubt say yes DPRK has a fusion bomb? I think yes.

The link above says all most imposable, but there are others that say... well it might be possibility this one says yes

nuclear-news.net... form the link

Windsor Genova – AHN News News Writer, 20 June 2010,Seoul, South Korea (AHN) - A radiation detection station of South Korea measured increased levels of radioactive xenon in the air two days after North Korea announced a nuclear fusion test on May 12.


as well as this one rendezvous.blogs.nytimes.com...
from the link

But now a new study by a Swedish scientist, Lars-Erik De Geer, argues that the North Korean claim, which first appeared in the Rodong Sinmun, might not have been so ridiculous. In his analysis of radioisotope emissions, Mr. De Geer suggests that North Korea may have conducted two heretofore-unknown nuclear weapons tests in 2010.

Now would they say openly as to let the world know that yes DPRK has a Fusion bomb ? or would they keep this from us ? If they openly admit saying DPRK has tested Fusion , what would this mean to us.
Some questions this brings up,
How would the UN US react.
Would this be cause for the cease fire to end.
Would the South strike first.
Would DPRK actually hit the west coast of the US with a nuke.




posted on Jan, 29 2013 @ 01:31 PM
link   
With words like this

The U.S. will come to know what dear price it will have to pay for insulting and mocking the Koreans.

Satellites and long-range rockets to be launched by the DPRK without let-up and the nuclear test of higher level to be conducted by it in the all-out action, a new stage of the anti-U.S. struggle, will be targeted against the U.S. imperialists, the sworn enemy of the Korean people.

The world will clearly know what tremendous might the servicepersons and people of the DPRK will display and what great history of a thriving nation they will make, aware of the justice of their cause and single-mindedly united behind their leader.
we need to take any action DPRK does or will do very seriously. been reluctant to post direct link but with this statement, we should all be aware here is the link www.kcna.co.jp...



posted on Jan, 29 2013 @ 01:49 PM
link   
Well, the DPRK apparently has found a unicorn lair, and the people in N. Korea are now resorting to eating one another to survive ...

They can talk all they want about how scary their nuclear weapons are, I'm more afraid of the lost secrets they uncovered in that unicorn lair.



posted on Jan, 29 2013 @ 02:22 PM
link   
Removed silly ignorant comment.


My reason for retraction is listed below.
edit on 29-1-2013 by muzzleflash because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 29 2013 @ 02:30 PM
link   
reply to post by muzzleflash
 


Hydrogen (thermonuclear) bombs are (partly) fusion, but they need to fission to start the reaction.

So yes, fusion bombs have been on the go for quite some time.
edit on 29/1/13 by woogleuk because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 29 2013 @ 02:31 PM
link   
reply to post by bekod
 


It' ll be easy to tell, because they'll finally get way more than a fizzle yield . They're not up to levitated pit composite fission yet, they don't have the technology for a Teller- Ulam three stager.



posted on Jan, 29 2013 @ 02:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by muzzleflash
Um...what world did I just wake up into?

Last I checked, nuclear weapons technology on Earth currently operates on Fission.

Where did you guys get Fusion ?


Most US weapons are fusion weapons, they all depend on a fission trigger (well, two) though.

Even the few straight nukes use boost, which uses fusion in the pit as a neutron source.
edit on 29-1-2013 by Bedlam because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 29 2013 @ 02:44 PM
link   
Ok so it's still a fission device (with fusion as the end result).

I misworded my post incorrectly I admit.
I guess that is one fail for the day.

At least I went and read about it and learned that yes, throwing the word around callously is acceptable.
I retract my comment.



posted on Jan, 29 2013 @ 02:51 PM
link   
OK,

On a serious note. If there is anything anyone should worry about in N. Korea, it's their lack of resources to properly maintain and take care of their nuclear materials.

In all seriousness, the threat of a nuclear accident in N. Korea is greater than any kind of agressive threat. It would be worse than Fukishima and very bad for our allies in S. Korea.



posted on Jan, 29 2013 @ 02:55 PM
link   
In all seriousness the only information any of you have on North Korea is third hand information. It is information that has been selected to be told to you, a civilian with no power. You can soak it up and believe what you hear, or you can put 2 and 2 together and realize you are being lied to.



posted on Jan, 29 2013 @ 02:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bedlam
reply to post by bekod
 


It' ll be easy to tell, because they'll finally get way more than a fizzle yield . They're not up to levitated pit composite fission yet,


how do you know that?


they don't have the technology for a Teller- Ulam three stager.


right, you need a reliable primary first



posted on Jan, 29 2013 @ 03:11 PM
link   
reply to post by chadderson
 


OR, you could watch the Vice Guide to North Korea like I did, as well as a handfull of other documentaries with smuggled out footage.

Don't presume to know me and my level of understanding about N. Korea.



posted on Jan, 29 2013 @ 08:06 PM
link   
when they do the test , here is the link to help decipher the Info as to whom is telling the facts www.ctbto.org... was there a test when did it happen and of what kind K or M, I still think that they will be testing a Fusion, if Russia and china can do it, so could DPRK.



posted on Jan, 29 2013 @ 09:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by mbkennel

how do you know that?



Um. Well, you do have a knack for asking me uncomfortable questions I have to think about before answering.

For Nork, they have plutonium but not much in the way of refined U235. Yongbyon wasn't set up for separation until the end of 2010, and it takes a while to get that working really well when you've never done it before. Especially if you are having - ahem - trouble with your maraging steel alloys being off a bit and your control systems not working as well as they might. But at the time they did their first two fizzles, they didn't have the uranium you need to pull off a big easy primary.

Plus doing a vacuum levitated pit design takes some managing, IIRC Nork is still doing old school initiators and wasn't up to something like neutron tubes or zippers, much less boosted levitated pits.

Their first shots were compression plutonium designs with bad plutonium, lots of 240 in there, and they got fizzle yields. There's a pretty nice network of seismo sensors in the area, some even in the country from what I hear, and the data was pretty unequivocal when it came down the pipe.

(grin) Now that I have found the archive pages on Fark, I could probably find where I called the yields about an hour after the shots, at the time no one paid attention, but it's the number the gubmint posted the next week in the MSM. It goes out on 'global news network' about 30 minutes later, you guys just don't hear about it for a while.

But the straightforward answer is that I asked around, coming out of school I worked briefly for a national lab that does nukes, in a nuke related job. Which is why you see me post semi-lucidly in nuke threads, I guess. Further, deponent sayeth not.



posted on Jan, 30 2013 @ 12:05 AM
link   
reply to post by Bedlam
 
I hope you will contribute some of what you know , to this thread as far as DPRK getting a fusion bomb, or being able to develop one as being a real threat to US. If they did try and had a mistake , would it be as bad or not as bad as the TSAR bomb also the biggest Fusion bomb ever made



posted on Jan, 30 2013 @ 12:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by bekod
reply to post by Bedlam
 
I hope you will contribute some of what you know , to this thread as far as DPRK getting a fusion bomb, or being able to develop one as being a real threat to US. If they did try and had a mistake , would it be as bad or not as bad as the TSAR bomb also the biggest Fusion bomb ever made



They might buy one from China. It's the only way they'll do it quickly.

First, they have to engineer some effective, dependable primaries. You can't get a thermonuke without a good primary. That's step one. NK bought an AQ Khan fission design that requires mixed plutonium and uranium. They didn't have the uranium, so they tried to finesse it and failed.

When they can trigger off a big primary, maybe 20kT, and get it right, then you could start looking at the next steps of getting a proper secondary to work. But it's going to be physically big and horky at first. Getting to really technically excellent small thermonukes like a W88 takes years of effort, lots of resources and very good physicists and material science guys.

BTW, big is not necessarily good. Big is hard. Small is hard. There's a point of diminishing returns for your buck on big. Past the 'knee', you put in more and more effort to get a bigger and bigger bang, and the actual destroyed target radius starts to increase more and more slowly. So if you multiply your bang by four, you don't get 4x the destruction, you might get 70% more, by ten you might get 110% more, eventually you can drop the Tsar Bomba but you would have gotten the same mayhem by dropping four W88 sized warheads at less cost and more flexibility.

The US likes to run simulations with B61's, maybe 320kT. 300kT - 1MT is your sweet spot. You don't want or need gigaton weapons. The trend is to go smaller, with zero maintenance. That's what the bulk of US nuke design effort is on these days.



posted on Jan, 30 2013 @ 12:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by muzzleflash
Ok so it's still a fission device (with fusion as the end result).


I don't know if anyone's working on direct fusion weapons. It would be very very hard. And one of those things where you have to ask - if I have technology x that can actually trigger a fusion explosion, why not just use that as a weapon instead?

Not to mention, most of the bang from a thermonuke is from fission in the third stage anyway. If you want a really big neutron bomb, then direct fusion, if you could do it, is the way to go. A big honkin' DT weapon would put out most of its energy in neutrons.



posted on Jan, 30 2013 @ 11:18 AM
link   
Why try to build test a fusing not a fission? simple here is a link to the answer library.thinkquest.org... it is odd how they call it a clean bomb from the link

Thus thermonuclear weapons are sometimes called "clean" bombs. Technically a clean bomb is defined as one where significantly more than half of the destructive power arises from fusion. So-called "radiation fusion bombs", also known as neutron bombs are examples of clean weapons
what good is land when it will kill you with radiation? New for the war monger , use a clean bomb.



posted on Jan, 30 2013 @ 05:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by bekod
Why try to build test a fusing not a fission? simple here is a link to the answer library.thinkquest.org... it is odd how they call it a clean bomb from the link

Thus thermonuclear weapons are sometimes called "clean" bombs. Technically a clean bomb is defined as one where significantly more than half of the destructive power arises from fusion. So-called "radiation fusion bombs", also known as neutron bombs are examples of clean weapons
what good is land when it will kill you with radiation? New for the war monger , use a clean bomb.


In actual reality;

a) a large fraction of the energy release of modern fusion bombs comes from fission
b) the total energy release of "H-bombs" is MUCH bigger than typical just-plain fission bombs
c) the amount of fission in a H-bomb is hence much bigger than in a typical plain-fission bomb
d) fallout is approximately proportional to the total amount of fission

Therefore, "H-bombs" release much more fallout than typical plain fission bombs because they're so much bigger, and they aren't in the slightest "clean" in any sense. Fallout for a 450 kt modern fusion warhead would be **much** worse than for 15kt Hiroshima weapon, not to mention the much larger blast.

They are Very Very Very Bad News every way around.

Analogy: A wheelbarrow of pig manure (Hiroshima) vs a garbage truck of 3/5ths pig manure and 2/5ths old tires (H bomb).

Is they get dumped on your lawn, is the garbage truck "clean" and the wheelbarrow "dirty"?




edit on 30-1-2013 by mbkennel because: (no reason given)
edit on 30-1-2013 by mbkennel because: (no reason given)
edit on 30-1-2013 by mbkennel because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 11 2013 @ 11:47 PM
link   
well if this is true and they , this being they www.ctbto.org... go to the press release feb 12 2013 you will see this

Statement by CTBTO Executive Secretary Tibor Tóth on the seismic event detected in North Korea as a response to media questions

Vienna, 12 February 2013

“Today our monitoring stations picked up evidence of an unusual seismic event in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK). The event shows explosion-like characteristics and its location is roughly congruent with the 2006 and 2009 DPRK nuclear tests. For now, further data and analysis are necessary to establish what kind of event this is. If confirmed as a nuclear test, this act would constitute a clear threat to international peace and security, and challenges efforts made to strengthen global nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation, in particular by ending nuclear testing.”
It does need to be confirmed, but it will be, and when it is ... whole new ballgame folks






top topics



 
2
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join