We called it a night three hours early, so I've got a few minutes to address this...
Originally posted by ipsedixit
And you just forgot about it a couple of posts ago when you said that there was a lack of small nukes? You're not some kind of dishonest person are
you? Backpacking a nuclear explosive device is not the sort of thing most people would just forget about.
I think the problem is that you and I are not on the same page with "small".
A 1kT weapon is not "small" when you're talking about detonating it inside a building. 50 tons is about the smallest fielded weapon they've made,
which is the W48 howitzer shell I was talking about. A 50 ton weapon in the basement would still obliterate the bottom floors in a blowout. It only
takes 5-7 psi of overpressure to eradicate the building structure.
No argument here. The nuke theory is something that is probably beyond the competence of most people on ATS. The British guy I referred to earlier was
talking about the deliberate meltdown of a small nuclear reactor in the sub-basement of the WTC. If I can find a link to his stuff, I'll put it
in this thread.
A meltdown of a reactor would not have caused an explosion. It also would have been even slower and sloppier than the 'thermite theory' which is also
atrocious. It sort of sidesteps the obvious, which is a 'reactor meltdown' would have left horribly radioactive residue of the sort you couldn't
mistake, in addition to cesium-137, iodine-131 and xenon isotopes that would have been characteristic of a meltdown.
BTW, you can't just say "if you find cesium it must be a meltdown", it has to be cesium-137. Your guy isn't claiming that, just that cesium was
present. That's a bit misleading. The radioactive gases would have been wafting around the island in a very unmistakable fashion. Not to mention
anyone that was in or near the building would have been fried, and even to this day you wouldn't have been able to get close. See also: Fukushima.
There was a howitzer shell with a topology changer design that was smaller but that one too would have blown the facade off the building and
irradiated everyone in the area.
"Topology changer" design. Cute.
The W48 IS a topology changer design. It's not "cute", it's how the thing works. It's one of those classic designs you're taught about that we just
don't use, which is why the W48 was never really deployed - it doesn't meet the design safety minimums that DOE/NNSA requires. For one, they're prone
to fratricide, since they have to be designed to be close to critical just sitting there.
Topo weapons don't compress the pit, they alter the topology. An obround shape has a higher critical mass than a sphere. An unreflected mass has a
higher critical mass than one with a reflector. So what you do in a topology changer is, you start off with a shape that's got a higher critical mass,
and you alter it into one that's got a lower one, leaving it supercritical. In the case of the W48 (and most other designs of this type) you compress
an obround mass into a spherical one, while shoving it into a reflector. It's sloppy and wasteful of fissile mass because the supercriticality factor
edit on 8-4-2013 by Bedlam because: (no reason given)