Re: Nuke weapon/reactor/waste horror story links?

From: John Marlow (johnmarrek@yahoo.com)
Date: Wed Jan 10 2001 - 16:26:27 MST


The only thing which distinguishes a nuke
> from anything else is radiation, a passive property.
>

Well, actually, there's density--or atomic weight, if
you will. Now of course, lead shielding is quite
likely to screw this up--but the lead shielding would
have only some easily penetrable covering--wood, thin
metal, etc.--both of which can be "seen through" with
current technologies, though mind you I'm not saying
that can (or can't) be done by satellite. Simply
detecting lead shielding would be a tip-off, depending
upon context. So, just to throw another wild Q--might
it be possible to pick it up that way--detection of
heavy elements in unusual places? Some tech analogous
to GPR, perhaps? (Though yes, I realize GPR itself is
unsuitable.)

> If you insist in making a fool out of yourself in a
> public
> place, be my guest.

Wouldn't miss the opportunity. I've always thought it
better ask and learn than dwell in silent ignorance.

How about you?

john marlow

--
--- Eugene.Leitl@lrz.uni-muenchen.de wrote:
> John Marlow wrote:
> 
> > @Could be; as I said, it's a guess--but I suspect
> > neither of knows the true capabilities of current
> > detection gear.
> 
> No. Nor do we have to, since elementary physics
> suffices. The only thing which distinguishes a nuke
> from anything else is radiation, a passive property.
> 
> Which is being emitted from behind a shield on a 
> noisy background, and has a distance of some 100 km 
> filled with atmosphere between source and detector. 
> Plus, you have a lot of terrain to cover, so you
> can't
> look for very long.
> 
> On such a distance you have a much better chance
> seeing the infrared emission from the nuke surface,
> which is (at best) few degrees K above background. 
> Which is just as silly.
> 
> > @It wouldn't really have to, would it? There are
> other
> > clues, such as disturbance of air molecules by
> passing
> > gamma particles--which of course, absent a
> detonation,
> 
> Um, gamma quanta are not special. There are a lot of
> hot 
> nuclei around here, and see the cosmic ray
> background. 
> You would should be able to detect a nuke with it's
> nitrogen-rich
> high explosive shell around it from a few m
> distance, but
> that's about it.
> 
> > are feeble. Can such things be detected from a
> great
> > distance? I don't know. Can Hubble be turned
> around to
> > look down here? Good chance.
> 
> If you insist in making a fool out of yourself in a
> public 
> place, be my guest.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Photos - Share your holiday photos online!
http://photos.yahoo.com/


This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 08:04:44 MST