Smallest possible nuclear weapon

[DRBUZZ0]

Already wrote about it here: http://depletedcranium.com/?p=138

A nuclear explosion like that, even a very very small one would produce fallout from fission products (and likely unfissioned plutonium) which would be way way way more radioactive than anything you'd otherwise expect. It could be very very very brutally ridiculously easily proven with a simple gamma spectrometer.

Even a 50 dollar surplus geiger counter would light up a block away. And yes, the rubble was tested for radiation.

NO NO NO! NO NUKE! NO!

 

[Furi]

Duck and Cover

how a bout a 100T of hiex footage

http://www.collegehumor.com/video:1763156

If I can dig it out I have trinity and beyond somewhere I'll see if I can edit out some of the smaller explosions such as
100T test conventional, Ranger Able (1kt), Ranger Easy (1kt)
the aftermath of the Jangle shots, Sugar and Uncle should be looked at. only a mere 1.2kt Surface and subsurface produced intense local Radioactivity and fallout.

whichever method of device is propsed Cold Fusion Hot Fusion Staged, (un)boosted Fission, Antimatter annihilation, Neutron Compression charge. Even excluding the lack of localised EMP High neutron absorbtion into surrounding materials, Mass prompt Xray emission (That I believe certain satelites would have picked up especially) the micronuke claims do infact have a use.. it helps to show just how much diligeance, thought, research and care, goes into a CT proposal, and brings to forth the mark of woo

and remember kids bert the turtle says
(time passes depending on distance)

 

[DRBUZZ0]

how a bout a 100T of hiex footage

http://www.collegehumor.com/video:1763156

If I can dig it out I have trinity and beyond somewhere I'll see if I can edit out some of the smaller explosions such as
100T test conventional, Ranger Able (1kt), Ranger Easy (1kt)
the aftermath of the Jangle shots, Sugar and Uncle should be looked at. only a mere 1.2kt Surface and subsurface produced intense local Radioactivity and fallout.

whichever method of device is propsed Cold Fusion Hot Fusion Staged, (un)boosted Fission, Antimatter annihilation, Neutron Compression charge. Even excluding the lack of localised EMP High neutron absorbtion into surrounding materials, Mass prompt Xray emission (That I believe certain satelites would have picked up especially) the micronuke claims do infact have a use.. it helps to show just how much diligeance, thought, research and care, goes into a CT proposal, and brings to forth the mark of woo

and remember kids bert the turtle says
(time passes depending on distance)

What kind of blasts are you looking for? I have nearly the whole DOE archive of nuclear blasts on a series of data DVD's. Images, movies and all the data tables. It took me years to collect some of this, as some was not released in digital form until recently.

The stuff on Trinity and Beyond may be dicey to post online. I know VCE hasn't been copyright nazis with it, probably because they realize that nobody's going to forgo buying their movie in favor of a few 320x240 resolution 2-minute clips.

However, the original stuff, which may/may not be as much eyecandy (VCE did an amazing job of digitally remastering some of the faded footage) and it won't have the same background music. But the original DOE/AEC stuff is public domain so posting is no problem.

 

[DRBUZZ0]

I might reiterate again: There is no way that you can set off even a very small nuclear weapon without any indication of the fallout. At least, the only way you could do it would be to have it down a very deep and well-sealed borehole. Obviously this is not what is claimed.

Any bomb with a fission component will produce very noticable and easily detectable fallout. Even if it's well bellow "danger" levels, any bozo with a geieger counter will know something is up. Any half-decent community college will have the equipment to determind that there is nuclear fission bibroducts above what would be expected from past nuclear testing/chernobyl and so on.

There is no way of detonating any nuclear weapon that does not involve a fission component. The exceptions of antimatter/pulsed power/isomers and so on are beyond any systems in current existance. We cannot make ANYWHERE NEAR the amount of antimatter needed, and if we could we don't have a reliable means of safely storing it. We can't make enough halfnium isomers. We don't have large enough pulsed power generators.

It simply cannot be done without fission. The only exception might be some sort of massive impulse generator, which would cost on the order of billions and take up a huge amount of space.

Ontop of this, fusion is not necessarly fallout-free. Although by itself it's basically "clean" (aside from possibly a small amount of tritium) it can produce fallout by neutron activation of other materials (such as iron) the only way of having fallout-free fusion would be to use a very low-neutron fusion material such as helium-3 or boron fusion. This makes it even more difficult. Even then, there would be some neutrons, so you'd have to have the whole thing surrounded by tons and tons of boron or halfnium-based neutron sheilding.

Can't be done. Sorry. Just not within the relhm of possibility.


IF there were a nuke set off there, lower manhattan would still be a bit more radioactive than expected today. Even nuke sites from 40 years ago still have traces of fallout if you use sensative enough equipment.


If it will shut up any CT'ers, I'll happily take my spectrometer and a couple good scintillation detectors down to NYC next time I go. The only radiation I would expect to find is some thorium, radon, maybe a touch of uranium and some potassium-40. Of course, these are what you find ANYWHERE!

 

[Furi]

What kind of blasts are you looking for? I have nearly the whole DOE archive of nuclear blasts on a series of data DVD's. Images, movies and all the data tables. It took me years to collect some of this, as some was not released in digital form until recently.

The stuff on Trinity and Beyond may be dicey to post online. I know VCE hasn't been copyright nazis with it, probably because they realize that nobody's going to forgo buying their movie in favor of a few 320x240 resolution 2-minute clips.

However, the original stuff, which may/may not be as much eyecandy (VCE did an amazing job of digitally remastering some of the faded footage) and it won't have the same background music. But the original DOE/AEC stuff is public domain so posting is no problem.

I was thinking of some of the smaller surface tests, Moth, Bee, boltzman (sub kiloton types) a lot of these were physics tests, I think there was a few very small MET/WET at around the 0.8 -1kt, or maybe some of the small primary underground tests, the video of even these tiny (relative) explosions, with shockwave, Blast duration, and Altitude of shroom cloud (subsidence crater), should pretty much convince anyone who doesn't accept any fact unless it presented in video format. plus let's face it Nuke explosion are cool (at a distance )

Good point about the TAB video, although I also have seen a lot of that footage from open sources. but I will see if I can find any of the pd stuff

 

[DRBUZZ0]

I was thinking of some of the smaller surface tests, Moth, Bee, boltzman (sub kiloton types) a lot of these were physics tests, I think there was a few very small MET/WET at around the 0.8 -1kt, or maybe some of the small primary underground tests, the video of even these tiny (relative) explosions, with shockwave, Blast duration, and Altitude of shroom cloud (subsidence crater), should pretty much convince anyone who doesn't accept any fact unless it presented in video format. plus let's face it Nuke explosion are cool (at a distance )

Good point about the TAB video, although I also have seen a lot of that footage from open sources. but I will see if I can find any of the pd stuff

Oh sure. I'll find you some of those no prob. They're mostly in the form of longer films in higher quality. So give me a day to get it cut down to size and transcoded to something youtube would like.

 

[DRBUZZ0]

Okay. First here are some tests from the 1950's in some AEC/DOE footage. These are one kiloton nuclear tests, which is about the smallest you can get without resorting to stuff like linear implosion and compound neutron-reflector designs as mentioned above.



Now it's important to note that one kiloton does not mean "as much energy as a kiloton of TNT." It is a measure of "blast equivalence." In reality, the total energy released in terms of thermal energy/x-rays/neutrons and such is MUCH MUCH MUCH higher.

Some description of seeing a (small) nuke from within 1-5-2 miles:

Light:

The initial blast produces an enormous flash. For those closeby it will be much brighter than the sun. I recall an interview with a camera man who was in a high altitude aircraft filming a small few-kiloton blast. He described how just before the blast he was adjusting his goggles when they fell off. He immediately slapped his hand over his eyes and when the flash appeared he could see the outline of the bones in his hand. But he was quite close.

The flash is breif but the bright light continues as a "fireball" of superheated gas/plasma begins to rise. This will remain bright for at least several seconds, at the minimum. How long will depend on the atmospheric conditions/daylight/weapon yield/whether it kicked up a lot of dust and many other things.

The glow of the blast cloud can be visible for minutes afterward, especially at night. This is both due to the incandescence of hot rising gas, the chemical reactions of combustion and of ozone being created and decaying, atmospheric gases bonding and so on. There is also a more faint glow which (generally at night) can leave a hazy light to the cloud. This is caused by the rapid decay of short-lived fission products ionizing the air.

Heat:

The blast is accompanied by an immediate wave of heat in the form of thermal radiation. For those a "safe" distance away it still be very noticable. Imagine standing in front of a bank of IR heat lamps and having them imediatly all come on full power and then slowely fade after the burst. It would be stronger than the feeling of the sun. Perhaps similar to being near a big bonfire, but it comes all at once.


Here is some footage from Operation Cue which tested structural effects. These structures would obviously be much closer than observers. Notice something: Even before the blast wave occurs there's smoke coming off of structures. The powerful thermal radiation immediately heats materials to the point of combustion. Structures are scorched, paint is vaporized and grasses begin to smoke and char.




The blast wave:

The flash is silent. Obviously sound travels much more slowely than light. The first sound that (may) be heard from the blast is the sound of the materials closer to the observer burning. It can range up to a small crackling roar, but its not that loud. This sound may be so brief as to not be noticable before the blast sound. It very much depends on the conditions and what is in between the blast and the observer.

The ground may shake or rumble before the air pressure wave arrives. This depends on factors like the altitude of the blast and the ground density, but earth tends to transfer acoustic energy faster.

The blast wave can often actually be seen approaching. It spreads in a circle and kicks up dust. Occasionally it may condense moisture in the air. Generally it can be seen approaching faster and faster due to the illusion of speed/distance. But it will seem like a far off wave that comes slowly then rushes you.

It's less a "bang" than a "FROOM!" or a big thud that you may as much feel as hear. The rapid change in pressure could cause your ears to "pop" and it could knock off your hat or ruffle papers.

Dust which is seen rising is not from the blast. That's just nearby dust kicked up. The radioactive dust comes later.

Here's the best video I've ever seen illustrating the blast wave. This is ripped from "Hollywood's seceret studio" VCE is usually pretty lenient about letting clips and tidbits be posted and it is originally AEC footage. Buy the movie... seriously. Don't watch this and think "Okay now I have seen it" The movie is very good

 

[DRBUZZ0]

You know... i'm really disipointed that this lively thread has had zero responses to what I posted today.

I'm just saying because I went to some trouble to get those videos up and stuff. ANd I thought they were interesting and whatnot.

Oh well.. guess not

 

[BenBurch]

Dude, its a FRIDAY.

 

[grmcdorman]

I enjoyed them, DRBUZZ0. Your posts have been very informative and interesting; I'm learning new stuff. Please don't be discouraged. (As an aside, I borrowed Trinity and Beyond from the library once, and watched it with my son; he said it was interesting but a bit disturbing.)

 

[jhunter1163]

I always enjoy watching things get blow'd up.

 

[DRBUZZ0]

ah good. I always liked those "shockwave" movies. They're pretty unique in showing what that is like.

 

[BenBurch]

I've always thought that the nuclear bomb was one of the more beautiful on man's creations. Seen as fireworks, of course.

 

[DRBUZZ0]

I've always thought that the nuclear bomb was one of the more beautiful on man's creations. Seen as fireworks, of course.

Yeah. Trinity and Beyond is one of the most amazing documentaries I've ever seen and I think that there's really huge value to the fact that they show jaw-dropping eye-candy of the bombs and the effects.

The reason I think this is valuable is it puts things into a perspective that you might not readily appreciate. To the developers of these weapons they're more than just calculations on paper. There's a psycological factor and cultural perspective.

There's a conflict because you know the terrible power and purpose of the weapons. They're designed to kill and they cause such devastation. Yet, as a scientist you're trying to push things further, to expand human capabilities and understanding and harness forces. The power of the weapons is almost beyond comprehension. While they're a scientific pursuit, a deadly serious game, they are also a novel toy, an amazing display of power and beauty and an opportunity to control and operate something with power never before dreamed of by mankind.

Seeing the power like that there's an understanding of how it must have seemed like a culmination of harnessing the forces of nature. The desire to take it further and flex the nuclear muscle is obvious.

It's like having the fastest car around. You want to drive it fast. You want to see what it can do. You're amazed by it's performance. And then when you find there's a mod-chip or air intake that can make it even faster, you can't resist the temptation. People think it's irrational.... but then they take a spin in the car and understand.


The images in Trinity and Beyond take you closer to this than any verbal or written account ever could.

 

[phaed]

Seriously, why don't people do 5 minutes of research before posting a question? The minimum size for a nuclear weapon depends entirely on the substrate:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_mass_(nuclear)#Critical_mass_of_a_bare_sphere

 

[DRBUZZ0]

Seriously, why don't people do 5 minutes of research before posting a question? The minimum size for a nuclear weapon depends entirely on the substrate:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_mass_(nuclear)#Critical_mass_of_a_bare_sphere

NO. You're oversimplifying a complicated physics and engineering problem which must include other factors in practice. It also is not as simple as the bare critical mass.

You are assuming that you're talking about only a sphere of the fissile material. Neutron reflectors, fusion boosting, external neutron generators, the composition and purity of the material.

This is not taking into account how the critical mass is stored in a non-critical configuration, the explosives needed and so on.

 

[Drs_Res]

You know... i'm really disipointed that this lively thread has had zero responses to what I posted today.

I'm just saying because I went to some trouble to get those videos up and stuff. ANd I thought they were interesting and whatnot.

Oh well.. guess not

Interesting stuff here. Thanks for taking the trouble to edit and post it.

 

[Furi]

Dr Buzz0, What can I say, apart from ,

Excellent coice of videos showing the important features, some wonderful low yield footage, and an informative post as well.

A lot of people seem to forget what blast equivalence is in relation to published yields, and also just how LARGE even a 1kt explosion is.

Playing about with Brian Davis' spreadsheet (it's quicker than using WE or Blast) some startling results arise from 0.1 < 1kt figures at 500m ground distance, given a height of 380m (I know that the blast equiv where derived from free air explosions and that thermal / blast would be affected if enclosed (Say tiddlypeops can you spell Fallout?)). might play with WE(and blast) later later to gain some results from a radiological POV (prob have to use unboosted modern primary as a model though)

But tyvm for that post, I will prob get distracted now and start watch my test footage fims, or TAB, Threads, Failsafe, Dr Strangelocve etc LOL



=^..^=

 

[OldSchool]

Have these mini-nukes been used, by our military, during any faze of the Iraq war?

 

[DRBUZZ0]

Well, for the really small nuclear detonations in the single kiloton range, you're not talking about disastrous amounts of fallout. You would not want to be at ground zero right after the smoke cleared (at least not without a respirator and coveralls) but within a day it would be very reduced. Within a couple of weeks it would be well bellow 1%.

The most dangerous fallout component would be I-131. It's dangerous because it's rather radioactive and it exists in both vaporous and solid form, making it easy to absorb. Once in your body it goes to the thyroid, which, as it happens, is a very radiation-sensitive organ. Luckilly it's pretty short lived, so the hazard only exists right after the blast and isn't a long term issue. Also, administering potassium iodine can help reduce it's uptake.

So lets say you set off a 1kt fission bomb in lower Manhattan. Blast effects aside, my one concern would be people in the very immediate area could be exposed to enough I-131 to cause a significant increase in thyroid cancer risk. Although we probably would not be talking of an epidemic of thyroid cancer: Just quite a bit more than you'd otherwise have.

Now in the longer term, you've got stuff like Pm-147, Cs-137, Sr-90 and whatnot which hangs around for years. But the total amount produced by a one kiloton blast would not be that huge. A few good rainfalls and the area would be basically okay. (But again we're talking a very small nuke).

Of course, you need to realize that any fission explosion is going to create a lot more radioisotopes than you'd expect to see otherwise. Even if it's at "safe" levels, it'd still be more than enough to detect easily.

Let me give an example: A fiestaware orange plate is perfectly safe to handle. It's even safe to eat off of, but it contains enough uranium that it make a good geiger counter light up from several feet away. With a scintillation detector you could pick out out from the other side of the room. With a good scint you'll even notice a jump if you walk by a smoke detector.

The thing about radioactive substances is they're so extremely easy to pick out and detect, even in tiny tiny amounts, that they're used all the time as "tracers" in medicine and science. Even in industry they are used to find leaks in pipelines and such.

So it's inconceivable to me that you could set off a nuclear explosion, even one with relatively little fallout and not have it noticed by a simple instrument. If an area is, lets say 10 uR/hr background radiation level and then you start walking with a geiger counter and the area goes up to 20uR/hr then to 80uR/hr and then 300uR/hr, well you're going to notice. Eventhough by most standards that's still perfectly safe it's still WAY above normal.


Really the only way you can hide a nuclear explosion would be to have a very small nuclear weapon and put it very deeply underground. Deep enough that it would not create a subsidence crater.

But then again... that doesn't accomplish much does it? I mean how the hell do you use a nuke to destroy stuff when it has to be isolated under one thousand feet of granite?