Post #269,876
10/8/06 11:05:48 PM
|
N. Korea claims successful nuclear test. No details yet...
|
Post #269,890
10/9/06 9:48:03 AM
|
Looks like North Korea detonated something
[link|http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/world/4245545.html|Houston Chronicle] North Korea faced a barrage of global condemnation and calls for harsh sanctions Monday after it announced that it had set off an atomic weapon underground, a test that thrusts the secretive communist state into the elite club of nuclear-armed nations.
The U.N. Security Council scheduled a meeting for today, a U.S. official said. And Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe and President Bush agreed during a telephone call today that the U.N. Security Council must take "decisive action" against North Korea. South Korea's geological institute estimated the force of the explosion to be equivalent to 550 tons of TNT, far smaller than the two nuclear bombs the U.S. dropped on Japan in World War II. But Russian Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov said it was far more powerful, equivalent to 5,000 to 15,000 tons of TNT. No surprise that everybody except North Korea is upset at the test. The interesting point is the conflicting reports on just how big the bomb was. Jay
|
Post #269,892
10/9/06 9:50:06 AM
|
Bush is going to make a statement soon.
[link|http://www.washingtonpost.com/?nav=globaltop&reload=true|Live Video via the Washington Post].
I hope he doesn't say something stupid...
Cheers,
Scott.
|
Post #269,894
10/9/06 10:13:15 AM
|
It was about 2 minutes.
He said they were still working to confirm the test. He said the test was "unacceptable" and that the US would regard any transfer of nuclear technology or weapons as a direct threat to the US and that the US would hold NK responsible. IOW, more bluster from the US while we have few, if any, levers to do anything about it. It sounded to me like it was a restatement of earlier policy. A policy that manifestly has not worked thus far. The Washington Post has a [link|http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/08/AR2006100801169_pf.html|story] about the situation this morning that mentions something that I think is getting too little notice: "The North Koreans are making a statement that 'you guys can gang up on us, but you can't change us,' " said Lho Kyong Soo, international relations professor at Seoul National University. "Now, they're hoping they could get away with this like Pakistan. They're saying treat us with respect and accept us this way because we are not going to change."
James A. Kelly, a former U.S. assistant secretary for East Asian and Pacific Affairs who previously handled the Bush administration's dealings with North Korea, said last week that Pyongyang's timing may have been prompted in part by the imminent selection of Ban as U.N. Secretary General. The North has smarted in the past at having to deal with the South Koreans, rather than directly with the Americans, in any type of diplomatic conflict.
"It's possible this threat of the tests is as much aimed at Ban Ki Moon as otherwise," Kelly said. "It's a big part of North Korea's obsessions with direct dealings with Americans is to avoid giving direct legitimacy to South Korea."
But U.S. officials said early this morning that the Security Council planned to go ahead with Ban's election as the first order of business before turning to North Korea, in an effort to show that North Korea's action will not deter his selection. The NK regime has been desperate to be seen as a player in the region for ages, and to be seen as more important than the South. I have little doubt that the timing was influenced by the prospect of a SK diplomat taking over as head of the UN. I sincerely hope that people in the Administration recognize that in addition to the obvious security implications there are psychological aspects to this conflict that need to be carefully addressed. Empty, or unilateral, threats aren't going improve the situation. Cheers, Scott.
|
Post #269,895
10/9/06 10:40:58 AM
|
Re: N. Korea claims successful nuclear test. No details yet
[link|http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/6033457.stm|http://news.bbc.co.u...cific/6033457.stm]
Ooh, "international condemnation". That'll put the wind up the Dear Leader.
He's got his neighbours by the balls and he knows it.
Peter
[link|http://www.no2id.net/|Don't Let The Terrorists Win]
[link|http://www.kuro5hin.org|There is no K5 Cabal]
[link|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org|Home]
Use P2P for legitimate purposes!
[link|http://kevan.org/brain.cgi?pwhysall|A better terminal emulator]
|
Post #269,926
10/9/06 2:10:33 PM
|
Maybe its real, maybe not
You know, you can simulate that kind of thing with a cavern and a whole lot of ANFO.
Which is what I'd do if I wanted to bluff. It seems like they progressed a bit fast on the nuke front. We desperately need verification that its real nukes.
OTOH, if true, then the worst thing possible has happened - a second nutcase has gotten hold of nukes (ours being the first nutcase).
[link|http://www.blackbagops.net|Black Bag Operations Log]
[link|http://www.objectiveclips.com|Artificial Intelligence]
[link|http://www.badpage.info/seaside/html|Scrutinizer]
|
Post #269,937
10/9/06 3:22:18 PM
|
It seems similar to their earlier explosion.
But the early analysis seems to indicate that unlike the [link|http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2004-09-11-nkorea-explosion_x.htm|2004 explosion] there was likely a nuclear explosion in this case.
I'm sure we'll know more in a few days. I suspect something will show up on the [link|http://www.fas.org/main/home.jsp|FAS] and at [link|http://www.thebulletin.org/index.htm|The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists] pretty soon.
Cheers,
Scott.
|
Post #269,985
10/10/06 9:43:20 AM
|
North Korea detonation seems odd, UN debates response
[link|http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/asiapcf/10/10/korea.nuclear.test/index.html|CNN] U.S., French and South Korean experts estimated that the power of the explosion, about 240 miles northeast of Pyongyang, was equivalent to about 500 metric tons of TNT, which a senior U.S. intelligence community official said was unusually small for a nuclear blast. Also, the small size of Monday's explosion may make it difficult for geological sensors to pick up radioactive emissions that would effectively confirm a nuclear test -- raising the possibility that the international community may never know for sure whether North Korea actually has a working nuclear bomb. The estimates of the bomb suggest it was very small. There is a lot of talk about uncertainty about it actually being nuke because of the size, but I don't see where that makes much difference. That will mostly be cover for political manuvering. Several analysts feel that if the 500 ton power is right then it probably was a partial explosion. That is, the bomb detonated, but not correctly and thus at far lower power then planned. U.N. Security Council members will resume closed-door discussions Tuesday of U.S.-proposed sanctions against North Korea over its claimed nuclear test.
The resumption of talks at the United Nations comes as America's lead negotiator on North Korean issues urged sanctions that are tough enough to show North Korean leader Kim Jong Il that he made a "very, very costly" mistake if a test was indeed carried out. Bush wants some sort of harsh penalty, and some in his administration have raised the possibility of military action. But outside the US that is generally rejected, and at this point there is little else that can be done to North Korea. The most important politcal consequence is South Korea's anger over this. This will lead to at least a temporary reduction of contacts and trade between the two and may lead to a long term reduction. Jay
|
Post #269,990
10/10/06 9:58:10 AM
|
There were similar disagreements about India and Pakistan.
It ended up not mattering all that much.
[link|http://www.thebulletin.org/article_nn.php?art_ofn=jf02norris|Pakistan's tests didn't reach designed yield], and [link|http://www.thebulletin.org/article_nn.php?art_ofn=ma02norris_038|neither did India's]. However, the Pakistan and Indian tests were larger than the NK test.
We should know more in a few days, but if the explosion does correspond to 500 T, then it'll add more confusion about what to do. Presumably NK would feel pressure to try another test to demonstrate that they really are a nuclear power, but would likely delay it until they felt they needed to be in the news again.
Cheers,
Scott.
|
Post #270,001
10/10/06 3:39:34 PM
10/10/06 3:44:36 PM
|
I'll choose Door #1 too: 'partial yield' - explains lots.
NK {we. think.} is working only with Pu, not U235. No 'separation' efforts (that anyone knows about -- but then, why would they know? -- ain't none of the spooks gots even a peek inside that Ideal-Cheney/Republican State.)
A simple {ie. "gun type"} device cannot be made with Pu, for inescapable physics reasons of pre-ignition cf. The Curve of Binding Energy. Now, it's just barely conceivable that Kim-Il-Egosan might force an expensive Proof of that principle: and this was it == Yup, gun-type, it be no workie.
{Hey, Shrub ain't the Only ideologue that flips coins for all decisions beyond the workings of his sparse supply of little-grey-cells.}
Implosion devices need that aberration-free ~perfectly uniform array of HE of varying er, brissance - to maintain the compression field for many 'shakes' of neutron multiplication. In that direction lies Efficiency (sorta the same simplest goal as Econ, eh?)
Same outcome as any silly gun try re this explosion: implosion lens perfection not achieved, ergo dud-level yield.
Note that Iran groks to fullness, the problem of undertaking Perfection in explosives, via stone knives and bearskins -
Moral?
WATCH the centrifuge folks. Almost anyone could get a gun device to work; insurance there consists of ... simply possessing enough excess material beyond calc. critical mass to ensure ignition, even if a Microsoft-grade design.
Corollary -
IF the NKers do manage world-death-class implosion techno to a fare-thee-Well.. guess how many .pdfs of that design shall escape the Invincible Bush Mouth-Quarantine and all subsequent threats to draft prepubescent Brownies and Boy Scouts, to surround the borders, tie banzai scarfs about pretty little heas and -- then invade.
Tragicomedy.. Love. It.
PS: remember.. we tested the scary/improbable implosion device at Alamogordo.
But dropped the gun-type Uranium bomb first: on Hiroshima
(that one wasted Lots of -235, but then we had built Oak Ridge for the Ages and had tons coming.)
Edited by Ashton
Oct. 10, 2006, 03:44:36 PM EDT
|
Post #270,089
10/11/06 9:57:47 PM
|
Good points. I'd forgotten that.
I should put Rhodes' [link|http://www.amazon.com/Making-Atomic-Bomb-Richard-Rhodes/dp/0684813785|book] on my "read it again" list.
I'm confused by the most recent tests, though. Presumably new nuclear powers want an implosion bomb due to its "efficiency" and compactness - to ease integration on a warhead. But the Indian, Pakistani and North Korean bomb tests have been weaker than expected. This would imply that the (apparently Chinese?) designs these countries are working from aren't very good, the materials aren't very good, or the assembly isn't very good. Which is it?
Should we be comforted that the new nuclear powers apparently can't immediately achieve what the US was able to do 61 years ago? And comforted that the necessary knowledge and/or materials and/or assembly techniques are as important as having the nuclear fuel?
My long-held impression, at least since reading Rhodes, was that the design of an implosion bomb was relatively widely known, the explosives were relatively easily obtained, and that our only protection was the difficulty in making or obtaining the fuel. (Thus, the strong arguments against Breeder Reactors and the proliferation fears.) These recent tests make me wonder if that picture is far too simplistic. I think it also gives me greater appreciation of the skill of the folks on the Manhattan Project.
Cheers,
Scott.
|
Post #270,094
10/12/06 1:35:50 AM
|
It's all much as Ashleigh Brilliant says (here especially)
In the final analysis ... everything else.
Dunno how widely (more to point: accurately) disseminated are the many tiny but crucial details of the implosion bomb. As of '06. Indeed, Hansen's coffee-table tome, US Nuclear Weapons displays photos of complete weapons, including those cute dunce-cap shaped, compact passengers on all those MIRVs {a techno which LLL essentially forced on the world/USSR completely gratuitously == assuring that most-lethal phase of the arms race - a book length dastardly deed, that.}
Unfortunately too, IMhO Hansen's book is entirely Too-fact-filled as regards the vast complexity of the various forms of Supers; the neat diagrams of the stages of the FFF (fission-fusion-fission) process -- I deem a real disservice to living things..
Because always: what every jackal or psychotic Really wants is the unlimited yield of a Super. Never mind how bulky ... the now insatiable demand for Stuff guarantees the continuing free-flow of all those container$. No matter what.
While most of those supercomputer hours were about improving, shrinking etc. I don't think there is anything easy about the implosion lens. Still, merely having a good hint of the idea of laminating various HE substances - is indeed a start. But remember how crude were the first studies at Los Alamos: trying merely (via "one fewer dimension") to neatly crimp test piece of metal pipe. (That was Kistiakowski's enigma.)
Hard to do a dry run on implosion, when everything is first compressed then flung apart - no?
(There was constructed a massive cylinder similar to a diver's decompression tank, hauled to Alamogordo - in the hope that it might serve to preserve the Pu, in event of a dud. It wasn't used; why eschewed? ... never heard.)
Another magical facet is that of the neutron-source initiator, usually a Polonium/Beryllium mixture == a small ball at exact center of the barely-subcritical assembly.
At least with the Pu, you can chemically test for purity - but there are aspects to the reactor configuration which -even there - can favor isotope mixes which are less contributory to an early fizzle. That's a Lot of reactor as well as Pu testing lore .. you can't Google for. Another + for meat.
Finally with the -235 gun-type: not a suitable trigger for making your own Super, later. And if you rush; if you try a lower than optimum %235 ... etc. Then there are the (free) DU or -238 'tampers' to ponder - nothing to lose, tossing in some scrap to accelerate the inferno. Especially if it doesn't need to be miniaturized for Efficiency.
Splendid physics for a most unsplendid coterie of mass assassins, no?
May the experimenters join Louis Slotin, the crew of the [link|http://www.radiationworks.com/sl1reactor.htm| SL-1], pinned to the roof by their control rods, et al -- reel soon now.
Areas of comfort? - well, I'm not aware of any info on the size/deliverability of the Pakistani, Indian devices; we can be sure though, that the (400+?) Israeli specimens are indeed deliverable. Still.. guess who's apt to be the first recipient of incoming?
Oh wait - Muricans, just 5 years after all that empathy -- may well be on the exact shit-list level of Jews, now. (I can't guess either.)
Maybe we'll all luck in, just by a zealot's sloth in the pesky details? :-)
Bloody likelier than that that we'll all wise up.
|
Post #269,996
10/10/06 11:43:35 AM
|
Not everybody in S. Korea is so upset about this.
I was talking to a Korean friend of mine, and he said that there are those in S. Korea who believe that eventually the two countries will be reunited, and that the reunited Korea will then have nukes. Some people look at that as a good thing, with China being so close to the border and having a history of invading and swallowing neighbors. *cough*Tibet*cough*
Odoru aho ni miru aho!
Onaji aho nara odoranya son son!
|
