DomKen
Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Phydeaux
quote:
ORIGINAL: DomKen
quote:
ORIGINAL: Moonhead
Quite. It's so trivial that nobody's managed it without a government behind them for over half a century.
For a long time it was probably beyond the capabilities of just anyone, The timing of the explosives that combine the fissionable material has to be extremely precise. Also enrichment of the uranium prior to the last few years was a large and technically complicated operation. Now there are laser based methods that could potentially be done on much smaller scales with much less chance of being detected.
Amazing. You're an expert on virtually everything DomKen.
Here's a few errors for you:
a). To make a nuke doesnt' require immensely precise timing. In point of fact one of the original bombs was made by firing a slug of uranium at another slug. Super precise timing is required to increase yields.
B). But even if super precise timing were required plain, ordinary flash cubes provide sufficiently precise timing.
c). You don't need plutonium to make a nuke. It can be done with uranium. Uranium isn't rare, its actually quite abundant.
D). Jordan is certainly in the middle east and has huge quantities of uranium. Iran, Pakistan, India also have significant quantities.
Regarding your reductio argument that we shouldn't attempt to regulate nuclear weapons.
The founding fathers recognized a difference between pointed hats and guns. Ie., it didn't say you can't regulate hats - its said the rights of citizens of keeping and bearing arms shall not be abridged. Washington was intimately familiar with field artillery. I suspect that if they wanted to allow field artillery the constitution would have said the rights of citizens to own field artillery shall not be abridged.
Arms require the conviction of person bearing. It is more intimate than artillery - it requires the certainty and the intent of the wielder.
I never said plutonium was required. Someone else made that claim.
AS I understand it the firing two slugs at each other method of triggering was abandoned because it didn't work reliable. The spherical shell of pieces of uranium imploded with precisely timed charges is the preferred method because, as long as you an get the timing right, it is very reliable.
Jordan's uranium deposits are not surface deposits according to my research and are not yet commercially exploited. They are also, it is repeatedly stated the only ME nation with any identified deposits. You don't think if Bush and his scum thought Jordan, which was very friendly with Iraq, would make a better place to scare people with talk of loose uranium.
As to enriching uranium, I already said the old methods that involved UF6 were impractical for the budding home bomb maker. However new techniques have been developed and other methods are in the development right now that avoid that issue. There are even older methods that dont't mess around with UF6. We did it in WW2 with a device called a calutron.
|
RE: A few questions about gun control... - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread