.:SonicBomb:.
    Login or Register
::  Home  ::  Videos  ::  Your Account  ::  Forums  ::  RSS Feed  ::
 
 
::Content::
  • Atomic
  • - Aviation
    - Aircraft
    - Military
    - Explosions
    - WW2
    - Various
    - Hi-Def
    - Photos

    - Wallpaper

    - Nuclear

    - WWI

    - WWII

    Advertisment
    Search
    Custom Search
    User Info
    Welcome, Anonymous
    Nickname
    Password
    (Register)
    Membership:
    Latest: Russ81
    New Today: 0
    New Yesterday: 0
    Overall: 710

    People Online:
    Visitors: 0
    Members: 0
    Total: 0

    sonicbomb.com :: View topic - A nearly-unlimited H-Bomb yield is possible ?

    Forum FAQ Search Memberlist Usergroups Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in

    View next topic
    View previous topic
    Post new topic Reply to topic  sonicbomb.com Forum Index » General Atomic Chat
    Author Message
    Teller25
    Cherokee (3.8 mt)


    Joined: Aug 22, 2007
    Posts: 254
    Location: Spain

    PostPosted: Mon Aug 25, 2008 6:39 am Reply with quote

    Graviton wrote:

    There is no way to confirm this web consumption fodder, that these components shown in the open panel have anything whatsoever to do with stages of fission or fusion.


    It is the most powerful hydrogen bomb ever constructed by mankind, but without the design at hand I guess that in the middle of it there are several beverage shakers.




    and this is obviously Not the primary,




    it is probably an old Soviet new Years ball.



    It is probably not even a weapon at all.
    View user's profile Send private message
    raigainousa
    King (500 kt)


    Joined: Sep 28, 2007
    Posts: 89

    PostPosted: Mon Aug 25, 2008 10:19 am Reply with quote

    Graviton wrote:
    Nuke MILF? MILF nooky isn't MILF nuking, whatever that is.

    Not being personal about this, but I don't find this article listed by Teller as informed or based upon any sort of real, even remotely confirmable information.

    After discussions with a friend of mine in Moscow who is an expert professor in nuclear fusion engineering there, he told me that Soviets never gave out any information about their weapons designs. I asked for his assistance in helping me find nuclear weapons programs information in Russian language, which he did.

    There is no way to confirm this web consumption fodder, that these components shown in the open panel have anything whatsoever to do with stages of fission or fusion.


    To be fair, when I saw the monkey pic, I thought youre a monkey.

    So all "designs" released about Soviet weapons are all "guessing"?

    Quote:
    Ok, I get it. He wants to have sex with the bomb. That wasn't too hard.


    Its hard. Where can I get the bomb??? Wink Rolling Eyes
    View user's profile Send private message
    4mrmissileer
    Baker (23 kt)


    Joined: Sep 16, 2009
    Posts: 33
    Location: US - Catskill Mountains

    PostPosted: Wed Sep 16, 2009 2:11 am Reply with quote

    This is only a wild theory of mine, so please everybody, don't get your knickers in a twist....
    We all know that there is a relationship between mass and energy- Einstein taught us that a long time ago.
    Suppose, that just like there is an absolute zero for temperature , there is an absolute mass that can occupy a given space...otherwise, we wind up with anomolies like black holes... pretty much the standard view in astrophysics..... pack it too tight and gravity/space/time go ballistic....
    Since mass and energy are related, doesn't it follow that there is an absolute amount of energy that can occupy a given space?
    What if we exceed that amount of energy?
    (pause while I put on my Hawkings hat and pretend to be really smart)....
    Suppose we end up breaching time itself? Is that not related to C in Einsteins theories? The speed of light is the speed of time?
    Tunguska, Siberia 1909- never explained.....
    Suppose Tsar Bomba performed at its designed yield and space/time could not contain the blast? If there is an astronomy expert out there, you could probably roll back the clock and see if the spacial relationships match. Could we have actually blown up things in our past?
    Meteor Crater in Arizona is another curiosity..... 40,000 years old and so well preserved?
    There are others......
    You can bet that any physicists involved in tests are not going to say that they do not know where the rest of their energy budget went. They are going to tell you either that the test was way bigger than they expected (castle bravo) or designed to yield half of what it could have (tsar bomba).....why? because of the "pepper factor" (word changed to keep it clean- adults, you know the point).
    It is very interesting that all nations that are party to the non-proliferation treaty backed off on their weapons development and/or tests after they breached the multi-megaton wall (if not sooner) ... when else in our history has a nation not pushed to make its weapons more destructive? The US and Russia to this day compete over "The Mother/Father of all Bombs" trying to get the most bang for the buck out of FAE's, for example.
    Given the current state of the art in explosives, metallurgy, and high energy physics, it is difficult to believe that a Gigaton class device is out of reach. My (personal) conclusion is that we found that exceeding a certain limit can result in unimaginable consequences, and that we were exceedingly lucky to have hit the brakes when we did.
    Interestingly, Einstein pretty much proved that nothing can travel to the future...it is the past that I am not so sure about.
    And NO, I do NOT wear a tinfoil hat! This is a THEORY open for discussion and not a forum for personal attacks!
    After this....I need an aspirin....
    OK- I opened this back up to edit, having more thoughts on the subject (oops, I almost said "matter".. a physics joke...)...anyway...
    According to what most of us already know about Einstein's Theory of Relativity, when traveling in space, the faster you go, the greater your mass becomes, and the slower everything around you transpires ( relative time slows down). In theory, as you travel closer to lightspeed, your mass approaches infinity, as does the energy that is required to propel you.
    Now, we all know Einstein says E=MC2. What if E happens to EXCEED MC2? Einsteins Theory says it cannot.... and I believe he is right! We assume that the theory is based on C being a constant.... not E or M... If E pushes the "bubble", and M is already approaching infinity, C must compensate to balance the equation, meaning that time slows and may even go backwards!
    Let's simplify- if you release an extrodinary amount of energy within a given mass, in order to balance the equation C2 must reduce. Somebody, somewhere must be able to figure out what happens if I release 100 megatons of energy (the predicted full yield of Tsar Bomba) into a 25 cubic foot space (my guess at the size) in ten nanoseconds, where (and when) that amount of energy will dissipate.
    My head hurts.......
    View user's profile Send private message
    sonicbomb
    Forum Admin
    Forum Admin


    Joined: Aug 06, 2006
    Posts: 1723
    Location: UK

    PostPosted: Wed Sep 16, 2009 4:15 am Reply with quote

    Some pretty far out ideas, welcome to forum by the way.

    Quote:
    It is very interesting that all nations that are party to the non-proliferation treaty backed off on their weapons development and/or tests after they breached the multi-megaton wall (if not sooner) ... when else in our history has a nation not pushed to make its weapons more destructive?


    Any weapon in the multi-megaton range is arguably of little actual military value, a shower of kiloton range warheads is far more effective (eg. MIRVs). Also the collateral damage and fallout from tests as large as the Tsar cannot be under estimated, and were considered a little bonkers even by the cold war standards of the day.

    I'm sure there was a discussion here in the past about the theoretical maximum yield for a thermonuclear device, but I cannot remember the conclusion. But by using multiple stages and if portability was not a factor, then gigaton yields are definitely possible.
    View user's profile Send private message
    4mrmissileer
    Baker (23 kt)


    Joined: Sep 16, 2009
    Posts: 33
    Location: US - Catskill Mountains

    PostPosted: Wed Sep 16, 2009 5:20 pm Reply with quote

    Thanks for the "Welcome Aboard"!
    Point well taken on MIRVing. The 350-400KT range seems to be a popular size. Probably the best use for a multi-megaton weapon would be in a FOBS for max EMP effect. Putting practicality aside, my understanding is that as long as the configuration is correct, you can "burn" as much lithium deuteride as you want, like the USSR did with Tsar Bomba. It would be horrifying to find what such a beast would do with a tertiary stage.
    View user's profile Send private message
    Lorne
    Fizzle
    Fizzle


    Joined: Oct 29, 2009
    Posts: 3

    PostPosted: Thu Oct 29, 2009 9:34 pm Reply with quote

    I can haz 1 gigaton? Laughing

    Wait... that gives me an idea, 2 minutes and I'll be back with a lolcat.
    View user's profile Send private message
    Ballistic
    Priscilla (37 kt)


    Joined: Mar 21, 2010
    Posts: 41
    Location: Winterthur, Switzerland

    PostPosted: Thu Mar 25, 2010 1:21 am Reply with quote

    The problem is certainly not to produce a gigaton device. Getting it to the enemy is! A 250 ton device in a An-225 sized plane will certainly cause some attention. Moreover the destruction caused by a 5 megaton bomb is considerably less than the combined destruction caused by ten 500 kiloton bombs. that much to the question why th multi megaton bombs are out of service.

    To the question of energy per space:
    Even if you whould release the energy of the tsar bomb in a cubic centimeter you whould end up with a trilion times less energy than the mass of the same volume of a neutron star contains. That much to the scale.
    If you release much energy in a certain mass, the only observable effect ist, that all the matter breaks down into smaller and smaller bits. For example the highest of the feelings by now is the Quark - Gluon plasma produced in particle accelerators. What happens to that plasma is simple: it just radiates out the energy and disperses it until it's equally distributed throughout space.

    Furthermore in your math where you think that C square whould have to compensate for more energy induced, you are mistaken. The increase in mass (represented by M) is very much sufficient to compensate for more energy. That's because any given positive constant greater than zero multiplied with infinity gives infinity.
    However there is a theory that there exist some particles that move faster than light and therefor travel back in time. But this is only a hypothesis.

    If you have any more questions feel free to ask Cool
    View user's profile Send private message
    DoYouKnow
    Grable (15 kt)


    Joined: Jun 03, 2010
    Posts: 24

    PostPosted: Thu Jun 10, 2010 8:03 pm Reply with quote

    Hi,

    Based on the known tendency for the power of the next stage to be able to be 50x the power of the previous stage, I did some calculations with how long the fusion reactions would be confined within the bomb. you would essentially have an increasing confinement time with stage, if the radius of the fuel capsule increased. This means that, the fusion reactions will not blow the bomb apart as you reach a certain number of stages.


    Unless of course, there are multiple fuel capsules being used for a stage. Then the confinement time would only be determined by the radius of each capsule. However, if you keep adding capsules you would have to control the amount of U-238 in the tampers or you would cause lots of fallout.

    A simple relationship between the number of capsules (n), the confinement time (tau), and the radius ratio between the current and previous stage is given by:

    tau <scales like> 7.07*(1/sqrt(n)), where 7.07 is the radius ratio between stages.

    The radius ratio is taken by taking the square root of the volume ratio (the next stage can be 50x more powerful than the previous stage).

    sqrt(50) = ~7.07


    Derivation:

    c_s = sqrt((2*k_B*T) / m_f)
    (Calculation for pure deuterium at 33.3g/cm^3)
    tau = R_f / c_s = sqrt(V / (n*pi*h_f)) / c_s = sqrt(V/(n*pi*h_f))/167332005
    = 7.07*sqrt(V_(stage-1) / n*pi*h_f) / 167332005

    There seems to be an equilbrium of sorts around 1/sqrt(50) = 0.14, where 1/x = 50*x, x = ~0.14. This the value for which having x stages cancels out the effect of having x capsules. For higher values, the number of capsules will generally have to be larger than the number of stages to maintain a constant duration of confinement.

    DoYouKnow


    Last edited by DoYouKnow on Fri Jun 18, 2010 4:56 am; edited 3 times in total
    View user's profile Send private message
    Graviton
    Yankee (13.5 mt)


    Joined: Sep 03, 2006
    Posts: 1567
    Location: USA

    PostPosted: Fri Jun 11, 2010 8:06 pm Reply with quote

    raigainousa wrote:
    Graviton wrote:
    Nuke MILF? MILF nooky isn't MILF nuking, whatever that is.

    Not being personal about this, but I don't find this article listed by Teller as informed or based upon any sort of real, even remotely confirmable information.

    After discussions with a friend of mine in Moscow who is an expert professor in nuclear fusion engineering there, he told me that Soviets never gave out any information about their weapons designs. I asked for his assistance in helping me find nuclear weapons programs information in Russian language, which he did.

    There is no way to confirm this web consumption fodder, that these components shown in the open panel have anything whatsoever to do with stages of fission or fusion.


    To be fair, when I saw the monkey pic, I thought youre a monkey.

    So all "designs" released about Soviet weapons are all "guessing"?

    Quote:
    Ok, I get it. He wants to have sex with the bomb. That wasn't too hard.


    Its hard. Where can I get the bomb??? Wink Rolling Eyes


    I have to laugh at your lack of context to the monkey graphic, in your trying to put the monkey on me.

    No official western source would ever publish details of their weapons designs. The rest is speculation.

    Yes, there are reasons for no official source releasing information about this. 1) Security. 2) Risk of jail if caught.

    Some people try to think they have even basic competency in such an advanced topic as nuclear weapons designs, without ever having any sort of advanced nuclear and/or explosives engineering, or advanced (= graduate level and above) physics training. People spend years learning these design principles, to understand the very specialized issues.

    Do dilettantes tickle themselves somehow to think they possess some kind of dangerous knowledge? Laughing Do they have the steep knowledge to safely handle the highly toxic and dangerous materials involved? Do they have the vast sums of money and infrastructure to advance a rogue project?

    An example of flagrant incompetency in public/amateur proposals is the concept of 3-stage container compression geometry (conventional/fission/fusion), which all designs I have seen on the web magnificently fail to address. I won't add to this with details, since I don't want to fuel a new debate of people assuming they really grasp the material where moments of time called knocks (ten millionths of a second) are critical to engineering successful detonations.

    Recall that the genius Soviet nuclear bomb project director Kurchatov had to spend immense amounts of time studying stolen documents provided through Manhatten Project traitor spies, just to find basic understandings of primitive nuclear weapon principles, despite his highly advanced education.

    Oppenheimer also didn't build the first, crudely designed nuclear bombs. The combined talents of thousands of specialists working together pulled it off.
    View user's profile Send private message
    DoYouKnow
    Grable (15 kt)


    Joined: Jun 03, 2010
    Posts: 24

    PostPosted: Tue Jun 15, 2010 4:26 am Reply with quote

    I don't discount the complexity of the hydrogen and atomic bomb program.

    However, the government has released large amounts of data through scholarly channels.

    Some of this information, has led to in the book, Fisica dos Explosivos Nucleares by Barroso, to come up with a detailed model of several working h-bomb types based on information leaked through the press or released through scholarly channels - including a model of the fusion stage of a Ulam-Teller thermonuclear bomb.

    Another book that mentions h-bomb physics is the book "Inertial Confinement Fusion" by Atzeni. Inertial confinement fusion research goes waayyy back, all the way to the h-bomb program. It is believed based on these pieces of information that the h-bomb uses inertial confinement fusion to compress the fusion fuel.

    I'm also not discounting your fission-fusion-fission ideas, which are entirely true, but there's a lot more to the bomb than fission-fusion-fission.

    From the book by Atzeni:

    "According to Teller
    (2001, p. 311 ff.), ignition in optically thick
    fuel is an essential aspect of the Teller–Ulam
    design of thermonuclear weapons (compare
    Foreword of this book, also Rhodes 1995,
    chs 23 and 24), another aspect of the
    Teller–Ulam design is that radiation implosion
    is used to compress the fuel and to achieve
    equilibrium ignition."

    Teller, 2001 is his book "Memoirs"


    radiation implosion is discussed extensively in this book (Inertial Fusion), which is not the only known mechanism for radiation implosion, but the only one known to work based on basic physics (compare the miniscule momentum of x-ray photons with the energy of the space shuttle).

    For information on radiation implosion, the main mechanism behind implosion of the secondary, visit, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiation_implosion

    Khronos[/url]


    Last edited by DoYouKnow on Tue Aug 03, 2010 11:03 pm; edited 1 time in total
    View user's profile Send private message
    4mrmissileer
    Baker (23 kt)


    Joined: Sep 16, 2009
    Posts: 33
    Location: US - Catskill Mountains

    PostPosted: Mon Jun 21, 2010 11:10 am Reply with quote

    It is doubtful any one person could grasp all the dynamics involved in making a multistage weapon work....each facet is incredibly complex by itself, and it must take a huge number of PhD's and computer time to crank out a functional design. Take into account that design information is compartmented also.
    Even our most celebrated physicists could not make a go of it on their own. I envision them more as "big picture" people than "nuts and bolts" types.

    Most of us can grasp the concept- just as we can understand the concept of an internal combustion engine..... but knowing enough to build something even as "rudimentary" as an engine and have it operate reliably is another story. Wait......what were we talking about??? Embarassed
    View user's profile Send private message
    DoYouKnow
    Grable (15 kt)


    Joined: Jun 03, 2010
    Posts: 24

    PostPosted: Mon Jun 21, 2010 2:46 pm Reply with quote

    The biggest impediment though IMO, is getting the fine details right with lots of experimentation, filling in the gaps that classification have alotted.

    The north koreans for example, have no problem making plutonium. However, their yields are small, so they have design issues due to lack of data.

    Khronos
    View user's profile Send private message
    4mrmissileer
    Baker (23 kt)


    Joined: Sep 16, 2009
    Posts: 33
    Location: US - Catskill Mountains

    PostPosted: Sat Jul 17, 2010 7:32 am Reply with quote

    Ballistic wrote:

    To the question of energy per space:
    Even if you whould release the energy of the tsar bomb in a cubic centimeter you whould end up with a trilion times less energy than the mass of the same volume of a neutron star contains. That much to the scale.
    If you release much energy in a certain mass, the only observable effect ist, that all the matter breaks down into smaller and smaller bits. For example the highest of the feelings by now is the Quark - Gluon plasma produced in particle accelerators. What happens to that plasma is simple: it just radiates out the energy and disperses it until it's equally distributed throughout space.

    Furthermore in your math where you think that C square whould have to compensate for more energy induced, you are mistaken. The increase in mass (represented by M) is very much sufficient to compensate for more energy. That's because any given positive constant greater than zero multiplied with infinity gives infinity.
    However there is a theory that there exist some particles that move faster than light and therefor travel back in time. But this is only a hypothesis.

    If you have any more questions feel free to ask Cool


    I dunno, Ballistic- I asked somebody to let me borrow their neutron star so I could verify, but I seem to have lost it before he gave it to me... by about 200 million years or so..... maybe.

    I dont follow your math (always a weak subject for me anyway).... I never said infinity- I said approaching infinity- an important distinction.... I still contend that a given amount of space can only contain a given maximum amount of mass and/or energy , and that we at present know very little, if anything at all about what would happen if those absolutes were closely approached or breached. I do not begin to pretend that I have the faintest clue as to what those numbers may be.
    View user's profile Send private message
    DoYouKnow
    Grable (15 kt)


    Joined: Jun 03, 2010
    Posts: 24

    PostPosted: Wed Sep 01, 2010 5:58 am Reply with quote

    You can supposedly make a weapon of any yield.



    "It is more accurate to think of the detonation of a thermonuclear weapon as a series of mutually reinforcing fission-fusion-fission reactions, begun with chemical high explosives in a primary, and continued in secondary and, in some cases, tertiary stages via radiation coupling." - http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/nukes/readings/appendixb.html

    according to carey sublette, the quaternary would be 10-100x as powerful as the tertiary, and a quinary, 10-100x as powerful as a quaternary, and a senary 10-100x as powerful as a quinary. A weapon this large, according to Edward Teller, wouldn't cause any more blast damage on the ground, except for a larger mass of atmosphere that would be expelled and a higher velocity at which that mass of atmosphere is expelled from the Earth.

    It is the job of radiation coupling to evenly surround the fuel capsule with radiation using radiation from the previous stage, so that an implosion that's devoid of instabilities would result.

    According to Borroso, who is the author of a book on "Fisica dos Explosivos Nucleares", written in Portugeuse, one way of causing a delay so that there is even compression is with layered foam of different pourosity/density, so that the radiation channel becomes transparent in a way that ensures the surface of the fuel capsule is heated and ablates at roughly the same time across its surface. He talks about using an optical lens "polystyrene" instead of a foamed polystyrene in a crescent shaped blob coated on the fuel capsule, removing delay of radiation in the farther-from-primary part of the secondary (in this case it was spherical, but I can't see why it can't be used for other shapes - such as a cylinder.)

    Another opinion, in the book by Friedwardt Winterberg on Inertial Confinement, is thermonuclear staging would occur with a primary (stage 0) igniting a secondary in stage 1, and a larger radiation case enclosing the primary, secondary, and tertiary for stage 2. He says,

    "There are two ways which promise arbitrarily large gains. The first is by a staged Teller-Ulam configuration. As shown in Fig. 7.7, a fission bomb, which is the zeroth stage, ignites the first stage thermonuclear explosive in cavity 1, with the energy for ignition delivered by the zeroth stage. By blasting a hole through the wall of cavity 1, the radiation from the first thermonuclear stage enters cavity 2, where it ignites the larger second stage thermonuclear explosive. The burn of the second stage will likewise blast a hole through the wall of cavity 2, with the radiation from the second stage entering cavity 3, igniting the still larger third stage, and so on."



    In this book, he also gives an iterative relationship for the sizes of the stages (7.24 - using a gain formula).

    Here is the output of a program with the calculations using this relationship (numbers in tons of tnt):

    Maximum Yield of stage 0.0 : 20000.0
    Total yield up to this point (stage 0.0) : 20000.0
    Maximum Yield of stage 1.0 : 8000000.0
    Total yield up to this point (stage 1.0) : 8020000.0
    Maximum Yield of stage 2.0 : 6.4E10
    Total yield up to this point (stage 2.0) : 6.400802E10
    Maximum Yield of stage 3.0 : 4.5794672179195696E16
    Total yield up to this point (stage 3.0) : 4.5794736187215696E16
    Maximum Yield of stage 4.0 : 2.7718353248336327E25
    Total yield up to this point (stage 4.0) : 2.7718353294131063E25
    Maximum Yield of stage 5.0 : 4.127586005352512E38
    Total yield up to this point (stage 5.0) : 4.1275860053527895E38
    Maximum Yield of stage 6.0 : 2.3718607613625353E58
    Total yield up to this point (stage 6.0) : 2.3718607613625353E58
    Maximum Yield of stage 7.0 : 1.033186633898522E88
    Total yield up to this point (stage 7.0) : 1.033186633898522E88
    Maximum Yield of stage 8.0 : 2.970387866783658E132
    Total yield up to this point (stage 8.0) : 2.970387866783658E132
    Maximum Yield of stage 9.0 : 1.4479872469830768E199
    Total yield up to this point (stage 9.0) : 1.4479872469830768E199
    Maximum Yield of stage 10.0 : 1.558447220742934E299
    Total yield up to this point (stage 10.0) : 1.558447220742934E299

    4 thermonuclear stages would be sufficient for blowing up the Earth by exceeding Earth's gravitational binding energy (if the nuke were placed at Earth's center.)

    5 would be enough so that the energy released by itself (if it were concentrated) could form a black hole.




    Sources:

    The Release of Thermonuclear Energy by Inertial Confinement: Ways Towards Ignition, Friedwardt Winterberg
    http://www.amazon.com/Release-Thermonuclear-Energy-Inertial-Confinement/dp/9814295906/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1283975800&sr=8-1-spell

    FISICA DOS EXPLOSIVOS NUCLEARES, A By DALTON ELLERY G. BARROSO: http://books.google.com/books?id=6bE6781f1Q8C&printsec=frontcover&dq=Fisica+dos+explosivos+nucleares&hl=en&ei=pOqHTK_6I8GnnQf6jtyBDA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCgQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false



    DoYouKnow[/img]
    View user's profile Send private message
    Display posts from previous:   
    Post new topic Reply to topic

    View next topic
    View previous topic
    You cannot post new topics in this forum
    You cannot reply to topics in this forum
    You cannot edit your posts in this forum
    You cannot delete your posts in this forum
    You cannot vote in polls in this forum


    Powered by phpBB © 2001 phpBB Group
    | Privacy Policy || Contact us |

    Page Generation: 0.12 Seconds
    :: In the future we will all be robots ::