Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist - Part-3

[Kanson]

^^^ bhai saab, If GoI dont have any confidence in a particular agency who are incompetent and anti-national in fudging the test which is of national importance, they why to hand over such an important task of weapon building to them and ask someother agency to cross verify them.

GoI system is based on checks and balances. It is like saying you have politicians running the country but want judiciary to look into it too, why?

Checks and balances are essential for any system design -- all are human and capable of failure. Trusting some one to be 400% correct is not the way systems are made.

Cross check even if correct.

This is not about love and relationship where the magical trust word keeps coming up.

Thats why they had a panel headed by Raja Ramana to take a overall view after the POK-2.

[Sanku]

Sorry Sanku,

You have written a long post but you have not specifically tackled with Sibal wrote.

What RC has asserted or not asserted is not moot.

At the risk of sounding repetitive let me re-quote Sibal:

(1) Would it entail sharing sensitive information with experts of high public standing in diverse test related disciplines, after they have been sworn to secrecy? (2) Would any government concede an outside review and indirectly acknowledge it had mishandled a vital matter until now? (3) But would such a review necessarily efface the damage already done?

Actually I did, you missed in probably because the post was too verbose in making its point.

I said I disagree with the basic premise of "something major to hide" syndrome gripping us -- some meaningful data HAS to be given out to public and some more indepth data to a high power panel (such a IIT profs, retired Mil persons, retired BARC and DAE etc etc) who can then speak on behalf of nation

Anyway once more
I just gave one example of simple shaft examination by IIT folks.

Further there are three diverse statements there, further there is no correlation between the three either --
1. Yes it might, that's not a big deal, it can be handled. Some things can also be done without too many secrets being divulged. (pure yield calculation using soil mechanics and accelerometers say)

2. I dont see whats the point, is Sibal saying that even if Govt has goofed up it wont admit (even internally) and thats ok? I am sorry that is not acceptable. If the govt has goofed up it must correct that situation and not perpetuate myths.

3. The review will efface some of the damage done and more importantly prevent more of it from happening if (a) GoI stops its recalcitrance immediately (2) Stops its vilification campaign and deal with senior GoI members with respect due to them and cooptes them into the system.

Sibal is erring in thinking of it as a "past event" to be handled. It is the bedrock of Indian future, without it being solid all we are going to see if further grief in future.

Look at it as foundation secure it for future.

----

(Please also stop bringing in straw men like telling China what Kt is aimed at it. No one brought it up)

[Sanku]

Thats why they had a panel headed by Raja Ramana to take a overall view after the POK-2.

I think the composition of the panel and subsequent issues are discussed already.

That was a badly flawed panel on many counts.

[amit]

There are so many controversies surrounding KS statements. To the NDTV intreview posted by Csharma in the previous version of this thread, he says, intially he thought the test is Ok but to the Outlook he makes a darring statement saying from the moment after he knew the test is a fizzle. If we go back to check the photos where the four top leaders of POK2 posing for the press, KS raised a victory sign to the press. If he knew in the first place that the test is a failure as he mentions in the Outlook interview then the question is why showed a victory sign and gives the impression that all these are mere drama.

Who knows, may be both MKN and KS are playing the game. Both are spooks and both know the trade.

Kanson Saab,

You raise a very good point. I also remember the picture posted in the first avatar of this thread where KS is the only one with the V-sign. Yes indeed how does that gel with the Outlook interview.

Just to add he claimed that someone from BARC told him that the radiochem analysis of POK1 was fudged (the KS-Parthasarthy article if I'm not mistaken). He used that to draw an analogy to conclude the POK2 radio chem could also be fudged (if I'm not mistaken). The point is if he knew of the fudging in POK1 did he bring this to the notice of higher authorities?

You are right I feel KS the spook is as much active as KS the scientist is in all this drama baazi

[Raja Ram]

Yikes, just returned to BR forum, I can still see the "debate" cotinuing.

Just saw that Arun_S has quit and also noticed that kgoan is back. Sad to see some of my predictions have come true. The "debate" reached its logical conclusion when knowledgable and reasonable men have fallen out.

Perhaps now would be a good time to revisit the earlier ramble of mine and see how the events are panning out? Sometimes it really does pay to heed the odd ramble from ordinary people too. I am not gloating or anything here. Just pointing out the need for taking a step back and looking at the big picture ignoring the initial burst of natural reactions.

Hope those who left will come back once again and some here (gurus included) learn the need for restraint too.

More on the topic of discussion later. To my old friend kgoan, welcome sir. To my respected friend Arun_S, sir please reconsider.

[NRao]

The Kanwal Sibal and RR article/s are GoI-speak.

IF Santhanam decides to come back after his three week hibernation, I just hope he has a better presentation than the ones he has made so far.

Kanwal Sibal has been pretty vocal in his opposition to many of the UPA govt's foreign policies including nuclear deal, Indo-US relations etc. I agree with amit that we shouldn't shoot the messenger. In this case, by his many articles since his retirement, he has shown that he doesn't have any love for the UPA govt and I feel he is pretty objective on the foreign policy issues.

I have no problem with rebuttal of ANY sorts. The more the better. HOWEVER, the topic is such that one can debate or rebut only so much. Even Santhanam can only say so much in public. This debate, IMHO, cannot have sides - in public the GoI stands. (This is a strategic matter - which is why it stands. Technical issues have been debated as much as they can in public. Serious issues should never see the light of day. This is not a topic like should India pay more for the Russian ship and the like.)

On Sibal being objective - I am sure you know far more than me. However, on THIS topic there is only GoI, no UPA or NDA. And, fortunately for me both NDA and UPA are in the same mess - both say India has TN deterrence, nothing less. So, in this particular case, Sibal's position does not side with one or the other. And, on strategic issues it should not.

Having said all that I do have a grip with Santhanam. I still feel this is the worst time that he came out (he IMHO had ample time and very good position to make his case and get results) and certainly he could not have made a bigger mess about what he was trying to achieve. Which is why "better presentation".

But, let us see, he still has a chance or two to make his case.

[Kanson]

Thats why they had a panel headed by Raja Ramana to take a overall view after the POK-2.

I think the composition of the panel and subsequent issues are discussed already.

That was a badly flawed panel on many counts.

Boss, Raja Ramanna is not some ordinary guy.

[NRao]

If we go back to check the photos where the four top leaders of POK2 posing for the press, KS raised a victory sign to the press. If he knew in the first place that the test is a failure as he mentions in the Outlook interview then the question is why showed a victory sign and gives the impression that all these are mere drama.

That he has covered when he said that he/DRDO gave a classified report to the then GoI about the failure.

So, that is fine, he just went along in public. I really do not see anything wrong with that particular incidence. Could have been handled differently, but not particular harm done IMHO.

[Kanson]

Kanson Saab,

You raise a very good point. I also remember the picture posted in the first avatar of this thread where KS is the only one with the V-sign. Yes indeed how does that gel with the Outlook interview.
...
You are right I feel KS the spook is as much active as KS the scientist is in all this drama baazi

It will be more clearer if KS drops the next "shoe". If was waiting in expectation for the next shoe, in the mean time, suprisingly here, the whole shoe making factory is getting evacuated, Ooops.

[NRao]

I think the composition of the panel and subsequent issues are discussed already.

That was a badly flawed panel on many counts.

Boss, Raja Ramanna is not some ordinary guy.

Sanku,

What would, in your opinion, constitute a "good" panel?

[amit]

1. Yes it might, that's not a big deal, it can be handled. Some things can also be done without too many secrets being divulged. (pure yield calculation using soil mechanics and accelerometers say)

You need to be a bit more specific. I'm not sorry but I'm not an engineer like you but can you explain how you can use accelerometers now to measure the effectiveness or otherwise of an explosion that took place 11 years ago?

2. I dont see whats the point, is Sibal saying that even if Govt has goofed up it wont admit (even internally) and thats ok? I am sorry that is not acceptable. If the govt has goofed up it must correct that situation and not perpetuate myths.

Assume for the moment that BARC (do note there's a huge difference between BARC and Govt and the two cannot be used interchangeably here) did indeed goof up. Now do can you with certainty say that the Govt (again note the usage here) has not had BARC admit "internally" that it (BARC) has indeed "goofed up"? And corrective steps have not been taken? These sort of information would not be even available to senior retired scientists. Do note as a I mentioned earlier the Indian nuclear weapons programme is one of the most secretive in the world.

3. The review will efface some of the damage done and more importantly prevent more of it from happening if (a) GoI stops its recalcitrance immediately (2) Stops its vilification campaign and deal with senior GoI members with respect due to them and cooptes them into the system.

Again you are making the cardinal mistake of freely interchanging BARC with Govt. If BARC did indeed goof up the duty of any responsible government would be to scramble to manage the fall out and ensure that it did not affect the deterrence posture. And the government recalcitrance - as you say it (I don't agree with this description) - could more due to the harm to our deterrence posture that KS' revelation have wrought rather than whether he's right or wrong about the "fizzle" claim.

And this, sadly to say, brings me to the conclusion that you are missing the essence of what Sibal is trying to say. He is not defending the sizzle camp. Neither is he bad mouthing the fizzle camp for its fizzle claim. He is saying that conducting this debate in public is harming India's nuclear deterrence posture.

I think that's the essence of this whole thing. There are things which cannot be discussed via vitriolic DDM like Express Buzz for example. It does more harm than good.

JMT

Added later:

(Please also stop bringing in straw men like telling China what Kt is aimed at it. No one brought it up)

How can you call this a Strawman when the entire Deterrence thread, in which you are an active participant, is discussing how India can deter China with 20kt chotus? You think somehow the Chinese strategists missed this assertion by KS?

[Philip]

The "Test" contd.

Many years later a controversy rocks the game as allegations surface thanks to whistle-blower Santy that P-2 was "fixed" and that it was at the behest of the Paki gambling ring run by Dawood for the benefit of the Chinese gamblers.

Al Balls,Bull S.Hit,Expert Commentator Dam P Squib are being interviewed by the media moron Dirt D.Digger.

AB: I say you chaps,its a bl**dy shame that all this dust is beng thrown up after a decade by Santy.He's behaving like a bad loser.The result as we were then told and all agreed upon is that India scored a deserving victory.In fact famous scribe Raj Chengappa has written a super book on the match which no one has criticised.

BS:Yaas,in this game of glorious uncertainities,it waas indeed a glorious Indian victory.We did score I think 5 goals!

DPS:Shi**y,5 runs dear fellow not goals,we were not playing football.

BS:Exactly! It was simply not cricket,bullshi**ing to the nation that we scored 5,when Santy who was wicket keeper,said then and now that RC was indeed "stumped" after the test! RC scored an own goal as well.

AB:But President of the Umpires Association,Prof.Kalam who was there,says we did score five....

DPS:Veteran legend Dr.Sethna,says that Kalam can't spin this one as he is used to bowling fast projectiles only and cannot spin for his supper neither for his superiors!

AB:Chaps,it was the nature of the pitch that has confused everyone,it was laid on a strata of solid granite in harsh conditions.Even KS ,the guru of the game has said that we must've succeeded and after all "what's in a run?.A run by any other name is still a goal?"

BS:Typical of us Indians trotting out lame excuses such as blaming the pitch and the weather...

DPS:Steady on old bean,the pitch does alter results you know and remember we were bowling forom both ends at the same time to confuse the Pakis which is why the results might've got a bit mixed up! In my experience,there is a huge difference between the ends of pitch separated by 20 odd yards and Santy was wicket-keeper at only one end!

BS:What about the tripods at each end then? One was left standing and there was little wear and tear at that end of the pitch.

DPS:Strata,sub-soil dear bean,strata.The stumps might have been left standing but didn't you notice that the bails were displaced? That according to the rules means a goal!

DD:Gentlemen,you were all at the scene of the crime....I mean the scene of the game and covered the match in great detail.How can you have differing views now a decade on? Did we bomb or dud it bomb....I mean "did it bomb,or did it not bomb,that is the question?"

Al Balls,Bull S.Hit,Dam P.Squib all look at each other and suddenly their eyes light up.Dam P Squib says excitedly."Chaps,there's only one way to find out whether the run was a goal,let's have a rematch!"

[Kanson]

^^^, Superb! especially on Kalam and his fast projectiles.

Ok let me ask this "Is emperor naked" question ?

BS:What about the tripods at each end then? One was left standing and there was little wear and tear at that end of the pitch.

Show me exactly, where the A-structure was left standing intact, anyone ?

Al Balls,Bull S.Hit,Dam P.Squib all look at each other and suddenly their eyes light up.Dam P Squib says excitedly."Chaps,there's only one way to find out whether the run was a goal,let's have a rematch!"

If we do the rematch in the same pitch same problem might occur, so lets have the match in foreign soil.

[kgoan]

Rahul M: thank you for the welcome back.

Shiv: Don't laugh now, but for the last couple of years I earn my living by being a consultant to the mining industry in a certain Pacific Island - and yes, I am, peripherially and in my usual unimportant way, it is the stuff this thread is so fascinated with. It pays well

Ramana: Thank you for the welcome. A long time ago, may be 3-5 odd years now, I remember having a discussion with Acharya and warning him that since the standard social attack vector against us had repeatedly failed, i.e. India was still together despite the massive overseas funding of our so-called "minorities" it made sense for the next attack to be along the majority community vector.

It was Rudradev who fleshed out that argument by pointing out that the Soviet Union was destroyed not by its minorities but by the Russian Republic and its ruler, Yeltsin who withdrew from the Union. Rudradev then went on to point out that it wasn't the minorities that destroyed Yugoslavia but the insane sense of injustice that the majority Serbs subscribed to that tore apart Yugoslavia and turned the Serbs into the dogs of modern EuroLand to this day.

Do I need to remind you that a 1500 year old religion was turned into an insane circus in pakeeLand not by the Pakees despite their remarkable stupidity, or by the Jews or Christians or Hindus, but by True islamic Believers who believed the Truth that the the University of Maryland gave to the well meaning believers inside pakeeland?

Do I really need to remind you that the Nuclear Power industry was destroyed by a bunch of fanantical anti-nuclear "warriors" in the West, who were *not* funded by the evil commies but by the Hydrocarbon (oil, and coal) industries, during the 70's and late 80's?

Do I really need to remind you that the way to destroy something is not through the obvious "enemies" route, but by getting a set of determined well intentioned, highly motivated, highly ethical folk to simply believe that they were the *only* ones *really* protecting something?

The road to as you well know is always paved with good intentions.

Do I really need to remind you of all people about these things?

N:

The economic upheaval is more than just "seismic". "Seismic" is what happened to to San Fransisco in 1906. trivial stuff. This, using the seismic analogy, is Krakatoa.

JEM: Thank you. Good gawd, you actually spotted it!! Couldn't resist that one either. rotfl.

[kgoan]

N:

Datum point to keep in mind:

Last year Paulson (remember him) went hat-in-hand to China, immeadiately after, Dubya (remember him, anyone?) removed *all* missile related sanctions against the Chinese.

The Chinese can now buy any sort of stuff they want from the US. Anything. They no longer even need those legions of "Students" to spy for them. Just cold hard cash - which they have bucket loads of.

C'est la vie, eh!

ps: Now that you're an August Mod no less, if you open a Romance Forum, I expect a thread on synchronised swimming okay?

[Tanaji]

Can anyone clarify the University of Maryland comment from kgoan's post?

[svinayak]

Can anyone clarify the University of Maryland comment from kgoan's post?

It is actually University of Montana which changed the textbooks in Pakistan and Afghanistan in 1980s during the afghan wars.
Too much reminding is not good. People have to think

[shiv]

ATTENTION CHENNAI BRFITES!!

Email from a lurker friend:

This is the birth centenary year of Bhabha. Tomorrow APJ Abdul Kalam speaks at IMSC (Chennai) regarding Bhabha, its a public lecture 3-4pm so people can go ask about Santhanam and atim bum too.

Check the seminars link:

http://www.imsc.res.in/seminar/index.html

[Gagan]

Check out the speaker right after APJAK:
G. Rajasekaran

Designation: DAE-BRNS Senior Scientist
Research Group: High Energy Theory
Current Research Interest: Quantum field Theory and High Energy Physics

Email: graj AT imsc.res.in

Any co-relation with dark magic that atim bum scientists do?

[Bade]

Any co-relation with dark magic that atim bum scientists do?

Not much, many HEP theory guys think of atim bum physics as poor quality physics.

[Sanku]

Boss, Raja Ramanna is not some ordinary guy.

Sanku,

What would, in your opinion, constitute a "good" panel?

Kanson I know who Raja Ramanna is.

NRao, first off disclaimer I do not know names of the right people.

However the panel must do/have the following
1) Soil mechanics expert who can look at the various measurements and come up with a possible post shot picture and confirm it by digs. They can check the numbers and confirm. These can easily be drawn for existing IITs, there are tons who understand and do FEM modeling for soil etc.
2) Radiological experts -- they can recheck the data and pass the judgment on methodology and values obtained and whether they match -- DRDO supposedly has them too. Otherwise from TIFR or IISc
3) Seismic experts -- consider various values, at ARC and as well as from DRDO sensors and check them for consistency and systematic errors

These can be three sub teams, it must be led by an eminent panel of non controversial top scientist (say from ISRO, DRDO and BARC preferably retired) At the same time it must have a member each from the armed forces and/or SFC. The leasers are for direction setting and peer review of work.

It should also have one-two people from the fizzile allegation group and one-two from BARC design group as consultants and hangers on to quibble question and fill in doubts when needed.

Phew...

[geeth]

>>>Phew...

Phew! a panel to satisfy every Tom, Dic* & Harry...No wonder Chinese progress so fast and we keep debating over a non issue!!

phew...again!!!

[Bade]

What are the procedures for getting limited or lifetime security clearances in India ? Such a panel will have to forsake a lot of their personal freedom for life, wouldn't they ?

Does anyone here know, who gets what levels of clearance in India. Is the OSA, often quoted here a blanket cover for anyone dealing with such information and applicable to all GoI employees like at barc or drdo.

[Sanku]

(Please also stop bringing in straw men like telling China what Kt is aimed at it. No one brought it up)

How can you call this a Strawman when the entire Deterrence thread, in which you are an active participant, is discussing how India can deter China with 20kt chotus? You think somehow the Chinese strategists missed this assertion by KS?

Amit this is the sort of stuff which makes me weary frankly, you really mix up two statements from very different contexts freely to create a totally third picture.

There are two things
1) S1 failed and the we are trying to get by on bogus deterrence as far as TNs are concerned.
2) S1 passed and we are trying to find a structure to establish that.

This IS DIFFERENT from KS statement (in a totally different context) that 20KTs wont deter China.

So discussion on S1 is different from whether 20KTs will deter China.

UNLESS -- (1) S1 fizzle also means CONCLUSIVELY that India has NO HOPE of producing a weapon greater than 20 KT (even Fission or FBF) and deploying it. (Note 200 KT >> 20 KT and their is a huge range within it) that interpenetration of yours is not valid by any means.

(2) Further to talk about what bombs are aimed at China. It is not enough to even say that we have only Fission. We have to also say the number of warheads, the number of systems, the dispersal, the doctrine of targeting etc etc.

Nothing in the debate started by KS talks either of point 1 or 2 above. NOT BY A LONG CHALK

Thus it is a complete and total misrepresentation to claim -- that the task of adding credibility to the claims of
GoI is the same as letting China know our deterrence secrets.

------------

And there is no bluff based deterrence anyway.

-----------

The posture of BARC and GoI are NOW (after they closed ranks around RC after KS disclosure) are fully same. No difference

So NOW BARC == GoI.

-----------

You are missing the whole point I made about Sibal -- KS issue is now what it is because GoI goofed up big time plain and simple. Now blaming KS cuts no ice.

Irrespective of what is happening is good or bad -- it is GoIs actions which precipitated this -- and I never think that some things must always be hidden.

[Bade]

Now, that everything is going to be under peer review, I would also like to know if every unit in the defense forces handling such devices are really capable of the same....including the ability to hit the press button when asked to by the highest authority. How can I get the results of the peer review of the efficiency of the defense forces. As a citizen, would I not like to know if the procedures setup by the army/navy/AF will really work when necessary. How can I quantify this to the satisfaction of all non-believers like me.

[Sanku]

>>>Phew...

Phew! a panel to satisfy every Tom, Dic* & Harry...No wonder Chinese progress so fast and we keep debating over a non issue!!

phew...again!!!

Indeed, considering that Chinese bombs are all USSRs and their own advances are dodgy. It is instructive to compare ourselves with the Chinese.

[Sanku]

Now, that everything is going to be under peer review, I would also like to know if every unit in the defense forces handling such devices are really capable of the same....including the ability to hit the press button when asked to by the highest authority. How can I get the results of the peer review of the efficiency of the defense forces. As a citizen, would I not like to know if the procedures setup by the army/navy/AF will really work when necessary. How can I quantify this to the satisfaction of all non-believers like me.

Well if the Gen Kapoor after next three years turn around and says that they have been given weapons to fire but they dont know where the red button actually is.....

---------

Meanwhile one test under review by three independent metrics is hardly everything under peer review.

[Sanku]

Do I really need to remind you that the way to destroy something is not through the obvious "enemies" route, but by getting a set of determined well intentioned, highly motivated, highly ethical folk to simply believe that they were the *only* ones *really* protecting something?.

Ah Kgoan but thats how "nishkam karma" works, after all you cant get a set of determined well intentioned, highly motivated, highly ethical folk to do something wrong, after telling them that the law of unintended consequences will some how make it right?

[geeth]

>>>As a citizen, would I not like to know if the procedures setup by the army/navy/AF will really work when necessary. How can I quantify this to the satisfaction of all non-believers like me.

As a citizen, I would also like to know whether mijjile carrying these bum are actually capable of lifting off and reach the target..Ha! what if, even after so many tests, one of them turn out to be a Bhasmasura and head for Dilli instead of beijing..? Blame it on Trojan???

[SaiK]

[quote="Kanson].. so lets have the match in foreign soil.[/quote]
you have pakistan, iran, nk and p5 list. the problem is we are not chinese to view this seriously. i hope this was a joke.

btw, it wasn't the scientists who were responsible for v-moratorium rather BJP, and subsequently the haath party. there should have been some easy conditions to break on this voluntary decision.

sea and subsurface is open.. fire belts are dangerous anyway due to tsunami issues.

[Amber G.]

However the panel must do/have the following
1) Soil mechanics expert who can look at the various measurements and come up with a possible post shot picture and confirm it by digs. They can check the numbers and confirm. These can easily be drawn for existing IITs, there are tons who understand and do FEM modeling for soil etc.
2) Radiological experts -- they can recheck the data and pass the judgment on methodology and values obtained and whether they match -- DRDO supposedly has them too. Otherwise from TIFR or IISc
3) Seismic experts -- consider various values, at ARC and as well as from DRDO sensors and check them for consistency and systematic errors

Snkuji - As you say there are 'tons' so it should be easy for you to name at least one in each category. I want to here your take on getting/naming at least one person in each category who as you said would be, among other things, a non-controversial expert....

Please don't weasel out (By saying "I don't know the names" - should be easy if there are tons to find the names), please suggest some names which are suitable and universally accepted by all people like you and me and others.

[SaiK]

how about a team from BR?

[Sanku]

Please don't weasel out (By saying "I don't know the names" - should be easy if there are tons to find the names), please suggest some names which are suitable and universally accepted by all people like you and me and others.

No names! I already clarified. (even if I could, I would not) suffice to say the expertise does exist, if there are issues with it terribly sorry for that.

[Amber G.]

Ramana –

Hope you can put something here so layman’s like me can understand it. Much thanks in advance.

Some posts ago you mentioned R=K*Y^(1/n) type formula for cavity/crater. There have been a few attempts to plug that formula and get some results but I have not seen a compact part of that equation. Can you put *your* best values for what this formula means and how what is the confidence level (again give *your* best shot – if the part is too complicated to list)

Basically:

What is R : radius of crater or cavity? How does one define it? (After all – the crater/cavity is, to put it mildly, not a perfect sphere. In fact quite irregular shape so some type of ‘average’ has to be taken so how is that average taken? (For example what is integrated over in calculus /mathematical terms). Please note that 10% systematic error (or ambiguity in measurement) will give rise to about 30% error in yield.) So how much would be your guess in measuring accuracy of R?

What is K? What is the “best” (*your* best guess) value to be taken for S1? You mention 12-14 but again 20% error would result in approx 60% error in yield. How well K is known and with what precision?

What in “n”. I see value from 3 to 3.4. Please keep in mind that 10^3=1000 while 10^(3.4) is 2500+ . How precisely is ‘n’ ?

Sorry if this has been visited before, but if you can answer it for compactness would be nice. Thanks in advance..

[Rudradev]

KGoan!!

Now there's a sight for sore eyes. Where have you been all these years? May I say your posts were very much missed, and I hope we'll be availing of them regularly once again.

[Amber G.]

No names! I already clarified. (even if I could, I would not) suffice to say the expertise does exist, if there are issues with it terribly sorry for that.

Thanks Sankuji. Fair enough - you say that “even if I could I would not” and would not name any one. I too agree that expertise does exist.

But I think you proved my point and I am sure you would agree to that … that sentence shows that how thankless (to put it mildly) a job of ‘naming a name’, or serving on such a committee would be for many…. Because it is *so easy* for any one to throw mud on someone who sincerely wants to help the nation and wants to do a good job… by unjustified criticism.

Case in point in the beginning of Thread II there was a equation (IV). Never mind that there was no “double integral”, no mistake of calling r/rho as density/radius, and definitely, as far as I can see, no ‘cylindrical’ or ‘spherical’ coordinate space, yet it generated comments from “experts” like “you can do golmal in spherical” and “the authors are so idiotic that they try to use cylindrical system” (I am paraphrasing this) …
Any one can throw mud, with virtual impunity as that case showed.

IMO the ‘blue committee’ and ‘neutral’ experts request from many is quite bogus in their intention and claim of honesty. (Let me state categorically that KS is NOT included in ‘many’ as a respected scientist his views are important and are to be taken seriously) but expressbuzz type articles and general noise in this forum - In my opinion of course – is not exactly what it seems.

[Sanku]

No names! I already clarified. (even if I could, I would not) suffice to say the expertise does exist, if there are issues with it terribly sorry for that.

Thanks Sankuji. Fair enough - you say that “even if I could I would not” and would not name any one. I too agree that expertise does exist.

But I think you proved my point and I am sure you would agree to that … that sentence shows that how thankless (to put it mildly) a job of ‘naming a name’, or serving on such a committee would be for many….

In my opinion of course – is not exactly what it seems.

There are two aspects of things here.
1) Is even naming a name a thankless job? Yes it is. Is doing the job thankless? Yes again. Pretty much all those who serve GoI honestly are in thankless job business (IMVHO) actually.

2) Is BRF criticism the issue? IMVHO again irrespective of how ever important BRF is, far bigger folks have put their names and reputations on line with far greater vehemence. So yes, the thanklessness of the job in this case is actually far beyond the issue of what BRF says.

Lastly I know which paper and which issue you are talking of, however it would have been much much better if you could then come up and argue those points when those making the points were still participating in the thread.

To now take it up and in addition pass a judgment like "general noise in this forum - In my opinion of course – is not exactly what it seems." tends to become a very similar exercise as you "accuse" others in the forum of -- please note can you do it or are you entitled to that opinion? Yes you are -- as much as those making those wrong statements (albeit left un-argued then) are in my view. However since you have yourself called for much higher standards (in a way) it would be good to be careful yourself.

I remember the whole divide started because of comments like "kacchawalas, EBs" etc etc being bandied about freely and any argument made not responded to technically but just by mocking. We all need to do our parts in that to make sure it does not happen. At least I learnt my lesson then.

[ramana]

AmberG, You are a physicst and defer to your knowledge.
Thanks for taking time from Physics thread to visit this.

ramana

PS: While you are at it, see how one can squeeze 40-50 kt out of 3kg Pu in fission process. Like how much ould be the efficiency of that.

[JE Menon]

>>It is actually University of Montana

University of Nebraska and a certain Prof. Thomas Gouttierre was responsible.

[ramana]

Still hurting.