Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16887
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby NRao » 31 Aug 2009 06:19

Isnt that the crux of the matter.


28 pages for THAT?

When we knew all along that S1 was between 1 and 150Kts?

MMS based 123 on 'no need to test'?

Signing CTBT, NPT, FMCT have ALWAYS been a topic of concern?

OK. Very well. Silly questions.

Kick that can again. We are so good at that, might as well stick to a proven method.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby shiv » 31 Aug 2009 06:21

NRao wrote:MMS made it very clear during the 123 discussion that 'my scientists tell me we do not need to test'..



Which scientists?

Food scientists? Missile men? Nuclear scientists?

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby shiv » 31 Aug 2009 06:25

vasu_ray wrote:NRaoji, what is the point of calling the toss after the toss is thrown and the coin settles down?



This is exactly how nuke weapon tests are conducted. Believe it or not.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby shiv » 31 Aug 2009 06:39

Gerard wrote:Did you miss this gem?

http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_be ... al_1286240
But on Saturday PK Iyengar, former chief of the atomic energy commission backed Santhanam and asked as to why Kalam's words should be taken seriously considering he is only a missiles expert. "What is so sacrosanct about Abdul Kalam? Even Einstein made mistakes. Before the scientists on the site called New Delhi to confirm the tests, they should have checked the yield of the thermo-nuclear bomb with the seismic centre in London, with which India has a co-operation agreement. Dr Kalam did not check and doubts about the yield were there after the tests.''


This statement sounds like a firm "tongue-in-cheek" statement - a mischievous sense of humor.

Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8012
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby Gerard » 31 Aug 2009 06:49

http://www.indianexpress.com/ie/daily/1 ... 50114.html
However, Santhanam has somehow managed to evade the security cover but he has been ``advised'' not to attend the parties he used to. His friends claim that the man with a sense of humour does not really like being confined to his house to enjoy his drinks. His friends and colleagues maintain that he enjoys his drinks, but swear that his senses become even sharper. ``People have tried to get things out of him after he has had a few drinks but the man will say only what he wants to say and only as much as he wants to say,'' a friend and colleague at DRDO said.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16887
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby NRao » 31 Aug 2009 06:52

shiv wrote:
NRao wrote:MMS made it very clear during the 123 discussion that 'my scientists tell me we do not need to test'..



Which scientists?

Food scientists? Missile men? Nuclear scientists?


Very good question.

I have a call into PMO for clarifications.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55054
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby ramana » 31 Aug 2009 07:00

NRao wrote:
Isnt that the crux of the matter.


28 pages for THAT?

When we knew all along that S1 was between 1 and 150Kts?

MMS based 123 on 'no need to test'?

Signing CTBT, NPT, FMCT have ALWAYS been a topic of concern?

OK. Very well. Silly questions.

Kick that can again. We are so good at that, might as well stick to a proven method.


NRao all the assumptions on signing the deal are getting shredded. What is worse the benefits of the deal are not accruing from US after their regime change.
Seriously there are no silly questions. Only answers.

I don't have much of advanced stats background but I think the Monte Carlo error allocation in the Radio Chem paper is flawed. If the apportionment is correct then it will be closer to what KS is saying. Give me a few days to think about that.

The fundamental thing for me is if radius error causes a high error estimate how can the root sum square be less than that.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16887
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby NRao » 31 Aug 2009 07:18

OK.

Does anyone feel that MMS will back off because of this revelation? I feel that MMS now would be more compelled to sign the CTBT - just to prove that the fudge was actually a non-fudge, but was considered a fudge only to provide more funds to test again.


ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55054
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby ramana » 31 Aug 2009 07:42

Is there any effect of BJP transformation going on now?

Anujan
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7009
Joined: 27 May 2007 03:55

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby Anujan » 31 Aug 2009 07:46



I say we should sign the CTBT and NPT, and then take a page from our paki non-state actors, change our country's name and then test. That will show them !
This is a good way of avoiding sanctions also. Just claim we are not "India" anymore :mrgreen:

Out of curiosity. Do we have any more shafts left ?

enqyoob
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2658
Joined: 06 Jul 2008 20:25

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby enqyoob » 31 Aug 2009 07:50

New Improved S-6. 8) Ready when u r.

ss_roy
BRFite
Posts: 286
Joined: 15 Nov 2008 21:48

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby ss_roy » 31 Aug 2009 07:53

Anujan,

Relevant quote from Dr. Strangelove

"Mr. President, I would not rule out the chance to preserve a nucleus of human specimens. It would be quite easy... heh heh... at the bottom of ah ... some of our deeper mineshafts. The radioactivity would never penetrate a mine some thousands of feet deep. And in a matter of weeks, sufficient improvements in dwelling space could easily be provided."

Anujan
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7009
Joined: 27 May 2007 03:55

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby Anujan » 31 Aug 2009 07:54

narayanan wrote:New Improved S-6. 8) Ready when u r.

N^3 AFAIK, S-III was claimed to be reactor grade plutonium, not refined maal. Did you mean S-V which was U-233 ? (imagine what that means after our 3-stage program starts)

vera_k
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3259
Joined: 20 Nov 2006 13:45

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby vera_k » 31 Aug 2009 07:55

Anujan wrote:I say we should sign the CTBT and NPT, and then take a page from our paki non-state actors, change our country's name and then test. That will show them !
This is a good way of avoiding sanctions also. Just claim we are not "India" anymore :mrgreen:


Heh. Just move defence to the concurrent list. We'll have half a dozen new nuclear states in no time.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby shiv » 31 Aug 2009 07:55

Anujan wrote:Out of curiosity. Do we have any more shafts left ?



There is no shortage. We are getting shafted by everyone 8)

Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8012
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby Gerard » 31 Aug 2009 07:57

Unclear explosion - C Uday Bhaskar
The assertion that the thermonuclear test had a yield below that which was expected or desired is a very complex nuclear physics issue and has been discussed by domain experts for the last 10 years. A detailed technological assessment has been published by Chidambaram in 2000 (re-published in 2008 with revisions) which reviews the seismic data collectedin relation to the specific soil conditions obtained in Pokhran -- and the conclusion is that the yield was satisfactory -- and not a 'fizzle'.

Chidambaram and his core team of physicists and atomic scientists have spent greater part of their professional life in enabling India to reach its current nuclear status and their technical assessment has been validated by the peer group. Here Chidambaram's suggestion is welcome that sincethe doubts that have been raised are technical -- the quantum of the yield and its analysis -- if backed by appropriate scientific data these can be referred to BARC.

andy B
BRFite
Posts: 1649
Joined: 05 Jun 2008 11:03
Location: Gora Paki

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby andy B » 31 Aug 2009 08:00

A humble SDRE thought:

The 98 tests were successful in relation to the detterent needs a decade ago. Now the game has changed and thus the need to validate newer design/developments to fulfill the current needs and in turn to validate these designs on newer delivery platforms availabe which now gives the ebil Yindoos a lot more choice for "Kampao Chicken - Home Delivery"

All is maya created by GOI to use the threat of the phoonk sundari while keeping khan temparament eshtable.

Let the testing begin....Jai Ho! :twisted:

Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8012
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby Gerard » 31 Aug 2009 08:08

The 98 tests were successful in relation to the detterent needs a decade ago.


I think they were looking ahead to the present. Apart from the fission bomb, what they tested were not bombs. Rather they tested devices that would allow them to design bombs.

http://www.southasiaanalysis.org/papers5/paper451.html

The two-stage thermonuclear device, with a fusion-boosted fission trigger as the first stage and with the features needed for integration with delivery vehicles, was tested at the controlled yield of 45 kt and had the purpose of developing nuclear weapons with yields up to around 200 kilotons. The sub-kiloton devices tested again had all the features needed for integration with delivery vehicles and were tested from the point of view of developing low-yield weapons and of validating new weapon-related ideas and sub-systems. Thus the carefully-planned series of tests carried out in May 1998 gave us the capability to build nuclear weapons from low-yields up to around 200 kilotons. A great deal of further scientific and technical development work has taken place since then.

John Snow
BRFite
Posts: 1941
Joined: 03 Feb 2006 00:44

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby John Snow » 31 Aug 2009 08:27

PMO Uvacha
In view of recent revelations GOI is pleased that, the POK II tests were completed with the expected outcomes, we are revising our doctrine and naming at as MIND


MIND: Minimum Incredible Nuclear Deterrent

amit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4325
Joined: 30 Aug 2007 18:28
Location: The Restaurant at the End of the Universe

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby amit » 31 Aug 2009 08:42

John Snow wrote:PMO Uvacha
In view of recent revelations GOI is pleased that, the POK II tests were completed with the expected outcomes, we are revising our doctrine and naming at as MIND


MIND: Minimum Incredible Nuclear Deterrent


Now, now Snow ji why are you so upset?

Didn't we reach quod erat demonstrandum during the Nooklear debate that we've already entered CRE (incorporating Shitty Bitty and all manner of abbreviations) when we signed on to the 123, (Jekyll)Hyde and other acts?

Of course it's a pity KS (using Arun_S' built in safety style) didn't become the fearless whistle blower before the deal. In fact I wonder why he even said that the deal didn't compromise India's security? Dang, I'm sure he never reads BRF! :-?

Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8012
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby Gerard » 31 Aug 2009 08:48

amit wrote: In fact I wonder why he even said that the deal didn't compromise India's security?


The Quantum Leap
By K. Santhanam
Secondly, the asymmetry with respect to China stands largely removed and it is worth emphasising that deterrence is not just about numbers alone.


Indo-US nuclear treaty: A good deal
By K Santhanam

andy B
BRFite
Posts: 1649
Joined: 05 Jun 2008 11:03
Location: Gora Paki

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby andy B » 31 Aug 2009 08:55

Gerard wrote:
I think they were looking ahead to the present. Apart from the fission bomb, what they tested were not bombs. Rather they tested devices that would allow them to design bombs.



Saar I agree with the above but I think that it ties into what I am trying to say that what we did and had in 98 was sufficient to deal with photochor and have a very very minimum basis of detterence for Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon...now the main focus is on the later and thus the need for phatakas that are of a more advanced nature than what we had available.

Also if in 98 what they tested were indeed "tested devices that would allow them to design bombs" then it creates the need to test again even more so pressing and valid to make sure that we now have phatakas that can deal with the existing threat that we are experiencing and take into account ze future...

Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8012
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby Gerard » 31 Aug 2009 08:57

Behind dud test row is nuke deal
However, many senior officials here believe that India with 100 or so bombs in its basement has a credible minimum deterrent and no more tests are needed. ``If you go along with a section of retired scientists, nothing will ever be enough. Now they are talking of China. Next they will say we need to compete with the US. There has to be a stop and the political establishment cannot pander to these crazy scientists,'' an official who did not wish to be identified said.

John Snow
BRFite
Posts: 1941
Joined: 03 Feb 2006 00:44

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby John Snow » 31 Aug 2009 09:01

Sane babu calls hard working

these crazy scientists


so dont jump on any BRF members for calling names.. :rotfl:

amit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4325
Joined: 30 Aug 2007 18:28
Location: The Restaurant at the End of the Universe

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby amit » 31 Aug 2009 09:03

Gerard wrote:
amit wrote: In fact I wonder why he even said that the deal didn't compromise India's security?


The Quantum Leap
By K. Santhanam
Secondly, the asymmetry with respect to China stands largely removed and it is worth emphasising that deterrence is not just about numbers alone.


Gerard,

Thanks for the link. Sometimes I think you're an android programmed to pick up the most relevant link from the Internet. :D

Actually, I wonder if folks here realise that all this brum-ing about the "fizzle" comment made by KS, quoting "sesmological observations from around the world and 'experts' (Wallace?)" just detracts from the issue of why he chose to talk now and not 10 years ago?

Incidentally the famous picture of KS, RC, Abdul Kalam et al posted a few pages ago shows KS giving a two finger "V" salute. Now why would he do that? I wonder.

Sometimes, when one is desperate to find some clue or support for one's contention it's easy to miss the most obvious. And I think KS made this comment and potentially put his reputation on the line (remember he supported the N-deal) because he wanted to fire a warning shot over the prow about CTBT.

The purpose IMO of this thread should have been to explore if he did this at the behest of GoI or at the behest of a group within the establishment which wants to remind the political leadership of what the red lines should be.

And to think that I wrote something on these lines on page 3-4 of this thread and Raja Ram ji in his usual eloquent way expanded on this scenario on page12 of this thread. I thought his post should have been the last word on this fizzle tamasha.

JMT

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby shiv » 31 Aug 2009 09:08

John Snow wrote:I think only Shiv ji can answer this question as he is the expert on Indian elite and Indian piskology.

Why did Santhanam garu reveal his mind?

Did he not think of the consequences of saying what he said, that his credibilty will be attacked, his integrity shredded

Why is he so admant to retract or expunge his remarks?

At this time and his age why would he risk so much?


:mrgreen: Snow garu the piskolgical crystal ball is answering questions that you did not ask. :mrgreen:

Apart from the technical issues for which there is no answer and the emotional issues that we end up discussing - one thing that this discussion made me do was to go back and look at old discussions that are archived and it prompted me to read what other nations are doing with regard to nukes - having tested them to their satisfaction until the lasts time they tested.

Again there are technical and piskological issues there (IMO)

Just speculating - but I think the "West" as in Europe may be afraid of their own history in much the same way as we on here fear a repeat of our history. Of course - for Europe - "history" is one of each state beating the crap out of neighbors. Their ability to beat the crap out of others was actually made far better with the emergence of nukes.

So it appears to me that the history of nuclear weapons for the West has been an initial "Aha! Now we have a great new toy" - which later changed to "Yikes! :shock: Our adversaries (Russia) have got them.

This seems to be reflected in the treaties that have been designed basically to try and eliminate nuclear weapons from the have nots and a sort of structured and half hearted attempt to get the haves to become "less threatening". First the treaties banned atmospheric and underwater testing. Then they have attempted to put a cap on the size of yield for underground tests. Then they tried to stop everyone from conducting tests and the next step is to cut off production of fissile material.

At all times, for any nation that does not have nukes the view has been "Oh you have to trust the existing nuclear weapon states to do everything right, but while they can guarantee their own security, your security will not be guaranteed".

For reasons that I am assuming as "the need to not attract sanctions", India has kept a low profile. India protested the unfairness of the teat ban treaty but sadly India is behaving like a badly trained dog being made to sit in front of a plate of biscuits - drooling, sniffing and occasionally taking a bite - but yet not doing what is natural - i.e to gobble up the entire plate in seconds.

India first failed to test for many decades after 1974

Then it suddenly ejaculated and tested. Even in doing those tests India did a very limited and small series. Did them underground - which I believe is a sort of sham. After all if India claims that it has taken a "principled stand" and has not violated any of the norms of the treaties that it has not signed - then it should not have tested at all. After all - if we were breaking principles anyway- we could even have done an atmospheric test in the Indian ocean.

Once India broke out of its sham "principled stand" and tested, it should have gone the whole hog and not pretended (as it is doing now) o be the drooling dog that is sitting and wagging its tail and asking massa to say "You are a good boy!" even as it takes a bite or two from the plate. India's principled stand is a sham. It is a particularly shameful sham because this bloody principled stand has failed to remove sanctions and discrimination.

Let me state my opinion frankly and this is the opinion that has made me object strongly to criticism of one set of people without criticism of the other side. It is not just Manmohan Singh and his government that might be weak. The Vajpayee government was equally weak and tentative in taking a bite from the plate without finishing the whole plate, and following that act of "indiscipline" where the "principled stand" was discarded for 2 days in May 1998, India once again sat back, wagging its tail eagerly in front of the plate waiting for praise expecting that massa (international community) will say "Go get it - you can finish your plate"

The worst aspect of this act of coitus interruptus was the statements that have been made to Indian citizens that the Indian dog has eaten the whole plate of biscuits and its stomach is full - even as India is actually sitting and wagging a eager and slavish tail at the international community begging for nuclear crumbs at every opportunity. Blaming the scientists and saying the scientists misled our oh so honest and upright "principled stand" politicians is an act of finding a scapegoat to blame generations of stupidity and lack of cojones by cross party political leadership

Unless India is really is getting crumbs that we all don't know about.

If the nuke deal works as expected without India getting tied down - I am willing to admit that there is some method here. If it fails - it means that the national leadership is stupid.

amit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4325
Joined: 30 Aug 2007 18:28
Location: The Restaurant at the End of the Universe

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby amit » 31 Aug 2009 09:11

John Snow wrote:Sane babu calls hard working

these crazy scientists


so dont jump on any BRF members for calling names.. :rotfl:


Your sharp eyes caught the "aha!" moment in the Seema Bahen story. :)

However, this rosgolla loving, dhoti wearing Bengali babu (copying our Webmaster's terminology onlee) saw these two lines:

The noise about the alleged dud tests will become more vociferous if and when the US Congress ratifies the CTBT and pressure on India mounts. So it is natural that the Congress party will not want to stoke this fire which could put an end to the nuclear deal.


Now one thing is certain, KS' statement and its effect on CTBT can't be called a fizzle even by the NPA community! :D

So can we say that it met all parameters of the test design and both desiginers and testers are satisfied with the yield results?

Do note the first sentence could imply that KS was following a GoI script. The second sentence, however, could imply that a section within the establishment could be reminding the Congress of what India's "red lines" are.

John Snow
BRFite
Posts: 1941
Joined: 03 Feb 2006 00:44

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby John Snow » 31 Aug 2009 09:22

Shivji,Thanks for responding and giving a lucid, eloquent, well illustrated nearly comprehensive answer.
Like Arjuna in Gita I am ( Dur jana here) going to ask the same question s again and again.

Some how after reading your answer I feel you have very encapsulated the history but still I feel my quech for knowing has not subsided.

Why did santanam garu do it now?
Did he take these 11 yrs to comprehend what really happened in that shaft?
Did he take 11 yrs to understand CFD equations which Mava and his sishyas do in oral math?
Did he just learn to use google to find out what wallace & co have been saying for the 11 yrs.

Why did he think he would gain by doing this?

Did he suddenly subscribe to Satyamejayathe our notional motto?

please dispel my agyana and provide some answers I am sleepless in seattle and rattled too.

meanwhile

some context

Image

This is from CALTECH
Image

GOI PSU BALMER LOWRIE makes dabbas/containers like this in millions, they all contain HE material called petroleum.


Read the report

http://www.nrdc.org/nuclear/expl/ea3.asp

LIF Arun keeps mentioning is also in the diagram above.
Last edited by John Snow on 31 Aug 2009 09:38, edited 1 time in total.

negi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13112
Joined: 27 Jul 2006 17:51
Location: Ban se dar nahin lagta , chootiyon se lagta hai .

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby negi » 31 Aug 2009 09:26

Sometimes, when one is desperate to find some clue or support for one's contention it's easy to miss the most obvious. And I think KS made this comment and potentially put his reputation on the line (remember he supported the N-deal) because he wanted to fire a warning shot over the prow about CTBT.

The purpose IMO of this thread should have been to explore if he did this at the behest of GoI or at the behest of a group within the establishment which wants to remind the political leadership of what the red lines should be.

And to think that I wrote something on these lines on page 3-4 of this thread and Raja Ram ji in his usual eloquent way expanded on this scenario on page12 of this thread. I thought his post should have been the last word on this fizzle tamasha.

Very well put Amit dada....infact the problem is the given the nature of science and political repercussions related to nuclear testing POK-II are not the only tests where NPAs have got their yield estimates wrong ; their estimates of TSp's tests too were all over the place and recently they even tried to brush off the NoKo tests as insignificant by categorizing the tests as fizzile infact afaik the first test was even being projected as an explosion caused by high volume of conventional explosives and not by a nuke device ;all this despite NoKo having informed PRC before hand about a nuclear test. :roll:

John Snow
BRFite
Posts: 1941
Joined: 03 Feb 2006 00:44

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby John Snow » 31 Aug 2009 09:28

With India audience there is no last word only Lost words.

Raja Ram
BRFite
Posts: 586
Joined: 30 Mar 1999 12:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby Raja Ram » 31 Aug 2009 09:31

Since nothing of substance is getting discussed and everyone is dissing everyone else, let me also indulge.

Apropos the Fizzle ya Sizzle debate here - please continue nice entertainment onlee. After all Sundarji has already written an allegorical tale called "Blind Men of Hindustan" long back.

Speaking of allegorical tales, another apt one is the English tale written by Subramanya Bharati called "The Fox with the Golden Tail" - read it up sometime, it was written in a different context and was targeting a noted Indian nationalist who happened to be a friend of his. That is what I call a biting satire.

BTW, I dont know what is so difficult in spelling a south indian name correctly. The name in question is a common one and the current Home Minister shares that name too. The well read moderator surely reads the papers often and has read a lot of publications and news articles quoting Chidambaram of BARC too? Surely he can read and understand the correct spelling - cant be too difficult for a person who can crack missile configurations and understand how nuclear weapons are designed and tested.

Others here have been pulled by fellow admins and moderators for mangling the name of other important personages such as our distinguished economist PM. Can a excuse like "North Indian names are complicated and hence south indian postors find it difficult to get it right" be acceptable? Such narrow minded view points should not be encouraged.

It would have been better if the moderator just noted the fact, expressed his regret and continued with posting his views which are so well articulated by him. It would not have brought him down in any way. Instead, he continues to display his insensitivity by making a point to add rather silly notes within brackets each time he spells Chidambaram's name. That is rather insulting to all south indians.

His continued denigrating of South Indian names is irritating to say the least. Please note people from the North East, South and Western regions are also Indians and their names and culture are not aspects for ridicule. If it is difficult to get the nuances of regional names right, please make the effort. That is what is expected from fellow Indians.

I am sure that this post is going to inflame some here to react. But I want to demonstrate how it is for others who just want to have a fair exchange of ideas and have to put up with a lot of nonsense based on ego. It is irritating. Please have the decency to desist and those who are in responsible roles as moderators, please practice what you preach.

Sorry for a rather rude post, but I have tried honestly to contribute and maintain decorum. I have not seen the same effort from some very knowledgeable yet egotistic postors here. I have the right to say that and bring it to the attention of moderators.
Last edited by Raja Ram on 31 Aug 2009 09:38, edited 1 time in total.

John Snow
BRFite
Posts: 1941
Joined: 03 Feb 2006 00:44

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby John Snow » 31 Aug 2009 09:36

deleted as per ramana garus post
Last edited by John Snow on 31 Aug 2009 10:58, edited 1 time in total.

amit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4325
Joined: 30 Aug 2007 18:28
Location: The Restaurant at the End of the Universe

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby amit » 31 Aug 2009 09:39

Raja Ram ji the spelling malfunction with regards to Chidambaram's name is a new phenomenon. Didn't see it during the Nuclear debate.

Now the question that arises is why does one need to take such "cheap" potshots?

I'm confused because I absolutely refuse to consider the "low on substance, high on rhetoric" explanation.

All in all in bad taste, in the opinion of this lowly rosgolla loving, dhoti wearing BRFite.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55054
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby ramana » 31 Aug 2009 09:41

OK back to technical arguments. If yield is a function of radius of cavity cubed, then the error in yield in terms of error in radius is a function of the radius. what that means is the error from the Radius of cavity in the radio chem estimate is greater than 15%.

MMS and MKN can sign the CTBT as its their prerogative for being the elected govt. But its not because S-I worked as designed. And RC will be haunted by ghost of Bhaba and Raja Ramanna for fudging.

svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby svinayak » 31 Aug 2009 09:44

Raja Ram wrote:
BTW, I dont know what is so difficult in spelling a south indian name correctly. Surely he can read and understand the correct spelling - cant be too difficult for a person who can crack missile configurations and understand how nuclear weapons are designed and tested.

Others here have been pulled by fellow admins and moderators for mangling the name of other important personages such as our distinguished economist PM.

His continued denigrating of South Indian names is irritating to say the least.

I think this was just a mistake and so should not be taken seriously. This south Indian name and north Indian names should not be referred to like this creating a regional divide. Just an observation.

svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby svinayak » 31 Aug 2009 09:46

John Snow wrote:raja ram garu>> I am in complete agreement with you. If there was any inadvertant slipage on my part I regret.
I know I have called Jaswant as Jassoo M, but he is a political figure not a scientist who can not defend himself.
For politicians I thin we can take some leeway. IMVHO

Still not acceptable IMHO

negi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13112
Joined: 27 Jul 2006 17:51
Location: Ban se dar nahin lagta , chootiyon se lagta hai .

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby negi » 31 Aug 2009 09:47

Yes I agree...hell I got banned once. :evil: :mrgreen:

Raja Ram
BRFite
Posts: 586
Joined: 30 Mar 1999 12:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby Raja Ram » 31 Aug 2009 09:48

The above post is not my style and I am not very proud of it. In fact I regret having to make that kind of post. Sounds as if I view myself as a South Indian. I am not, I feel that I am an Indian from the south. There is a difference.

Also, please do not mistake my bringing this up as rejecting the said moderators view point. He has made a strong case of it. I may not be in total agreement but nor can I completely disregard his position. His contributions to this website as well as to knowledge has been far greater than what I have done. So my respect for him is there. It is only sad that such a small error on his part and his refusal to acknowledge that because of his own ego is causing him to expand the error and take the focus away from more substantive points he is making.

If it helps, I have no problems in apologizing to him in that way and retracting that post, if he just acknowledges that small lapse. My only request to others is not to use this small lapse to denigrate his arguments. If in disagreement with his view please counter with data points that refute his assumptions and positions without attributing other things to him on a personal level.

John Snow
BRFite
Posts: 1941
Joined: 03 Feb 2006 00:44

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby John Snow » 31 Aug 2009 09:52

Deleted derailing the thread
Last edited by John Snow on 31 Aug 2009 10:58, edited 1 time in total.


Return to “Nuclear Issues Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests