Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist - Part-2

enqyoob · Post by **enqyoob** » 22 Sep 2009 06:04

Manish: Thank you for reading my points and thinking about them. Welcome to BRF!! As you can see, ppl who actually think are in short supply here...

You raise a good point:

Also surprising was the argument from Narayanan when the point was raised about how undamaged S1 shaft was. He tried to prove by attributing it upto the sharp 90 degree angles of the shaft.
The question is how come the shaft right above the explosion remained undamaged but Khetolai few kilometers away got cracks.

This is easily explained.

1. It is reasonable to assume that the "undamaged A-frame and shaft" must have also got shaken with AT LEAST the intensity that Khetolai got shaken by. In an earthquake, the ground heaves up and down and maybe sideways, but also, a lot of energy travels along the ground. So an A-frame or bucket at the top of a concrete shaft will also go up and down along with the ground, but nothing else major should happen to it.

2. Think of what happens to someone who stands in a bus going at high speed over a typical desi "National Highway". The floor of the bus remains intact, but someone standing up without holding anything, is liable to end up falling over or suffering a few cracks on the head. Likewise, the vertical walls of a house may suffer serious damage, though the ground itself may look like nothing has changed.
*********

3. Now pls go back and look at the picture of the "undamaged A-frame and shaft". There seems to be a clear line on the ground surface, approximately at the location of the shaft. In the foreground (to the left lower part of the image) the ground seems smooth and uncracked. In the background (upper right and upper left) the ground seems completely different - totally cracked and broken like it was bumped up and down with extreme violence. No "crater" but very severe cracking.

4. Also read the stories from the Russian nuclear tests that Gagan posted, claiming that they used to place a glass of vodka (I think that's mistranslation - they probably placed a bottle and a glass) at "Ground Zero" and the first guy to get there after the test got to drink it in celebration. Going by the "A-frame criterion", this should be a TOTAL fizzle, hain? IOW, the Russians are saying that nothing much happens even to a glass container if it can survive the severe shaking.

5. Gerard posted some videos of Ground Zero during a hydrogen bomb test. Supposedly from Alaska. The wheeled trailers can be seen jumping up and down violently, but survive undamaged. If they had been planted in the ground, they may have been torn apart, but they were on rubber tyres with shock absorbers.

6. Now as for the 90 degree bend in the shaft. Again, this was not my idea - I used to imagine that the shaft was drilled straight down - but someone here - maybe Gerard - posted a picture showing that this is not what is done. The shaft was described as having "AT LEAST" a couple of 90 degree bend, precisely to AVOID any venting etc. through the shaft. So - there is no reason to believe , and every reason NOT to believe, that the A-Frame and concrete-lined shaft mouth was anywhere near being directly at "Ground Zero".

I must say that I find it extremely disappointing that Dr. Santanam would cite that "A-frame" as his shocking revelation, and more so that ramanaji would jump on that and get all devastated. The "A-frame" surviving undamaged has absolutely no significance, and surely Dr. Santanam of all people would know that.

7. Let me point out another aspect. Santanam also declared that "soil and stones flew up several meters, that's all", describing what happened at Ground Zero. So, if that happened, the A-Frame must have been quite something, hey, to have survived a blasting with stones flying out of the ground fast enough to rise several meters into the sky? And the concrete-mouthed shaft also must have been something to have survived completely undamaged, with smooth soil all round, if soil and stones flew out at high speed through there?

I have to conclude, therefore, that the "soil and stones flying up" did NOT happen anywhere near the A-frame. That tends to prove my suspicion that the A-Frame was nowhere near Ground Zero.

So that whole line was pure sensationalism, and I go by the simple question:

If truth is on ur side, why would u use false reasoning?

which of course leads me to uncomfortable conclusions about the motives behind this whole tamasha. In all the murder mysteries I watch, the murderer slips up usually by being a bit too overconfident, and going too far in trying to be smart. I think Dr. Santanam seems to have done exactly that with the "A-frame" sensationalism.

So there is nothing inconsistent between the "undamaged concrete shaft mouth and A-Frame" and the damage at Khetolai.

Pls let me know any more questions. I too believe that the aam aadmi, saada common sense approach is the only one that works here, because the real data are Classified, and all the amateur expertise in the world is not going to arrive at any definitive conclusion. This was fairly evident to me at the outset.

The best approach in such controversies is to go to the statements made, and the evidence seen BEFORE anyone had time to twist and cover up facts and think through what would be most in their own interests to say.

Arun_S · Post by **Arun_S** » 22 Sep 2009 06:18

ss_roy wrote:Arun_S,

I have read that a few grams of tritium/deuterium (gas mixture) injected in the core, results in a 2-3x boost for even older fission designs.

If only things were as easy as stated in the websites, Pakis would have had bigger boom balls then Indian in 1998.
What can I say except that those website are to corall madrasa Abduls (who have been hunting for Jinn power, since Alladin time), not for serious nuclear physicists.

John Snow · Post by **John Snow** » 22 Sep 2009 06:21

For sure one is Nuke Nanga

When Politicians play scientists and Scientists play politics.

Santanam garu is brave soul to have withstood the on slaught of mighty NSA MKN who generally is at slumber party or drafting bad errors, or missing a lawyer in his entourage

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 22 Sep 2009 06:25

Now as for the 90 degree bend in the shaft. Again, this was not my idea - I used to imagine that the shaft was drilled straight down

See

The Containment of Underground Nuclear Explosions
http://www.fas.org/ota/reports/8909.pdf

U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment, The Containment of Underground Nuclear
Explosions, OTA-ISC-414 (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, October
1989).

John Snow · Post by **John Snow** » 22 Sep 2009 06:37

This 90 bend was precisely the reason Mubarak mand etc claimed that their yield was not estimated by world correctly. If you look up may 1998 reports you will find that.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 22 Sep 2009 06:38

Many pages ago I made an assumption - an assumption designed to fit available facts.

I said that whatever the publicly released information about yields, the warhead makers have been only making fission based warheads because they were told the truth and they were tasked with making only fission or boosted fission warheads. Obviously - I have no proof for this statement and I just pulled it out of a hat at a time when everyone was busy flying kites and thought I might fly one more kite.(Thx for that expression Tanaji)

Now what if I am wrong. What if the warhead makers have been told to go a ahead and build thermonuclear warheads based on some assumption - i.e. 60% yield or something (Another assumption from me - please feel free to make your own assumptions and don't be carried away by mine) . That means that there could be Thermonuclear warheads designed for 200 kt which will yield anywhere between 20 kt (fission only) and 120 kt (60% yield of Santhanam).

This assumption of mine has also been carefully designed to fit in with available facts - except that it now accommodates Sanjay's question of what heavy warheads will India's missiles carry? After all, both S1 and 4 subkiloton tests were done to "gather data" and as per RC that data was to fill up gaps in equations of state that could not be simulated on computer. RC had alleged that it was this data that could be used to design scalable warheads.

enqyoob · Post by **enqyoob** » 22 Sep 2009 06:41

Thanks, Gerard.

Every nuclear test is designed to be contained and is reviewed for containment.7 In each step of
the test procedure there is built-in redundancy and conservatism. Every attempt is made to
keep the chance of containment failure as remote as possible.

How depressing!! All that IED-mubarak and no Oomph!! No Cloud-e-Mushroom. No Glow. No flash!
Not even fissures in the ground!!

Once the test has been approved for execution by the Test Controller’s panel, the Test Controller has sole responsibility to determine when or whether the test will be conducted. The Test Controller and Advisory Panel members conduct the following series of technical meetings to review the test:

D-7 Safety Planning Meeting: The “D-7 Safety Planning Meeting” is held approximately 1 week
before the test. This meeting is an informal review of the test procedure, the containment plan, the
expected yield, the maximum credible yield, the potential for surface collapse, the potential ground
shock, the expected long-range weather conditions, the location of radiation monitors, the location of all personnel, the security concerns (including the possibility of protesters intruding on the test site),
the countdown, the pre-announcement policy, and any other operational or safety aspects related to the test.

D-1 Safety Planning Meeting: The day before the test, the D-1 Safety Planning Meeting is held. This
is an informal briefing that reviews and updates all the information discussed at the D-7 meeting.
D-1 Containment Briefing: The D-1 Containment Briefing is a formal meeting. The laboratory reviews
again the containment plan and discusses whether all of the stemming and other containment requirements were met. The meeting determines the extent to which the proposed containment plan was carried out in the field. The laboratory and contractors provide written statements on their concurrence of the stemming plan.

A bit different from the process described by many experts here:

Have all the children been asked to come out and watch the plume? Accha!! AllaaaaaaahoAkbarrrrr! Hit the switch, Imran!

And this on why the A-frame may have survived intact even if the hole were vertical:

The final aspect of containment is the stemming that is put in a vertical hole after the nuclear device has been emplaced. Stemming is designed to prevent gas from traveling up the emplacement hole. Impermeable plugs, located at various distances along the stemming column, force the gases into the surrounding rock where it is ‘‘sponged up’ in the pore spaces.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 22 Sep 2009 06:42

John Snow wrote:This 90 bend was precisely the reason Mubarak mand etc claimed that their yield was not estimated by world correctly. If you look up may 1998 reports you will find that.

Snow garu there are some interesting side issues related to the Paki tests.

vsunder after analysing the seismograph squiggles of Paki and Indian tests stated that whatever the calculated yield of Paki tests, the India tests were double that yield.

Now Evernden calculated the Pakistani test to be 19 kt (Pakistan claimed 18kt) - again from seismological squiggles.

enqyoob · Post by **enqyoob** » 22 Sep 2009 07:02

Hmmm! Where's that convoluted shaft design we saw here b4? Can't find on Google.

John Snow · Post by **John Snow** » 22 Sep 2009 07:04

Ha that reminds me of great story of Paki like Sage

The sage did penance and when God appeared and asked him to seek his boon, the Paki Sage said, do me twice what my enemy asked, immidiately the Paki sage lost both eyes (vision).

If Paki Nook is dud ours is twice dud.
Thats comforting...

Seriously then it is in line with Santanam garu
Paki 18
India 36
Less than 45 claimed.
Case temporarly closed no?

Masaru · Post by **Masaru** » 22 Sep 2009 07:09

‘Naked’ India needs ‘series of tests’ to deal with China: Santhanam

“We are totally naked vis-À-vis China which has an inventory of 200 nuclear bombs, the vast majority of which are giant H-bombs of power equal to 3 million tonnes of TNT,

For the reference of gurus these are the yields and delivery systems from north that GoI needs deterrence for

Source wiki 2006 FAS & NRDC report

A partial list of deployed devices is reproduced below (not including the latest and greatest DF31/41 JL-2 etc.)

Code: Select all

Name                 Year     Range          Yield        No.
Strategic
DF-3A     CSS-2     1971     3,100 km     1 x 3.3 Mt     16	
DF-4      CSS-3     1980     5,500 km     1 x 3.3 Mt     22	
DF-5A     CSS-4     1981     13,000 km    1 x 4-5 Mt     20
DF-21A    CSS-5     1991     2,150 km    1 x 200-300 kt  35	
JL-1    CSS-NX-3    1986     1,770km     1 x 200-300 kt  12	

Tactical 
DF-15     CSS-6     1990      600 km     1 x low       ~300

Clearly from the range of the delivery system out of the 105 strategic payloads 80% are in the intermediate range (most likely) targeted at India and Russia. Of the 85, 38 are in the multi MT yield range and the rest are in triple digit kT range. This should be kept in context before buying the GoI argument that they have the capability to throw 'something'; and hence deterrence holds.

enqyoob · Post by **enqyoob** » 22 Sep 2009 07:21

Would it matter terribly to you if u and the city you live in were to be vaporized by a 20kT fizzle or a 1MT sizzle, I wonder? For my part, I would actually much PREFER the 1MT - much less chance of me or anyone I care about surviving to see the wonderful sunrise the next day - if our eyes hadn't melted, that is. I have had a long time to think about this, so I am very sure of that. In fact, FIVE or TEN 1MT warheads going off simultaneously would be so much better - I want total assurance that everyone I care about will be vaporized instantly with me. So I don't see why it is necessary to match the Chinis in throw-weight.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 22 Sep 2009 07:23

ss_roy wrote:
I have read that a few grams of tritium/deuterium (gas mixture) injected in the core, results in a 2-3x boost for even older fission designs..

Roy you are talking about something different. The information available (which I have linked earlier on several occasions) says that for a pure fission bomb you need a ball of Plutonium that is compressed until it becomes so dense that the particles (neutrons) that it naturally produces start breaking up neighboring Plutionium atoms causing the explosion. This is a pure fission device.

If you can somehow increase the number of those neutrons - the process of breaking up Pu atoms for energy (fissioning) becomes more efficient. One way of doing that is to take a hollow ball of Plutonium rather than a solid ball and to fill that hollow with tritium/deuterium. When the hollow ball starts getting compressed, the gas in the inner core starts fusing by a small amount and releases those precious neutrons that shoot out and help to break up the nearby Plutonium atoms much more efficiently. This would be boosted fission which is what your statement above is talking about.

But what people tend to refer to as a Thermonuclear "hydrogen" bomb takes the above mentioned fission or boosted fission device (as "primary" or first stage) and uses a complex mechanism to cause fusion of Tritium which releases a lot more energy. That Tritium or source of Tritium has to sit next to an atom bomb and the difficulty is to ensure that the Tritium fuses even before it gets blown away by the fission bomb sitting right next to it.

The design requires validation and the best way to validate would be to test bombs. The US, USSR and China (and UK/France) tested all their designs in an era when testing was allowed. After they had perfected their designs - they brought in the CTBT - knowing damn well that this would effectively prevent other nations from testing to perfect hydrogen bombs. This is where "Shri Late Lateef" (India) entered the game.

So while it is definitely possible to build a Thermonuclear bomb without testing - you will not know if it works at all or works well unless you test. You can build it - but it is not guaranteed to work as expected unless you can validate it by tests.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 22 Sep 2009 07:25

John Snow wrote: Case temporarly closed no?

Snow garu - you know me well enough to realise that no case can be closed so easily on weak seismological evidence which public sources indicate can be one order of magnitude this way or that way.

Sanjay · Post by **Sanjay** » 22 Sep 2009 07:28

Arun_S - have you made a bomb of any kind - petrol, Molotov cocktail or any such device ?

You have valid and useful arguments but it is distressing and unhelpful in the extreme to use phrases to the effect that "if it is difficult then it is more difficult for BARC".

Yes there is a problem with S1 but you know what ? They've done more than any of us.

I do not expect anyone to worship them or hold them above criticism but ridicule is not appropriate and it reduces the tenor and tone of Bharat-Rakshak to the level of the juvenille.

As to my statement, I had done some investigation into Indian boosted capability in 1996 and let us just say I did undergo a peer review of that claim.

Difficulty is a relative term. It isn't easy but is far from impossible.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 22 Sep 2009 07:29

narayanan wrote:Would it matter terribly to you if u and the city you live in were to be vaporized by a 20kT fizzle or a 1MT sizzle, I wonder?.

A 1 megaton bomb will flatten a 120 sq km area. That means a medium sized city will be demolished with one such nuke. For the leaders of a country who have started the war - a flattened city is less of a problem than a city that is 25% destroyed with dead, dying and fleeing people crying for help.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 22 Sep 2009 07:41

Please indulge me folks - I can;t resist this. When talking about a Primary fission stage needing to cause fusion in a secondary stage I am reminded of a very silly and very vulgar schoolboy joke about speedy Gonzalves (one that I heard 40 years ago)

Rick was about to make love to his woman, but Speedy Gonzalves was very quick, and as Rick attempted an entry he was surprised to find Speedy below him shouting "Hey get your d**k out of my backside"

This is how a TN ("hydrogen") bomb works. The fission bomb explodes - but if designed right - the fusion fuel next to the fission bomb fuses so quickly that by the time the fission energy can blow away the fusion fuel - the fusion has already scored - like Speedy.

But if Speedy is not fast enough - he will find no entry as Rick has done his job. In a complete fizzle the Fusion fuel is blown away without any fusion.

However there are a few microseconds or femtoseconds (I don't know) when a small degree of fusion can occur before the Tritium is blown away. I recall reading this somewhere some years ago and need to find that ref - I probably have it on my HDD. This could constitute a "partial burn"

enqyoob · Post by **enqyoob** » 22 Sep 2009 07:43

a flattened city is less of a problem than a city that is 25% destroyed with dead, dying and fleeing people crying for help.

And half-burned survivors with nothing to lose and no desire to live except for revenge, coming after the Leaders of the Nation with any half-burned timbers, concrete blocks etc.

Masaru · Post by **Masaru** » 22 Sep 2009 07:52

shiv wrote:
narayanan wrote:Would it matter terribly to you if u and the city you live in were to be vaporized by a 20kT fizzle or a 1MT sizzle, I wonder?.

A 1 megaton bomb will flatten a 120 sq km area. That mans a medium sized city will be demolished with one such nuke. For the leaders of a country who have started the war - a flattened city is less of a problem than a city that is 25% destroyed with dead, dying and fleeing people crying for help.

Agree with the premise that the after effect of a fizzle is deadlier than that of a sizzle.

1. So are the strategic gurus (here and outside) unanimous about the theory, that the deterrence value of a 20 kT sizzle is more (in the eyes of the aggressor nation) than a MT TN?

2. If yes why where the P-5 so keen on matching throw weight for achieving deterrence? Mine is bigger syndrome which doesn't afflict the SDRE?

3. Assuming fizzles are good enough, the key question is are there at least enough of the fizzles with proven delivery systems to achieve deterrence? Far from true based on public data.

csharma · Post by **csharma** » 22 Sep 2009 07:58

K Santhanam says he got calls from 500 scientists from atomic energy establishment congratulating him for coming out in the open about the H bomb thing. They said this was overdue.

The issue is that if GoI agrees to Santhanam's point of view it cannot sign CTBT or will have to test before it sign CTBT.

http://www.ndtv.com/news/videos/video_p ... id=1159157

enqyoob · Post by **enqyoob** » 22 Sep 2009 07:59

are the strategic gurus (here and outside) unanimous about the theory

Masaruji, I bow to ur optimism.

Many believe that the bigger the bang, the more Deterrent it is. I don't see it that way at all. The Kinder and Gentler strategy by shiv is to hit the outskirts and several interior points of a megacity and completely mess up the rescue operations to maximize suffering.

This provides the best deterrent. In the words of Winston Churchill:

The living shall envy the dead.. etc.

There's something very clean and appealing about getting vaporized in a megaflash compared to such utterly nightmarish scenarios. Say like the guys (gals?) whose shadows were burned into the bridge in Hiroshima.

Shiv, I read this book a while back where a terrorist-built hydrogen bum went off in Denver Stadium in a quasi-fizzle. Killed everyone inside instantly by gamma ray flash - but the thing was that the ppl standing next to the device were said to have become part of the fission/fusion reaction, because they got zapped by such a concentration of gamma and X-rays, neutrons, whatever else. Instant conversion to fissile/fusile gas/ plasma.

John Snow · Post by **John Snow** » 22 Sep 2009 08:02

Wonder idiots in P5 dont think small is beautiful unlike D or C size?
***
Some vedic math has been used by the designers of BARC I think so the yields are different from DRDO readings because they used regular expressions in All Zebra. The corps of Enginners true to their form built super duper tunnel that could with stand a 45 Kt H bum. (Sometimes this is like Humor in uniform when AOC regiment had Ram leela function the Shiv Dhanush did not break in the hands of Rama because AOC carpenter instead of joing the bow in the middle with a thin twig reinforced it with a but joint. Hence Rama could not marry Sita in that AOC Leela

)
This is very reassuring as the Corps of Engineers have the technology to build under ground bunkers for our NSA babus to discuss the ways to react to the most recent H bum bombing of AP.

Some good always comes out of even semi succesfull venture. The more immidiate concern is that having realised how good our underground tunnels are Pakis are ramping up bum production to blast our corps of Engineers built bunkers Command and Control Structures. This is alarming and our NSA needs to fly to geneva to talk to PAki counter parts. The sooner he does the saner will Babus be.

***
Some well connected source emailed to me that H bum was not a fizzle at all, the fact that Frame, winch, shaft everything was intact is because <Drum Roll please>, The Bum was Neutron bum, nothing has chnaged, even the pin up girls photos put by corps of engineer boys have remained intact, The Bum was NOT H BUM I repeat it was not a H BUM. IT was a NEUTRON BUM.
Case closed
where is the shitty bitty paper, let us sign with Indian ink. MKN saab will get back to his chai Samosa happy man...

shaardula · Post by **shaardula** » 22 Sep 2009 08:09

primary!

vera_k · Post by **vera_k** » 22 Sep 2009 08:14

One thing to consider is that having TN ability seems to be some sort of coming of age or status symbol between nations. Not sure why this is so, since many smaller bombs can be used to the same effect, but the Tellis book sure spends time assessing the credibility of the TN in the eyes of the rest of the world.

John Snow · Post by **John Snow** » 22 Sep 2009 08:15

Veera ji
"koti Surya sama prabha...."

Bithwa lochana gocharabhi bhavathi twam koti surya prabha,
Vedhya kinna bhavasyaho ghanatharam kee drug bhaven mathama,
....................................................................... 58
Sivananda Lahari parama Guru Shankaracharya virachitam

Becomes visible to the eye,
But you having the lustre of billions of suns,
Are not known to me.
Alas! the darkness of ignorance,

shaardula · Post by **shaardula** » 22 Sep 2009 08:18

secondary!

Manish_Sharma · Post by **Manish_Sharma** » 22 Sep 2009 08:22

Beauuuuutiiiiifully explained Narayanan, in desi saada terms! If you were my maths and science teacher instead of Ram Kumar Gupta in 10th standard my marks would have been dramatically different.
I am certainly coming with more questions!
Thanks for the warm and enlightening welcome

Satya_anveshi · Post by **Satya_anveshi** » 22 Sep 2009 08:52

csharma wrote:The issue is that if GoI agrees to Santhanam's point of view it cannot sign CTBT or will have to test before it sign CTBT.

Unfortunately, the repurcussions will not be limited only to the above. Much water has flown under the bridge since and skeletons in the closet are the issue also.

Actually this is an interesting dilemma before the GOI and the Indian public.

IF we assume Santhanam is right then we are seeing GOI doesn't have an appetite to even correct things internally (which basically needs either $hitting or getting off the pot kind of act), then what to say we will shelve our gandhigiri and retaliate even after taking the hit.

In my mind, that "something" referred by NSA is nothing other than the white dhoti.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 22 Sep 2009 08:57

Most likely MMS will have to hedge the accession to CTBT by saying will not stand i its way of coming into force but want to make sure all else ratify it. That will buy time and even if it doesn't, it locks up those who should be locked up.

amit · Post by **amit** » 22 Sep 2009 09:00

I think one data point that has been missed in all the traffic on this thread is that KS has admitted that he and other scientists who are claiming fizzle have not seen the radio chem analysis.

Now I gather from reading stuff here that everyone agrees that radio chem is the most accurate way to estimate yield value nah? If that is so, from a purely scientific perspective, what makes KS so sanguine about the fizzle?

I'm sorry but me thinks the more KS talks about POKII in open media the more he adds to the confusion. And he comes out as someone who's desperate to score debating points. It's one thing to do this on BRF but quite another to do that in general media.

His comment on India being naked vis a vis China in deterrence at a press conference didn't seem to me a very well thought out thing to do, unless he wants to start a fear mongering campaign given the tendency of journalists to sensationalise.

[eidited out the comment about KS saying India needs two tests of the TN device. Can't seem to find the link, maybe I misread. Apologies - amit]

One other point that I've been mulling over. The call for a peer review. Perhaps it would be best if such a review is done.

However, it's obvious that the AEC doing the review is not going to satisfy the naysayers. Fair enough. But does India have a group of independent and highly credible nuclear scientists and bomb designers - who are not associated with either Barc or AEC either in the past or present - who can do the review and at the same time have the level of security clearance required to be shown classified data (you can't have, for example an American citizen/green card holder of Indian origin being shown the data)? I would really like to know this point.

I also don' t think it would be fair to have KS, PKI, Shetna et al on this review committee because first of all they are the ones who have brought this allegation and they have done that without access to all the data (radio chem analysis) hence one could hardly call them neutral party.

And this idea that let's have KS, PKI etc on the committee and balance then with RC, Shikka etc would hardly work. This debate has gone too much into personal mudslinging for that to work. And remember that KS and RC already had a unreconciled dispute over the yield in 1998 itself.

So back to the question, is there a group within India who really can do this independent peer review that is being demanded?

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 22 Sep 2009 09:04

Manish_Sharma wrote: If you were my maths and science teacher instead of Ram Kumar Gupta in 10th standard my marks would have been dramatically different.

Not saying higher or lower?

"vaazha-vaazha kozha-kozha"

For those who want to know what "zh" is pronounced like in Tamil you need to know Marathi. "zh" in Tamil sounds somewhat like the Marathi letter that looks like the symbol for infinity at the bottom, but the upper half is exactly like the Hindi letter "La". Don't have the required skills to produce it here.

csharma · Post by **csharma** » 22 Sep 2009 09:08

In fact the situation is totally confusing. One day Santhanam writes something and it appears all too true. Then there is a rejoinder from K Subrahmanyam and that is convincing too. So for a layman it is very confusing.

But I do not think it is a good idea to tar Santhanam. He is taking a fair amount of risk in doing what he is doing. He also mentioned that numerous senior scientists are supporting him.

To solve the issue why can't they have PKI, KS look at the data. No test is needed for that and the controversy in the media is avoided.

John Snow · Post by **John Snow** » 22 Sep 2009 09:13

"once you are on the Nuclear high way, there is no easy exit to rest rooms, one has to look in the rear view mirror and the side mirrors and keep pace with the other on that high way" Spinster 1998.

Only in Inida

We rationalize our non retalliation of enemy aggression!
We rationalize with cermons the NFU with out complete second strike capacity!
We are deterred by 1.5 golas of Pakistan sH%^& bricks thinking it could go nuclear but we also saya aar paar our Deterrent is enough.
We adore our sceintists as Gods, but inject politics into their work and mould them.
We need collabration even to think strategically what we need to do, bring in Karuna chalams who have jolly well migrated to to work for us fro us.

Finally we prove these axioms every day

An expert is one who knows more and more about less and less until he knows absolutely everything about nothing.
Always draw your curves, then plot your reading.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 22 Sep 2009 09:14

narayanan wrote:
There's something very clean and appealing about getting vaporized in a megaflash compared to such utterly nightmarish scenarios. Say like the guys (gals?) whose shadows were burned into the bridge in Hiroshima.

My Japanese friend who is a vendor talks about Hiroshima. He was a 6 year old boy when the bomb was dropped.
He has full support for India. He also said that Japan will build one quickly when needed.

amit · Post by **amit** » 22 Sep 2009 09:15

csharma wrote:But I do not think it is a good idea to tar Santhanam. He is taking a fair amount of risk in doing what he is doing. He also mentioned that numerous senior scientists are supporting him.

To solve the issue why can't they have PKI, KS look at the data. No test is needed for that and the controversy in the media is avoided.

I agree with you no point in tarring anyone, either in the media or on BRF and certainly not KS.

However, I don't think it's a good idea to have them do the review. After all they've already made up their minds haven't they? Then how can they be neutral observers doing the peer review?

If you are OK with PKI and KS doing this peer review then you shouldn't logically have any problem with RC and Sikka doing the review as well, nah?

Would you agree that its a good idea for RC and Sikka to do a peer review on what KS and PKI have said/alleged and then give their opinion on the validity or otherwise of their comments?

When thinks come down to the level of personalities, as it has in this case then it's always a good idea to remove these personalities from the scene and then get to the bottom of the matter, IMO. Hence none of these folks should be in the peer review team, if and when such a team is set up.

John Snow · Post by **John Snow** » 22 Sep 2009 09:16

shiv wrote:
Manish_Sharma wrote: If you were my maths and science teacher instead of Ram Kumar Gupta in 10th standard my marks would have been dramatically different.
Not saying higher or lower?

"vaazha-vaazha kozha-kozha"

For those who want to know what "zh" is pronounced like in Tamil you need to know Marathi. "zh" in Tamil sounds somewhat like the Marathi letter that looks like the symbol for infinity at the bottom, but the upper half is exactly like the Hindi letter "La". Don't have the required skills to produce it here.

It is very easy as matter of fact

Just keep a tambaku Paan in your mouth and speak telugu, it comes out exactly as desired

"Tamala paku namulu
davada tho mataladu
Taane vacchu Tamilu
O koona lamma

"Later Arudra poet par excellence, cine song writer and intellectual.

Rahul Mehta · Post by **Rahul Mehta** » 22 Sep 2009 09:24

To Those who claim that Pokharan-2 was a failure (includes myself),

Why do you think so many experts lied and called Pokharan-2 a success?

John Snow wrote:Some well connected source emailed to me that H bum was not a fizzle at all, the fact that Frame, winch, shaft everything was intact is because <Drum Roll please>, The Bum was Neutron bum, nothing has chnaged, even the pin up girls photos put by corps of engineer boys have remained intact, The Bum was NOT H BUM I repeat it was not a H BUM. IT was a NEUTRON BUM.
Case closed
where is the shitty bitty paper, let us sign with Indian ink. MKN saab will get back to his chai Samosa happy man...

Can someone pls start a thread on N-bum status in world and India? I heard that China has N-bum and I also heard that US actually used a N-bum in Iraq. I am a big time fan of N-bums and believe that Indian should possess as many N-bums as possible. U-bum and H-bum are PR disaster because of the fire and material damage they cause. While N-bums appear as cool even after use --- the people are dead and have burns but there is no wreckage . ....

Some pleeeezee start a thread on N-bum progress in world and India.

.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 22 Sep 2009 09:25

Masaru wrote: 2. If yes why where the P-5 so keen on matching throw weight for achieving deterrence? Mine is bigger syndrome which doesn't afflict the SDRE?

First of all I must admit that I make strong arguments for one side while trying to demolish something else. But that does not mean that "something else" is no good no matter how much rhetorical force I use to demolish it.

If you have 50 kt - then 150kt is better. But I believe that having more than 250-300 kt is pointless. In order to have 150kt - you must have Thermonuclear fusion although there is at least one reference of a 500 kt US built fission only test.

So why do P5 have huge weapons.

Actually if you read what is available on the net - the "advanced" P5 have replaced most of their multimegaton weapons with multikiloton weapons.

A large proportion of P5 warheads - are in the 20 to 300 kiloton range. At least some Megaton warheads are reatined for "legacy" purposes. - i.e left over from an earlier era.

But let me quote some history here - for the second time in this series of threads.

First nukes - Hiroshima/Nagasaki type fission bombs
Huge Thermonuclear fusion warheads designed and built during cold war - IIRC some weighed in at 3000 kg or more. The promise of mutual destruction was great in those days of atmospheric testing
Huge thermonuclear warheads were found to be very polluting and so there was a demand for making them clean. This resulted in the "three stage designs" with Tsar Bomba type "clean" yields of more than 10 megatons as well as small "Neutron bombs" which were "relatively clean" (only 2 rapes, no murder) and produced maybe 20 kt
Then underground testing started and designs were refined to make them lighter but also more dirty because designs went back to lower yield "dirty" thermonuclear warheads. These resulted in modern warheads of 20 to 500 kilotons.
China did not perfect its own thermonuclear warheads till the late 70s, maybe later and retained some megaton warheads. I think China had at least one 3 megaton design that weighed 4000 kg.

vera_k · Post by **vera_k** » 22 Sep 2009 09:26

ramana wrote:Most likely MMS will have to hedge the accession to CTBT by saying will not stand i its way of coming into force but want to make sure all else ratify it.

But that has been the position from Vajpayee's days. Unless MMS was considering signing up to the CTBT, KS's efforts are more in the way of forcing the government to test and perfect a TN capability.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 22 Sep 2009 09:27

csharma wrote:
But I do not think it is a good idea to tar Santhanam. He is taking a fair amount of risk in doing what he is doing. He also mentioned that numerous senior scientists are supporting him.
.

Yes sharmaji. I think history may prove that Santhanam is a true patriot in ways that might be invisible at the surface now.