Page 1 of 3 [ 43 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next

24 Aug 2012, 1:07 pm

Upon reading the wikipedia article about antimatter weapons, it's clear that the proposed antimatter bomb is highly unfeasible and extremely dangerous to the side that possesses it as well as to the enemy, so I have an idea for a new type of weapon. This was partly inspired by AspieOtaku's comment about the enormous explosive power of volcanoes which far exceed the combined firepower of every nuclear weapon in existence today(~10,000 megatons). So here's an outline of it's anatomy and explosive mechanism:


1)The *pit* of this device contains a pure fusion bomb no bigger in size than a globe(14 inch diameter max). This device must be triggered by an intense burst of x-rays from a z-pinch tube and the x-rays travel through an evacuated tube injecting them into the pit.

2) The outer core that surrounds the pit is a thick sphere of Lithium Deuteride. It's total mass would be up to 300kg. This is the primary fusion fuel.

3)The core is surrounded by a tamper consisting of Uranium 238 which will undergo fast fission and intensify the force of the nuclear explosive lens and help compress the core fusion fuel.

4) Outside of the encased core are a cluster of small (fission-fusion)nuclear bombs whose total combined yield should be around 10 megatons. There number of these devices should range from 18-30. These bombs are timed to detonate simultaneously. Their combined explosive force acts as a nuclear explosive lens which hurl intense gamma rays as well as fission products traveling at relativistic velocities.


The nuclear explosive lens compresses the core to a density approaching that of a neutron star. This will create coulomb large enough to generate gamma ray pressure within the imploding core. A few nanoseconds later, the pit is detonated to create additional gamma ray pressure. However, the gamma ray pressure from outside the core is greater, so rather than stop the implosion, it creates a feedback mechanism to which the gamma rays in the exploding pit increasing the energy millions of times. The idea is to create enough gamma ray pressure to stimulate particle-antiparticle production which pushes the gamma ray pressure over the top and the imploding core explodes with the same mechanism as a Supernova.

Any thoughts?



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 89
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

24 Aug 2012, 2:29 pm

AspieRogue wrote:
Upon reading the wikipedia article about antimatter weapons, it's clear that the proposed antimatter bomb is highly unfeasible and extremely dangerous to the side that possesses it as well as to the enemy, so I have an idea for a new type of weapon. This was partly inspired by AspieOtaku's comment about the enormous explosive power of volcanoes which far exceed the combined firepower of every nuclear weapon in existence today(~10,000 megatons). So here's an outline of it's anatomy and explosive mechanism:


1)The *pit* of this device contains a pure fusion bomb no bigger in size than a globe(14 inch diameter max). This device must be triggered by an intense burst of x-rays from a z-pinch tube and the x-rays travel through an evacuated tube injecting them into the pit.

2) The outer core that surrounds the pit is a thick sphere of Lithium Deuteride. It's total mass would be up to 300kg. This is the primary fusion fuel.

3)The core is surrounded by a tamper consisting of Uranium 238 which will undergo fast fission and intensify the force of the nuclear explosive lens and help compress the core fusion fuel.

4) Outside of the encased core are a cluster of small (fission-fusion)nuclear bombs whose total combined yield should be around 10 megatons. There number of these devices should range from 18-30. These bombs are timed to detonate simultaneously. Their combined explosive force acts as a nuclear explosive lens which hurl intense gamma rays as well as fission products traveling at relativistic velocities.


The nuclear explosive lens compresses the core to a density approaching that of a neutron star. This will create coulomb large enough to generate gamma ray pressure within the imploding core. A few nanoseconds later, the pit is detonated to create additional gamma ray pressure. However, the gamma ray pressure from outside the core is greater, so rather than stop the implosion, it creates a feedback mechanism to which the gamma rays in the exploding pit increasing the energy millions of times. The idea is to create enough gamma ray pressure to stimulate particle-antiparticle production which pushes the gamma ray pressure over the top and the imploding core explodes with the same mechanism as a Supernova.

Any thoughts?


1. We don't have the technology to do it.
2. Even if we did it would be too expensive and too dangerous to use.

ruveyn



John_Browning
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,456
Location: The shooting range

24 Aug 2012, 4:38 pm

AspieRogue wrote:
Upon reading the wikipedia article about antimatter weapons, it's clear that the proposed antimatter bomb is highly unfeasible and extremely dangerous to the side that possesses it as well as to the enemy, so I have an idea for a new type of weapon. This was partly inspired by AspieOtaku's comment about the enormous explosive power of volcanoes which far exceed the combined firepower of every nuclear weapon in existence today(~10,000 megatons). So here's an outline of it's anatomy and explosive mechanism:


1)The *pit* of this device contains a pure fusion bomb no bigger in size than a globe(14 inch diameter max). This device must be triggered by an intense burst of x-rays from a z-pinch tube and the x-rays travel through an evacuated tube injecting them into the pit.

2) The outer core that surrounds the pit is a thick sphere of Lithium Deuteride. It's total mass would be up to 300kg. This is the primary fusion fuel.

3)The core is surrounded by a tamper consisting of Uranium 238 which will undergo fast fission and intensify the force of the nuclear explosive lens and help compress the core fusion fuel.

4) Outside of the encased core are a cluster of small (fission-fusion)nuclear bombs whose total combined yield should be around 10 megatons. There number of these devices should range from 18-30. These bombs are timed to detonate simultaneously. Their combined explosive force acts as a nuclear explosive lens which hurl intense gamma rays as well as fission products traveling at relativistic velocities.


The nuclear explosive lens compresses the core to a density approaching that of a neutron star. This will create coulomb large enough to generate gamma ray pressure within the imploding core. A few nanoseconds later, the pit is detonated to create additional gamma ray pressure. However, the gamma ray pressure from outside the core is greater, so rather than stop the implosion, it creates a feedback mechanism to which the gamma rays in the exploding pit increasing the energy millions of times. The idea is to create enough gamma ray pressure to stimulate particle-antiparticle production which pushes the gamma ray pressure over the top and the imploding core explodes with the same mechanism as a Supernova.

Any thoughts?

1) It was already thought of in the star wars books and comics.
2) Why build it when there is only one known inhabited solar system? :lol:


_________________
"Gun control is like trying to reduce drunk driving by making it tougher for sober people to own cars."
- Unknown

"A fear of weapons is a sign of ret*d sexual and emotional maturity."
-Sigmund Freud


24 Aug 2012, 4:50 pm

ruveyn wrote:
1. We don't have the technology to do it.
2. Even if we did it would be too expensive and too dangerous to use.

ruveyn



You are correct that it would far too dangerous to use. I don't give a s**t about Star Wars for what it's worth, JB.

A far more realistic option would be an orbiting accelerator that would fire an intense beam of positrons above its target which will cause a cascade of gamma rays that would mimic the effects of a nuclear airburst and generate plasma. The positive charge of the relativistic positrons would push the positively charged nuclei aside and collide with its target creating a massive burst of gamma rays resulting in an explosion well into the megaton range............And if there are sufficient positrons it could even reach yields in the GIGATONS! 8)


Might I add: If the device I proposed in the OPost is to be built and tested, it should be launched into outer space and detonated from a distance of at least 500,000 miles away from Earth. And John_Browning, I hope you realize that even though this device would be millions of times more powerful than any hydrogen bomb, its mass is NOWHERE NEAR the amount of mass in a star large enough to form a supernova.



Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 May 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 60,951
Location:      

25 Aug 2012, 11:10 am

Evidence, Please?

Show the maths.


_________________
The mere fact that science may not yet adequately explain an object, event, or experience does not mean the immediate explanation should automatically default to a conspiratorial, extraterrestrial, paranormal, or supernatural cause.


25 Aug 2012, 11:23 am

Fnord wrote:
Evidence, Please?

Show the maths.



I'll be happy to get back to you on that in a while. But keep in mind that a MSEE doesn't imply that you know jack sh1t about nuclear astrophysics....Which you clearly don't. Also, your claims about an exceptionally high GPA don't impress me that much. Sorry chub!



Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 May 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 60,951
Location:      

25 Aug 2012, 5:21 pm

AspieRogue wrote:
Fnord wrote:
Evidence, Please? Show the maths.

I'll be happy to get back to you on that in a while.

I'm not holding my breath.

AspieRogue wrote:
But keep in mind that a MSEE doesn't imply that you know jack sh1t about nuclear astrophysics

First, the field of "Nuclear Astrophysics" is an interdisciplinary branch of physics involving close collaboration among researchers in various subfields of nuclear physics and astrophysics, with significant emphasis in areas such as stellar modeling, measurement and theoretical estimation of nuclear reaction rates, cosmology, cosmochemistry, gamma ray, optical and X-ray astronomy, and extending our knowledge about nuclear lifetimes and masses.

Which of these fields is YOUR particular specialty?

In general terms, nuclear astrophysics aims to understand the origin of the chemical elements and the energy generation in stars -- NOT the development of supernova bombs and other doomsday weapons. Second, my thesis involved energy control systems analysis (... such as the kind used in thermonuclear power plants), included post-graduate calculus, and that I received top grades for it. Third, I did my research at the university's liquid-cooled "swimming-pool" style reactor, which has an extensive record of useful parameters and metrics going back decades.

AspieRogue wrote:
....Which you clearly don't.

Evidence, please?

AspieRogue wrote:
Also, your claims about an exceptionally high GPA don't impress me that much.

Please provide the link to the alleged post from which you obtained my alleged claim of an "exceptionally high GPA".

AspieRogue wrote:
Sorry chub!

The fact that you fell so quickly into Ad Hominem attacks when a single valid mathematical proof would have won your case implies that (1) it is you who knows nothing on the subject, and (2) you have no such proof.

Seriously, I am intrigued by your claims, and would be greatly impressed if they had any validity. So show the maths, and I will believe.

Otherwise, the concept you present is only so much comic-book fantasy.


_________________
The mere fact that science may not yet adequately explain an object, event, or experience does not mean the immediate explanation should automatically default to a conspiratorial, extraterrestrial, paranormal, or supernatural cause.


Ancalagon
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Dec 2007
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,302

25 Aug 2012, 5:36 pm

AspieRogue wrote:
Fnord wrote:
Evidence, Please?

Show the maths.



I'll be happy to get back to you on that in a while. But keep in mind that a MSEE doesn't imply that you know jack sh1t about nuclear astrophysics....Which you clearly don't. Also, your claims about an exceptionally high GPA don't impress me that much. Sorry chub!

You're proposing a 'supernova bomb'. If anyone's credentials ought to be under scrutiny, they would be yours.

Also, your design seems to assume that (among other things) you can get 18-30 nuclear bombs to detonate simultaneously. Since the hard part of making nuclear weapons is making sure the explosion doesn't tear apart the bomb so fast that relatively little of the fuel is used, it seems to me that that assumption is very unlikely to be attainable. Also, you're vague about the 'feedback mechanism', which appears to need to generate energy from nothing in order to make your bomb something other than a big fusion-fission bomb.


_________________
"A dead thing can go with the stream, but only a living thing can go against it." --G. K. Chesterton


25 Aug 2012, 8:57 pm

Ancalagon wrote:
AspieRogue wrote:
Fnord wrote:
Evidence, Please?

Show the maths.



I'll be happy to get back to you on that in a while. But keep in mind that a MSEE doesn't imply that you know jack sh1t about nuclear astrophysics....Which you clearly don't. Also, your claims about an exceptionally high GPA don't impress me that much. Sorry chub!

You're proposing a 'supernova bomb'. If anyone's credentials ought to be under scrutiny, they would be yours.

Also, your design seems to assume that (among other things) you can get 18-30 nuclear bombs to detonate simultaneously. Since the hard part of making nuclear weapons is making sure the explosion doesn't tear apart the bomb so fast that relatively little of the fuel is used, it seems to me that that assumption is very unlikely to be attainable. Also, you're vague about the 'feedback mechanism', which appears to need to generate energy from nothing in order to make your bomb something other than a big fusion-fission bomb.



Well, actually, it is possible to detonate explosives simultaneously(including nuclear explosives). This requires high speed switching which is used in detonating an implosion type fission device.






Fnord wrote:

In general terms, nuclear astrophysics aims to understand the origin of the chemical elements and the energy generation in stars -- NOT the development of supernova bombs and other doomsday weapons. Second, my thesis involved energy control systems analysis (... such as the kind used in thermonuclear power plants), included post-graduate calculus, and that I received top grades for it. Third, I did my research at the university's liquid-cooled "swimming-pool" style reactor, which has an extensive record of useful parameters and metrics going back decades.




Fnord wrote:

Please provide the link to the alleged post from which you obtained my alleged claim of an "exceptionally high GPA".




See text in bold.



John_Browning
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,456
Location: The shooting range

25 Aug 2012, 11:24 pm

OP:
Ok Dr. Evil, if you want to make this thing useable on a planet rather than detonate a star, how do you calculate it's yeild to adjust the size so that it does not destroy part of the earth's crust or cause massive ruptures and other apocalyptic geologic activity worldwide.

Assuming aren't a teenager that reads too much magna and plays to many video games and you really have the credentials to make a credible theory on such a device, why not apply it to rocket propulsion instead?

Image


_________________
"Gun control is like trying to reduce drunk driving by making it tougher for sober people to own cars."
- Unknown

"A fear of weapons is a sign of ret*d sexual and emotional maturity."
-Sigmund Freud


25 Aug 2012, 11:46 pm

I love it how JB, who obviously doesn't know jack sh1t about physics, let alone nuclear weapons, is trying to troll me with ghey movie references! :D


Keep trying hard to be cool, bro. You'll get there one day. :wink:



John_Browning
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,456
Location: The shooting range

26 Aug 2012, 12:33 am

AspieRogue wrote:
I love it how JB, who obviously doesn't know jack sh1t about physics, let alone nuclear weapons, is trying to troll me with ghey movie references! :D


Keep trying hard to be cool, bro. You'll get there one day. :wink:

I know what you are talking about. Your biggest scientific hurdle (money and bureaucracy not withstanding) is getting all these devices to work in sync. Getting the electronics of current devices synchronized properly is a feat. Getting quality control tolerances small enough for them to all work together PLUS the electronics to synchronize it all, well that's unlikely.

As a lab experiment a CERN it would be fascinating. Building a bomb out of it requires intelligence for the details, but if you stand back and look at the big picture, it's epically ret*d!


_________________
"Gun control is like trying to reduce drunk driving by making it tougher for sober people to own cars."
- Unknown

"A fear of weapons is a sign of ret*d sexual and emotional maturity."
-Sigmund Freud


Apple_in_my_Eye
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 7 May 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,420
Location: in my brain

26 Aug 2012, 12:40 am

OP, is this basically the same as your design ? Basically a fission-fusion sandwich? --> http://www.atomicarchive.com/History/hb ... e_08.shtml

I don't know enough about this subject to know (but this isn't Phys Rev A, so what the hell...), but I wonder if the problem is the timing requirements (as others have noted). It seems like with this 'alarm clock' design you have to worry not just about the uniformity of the chemical explosion (as you would with a fission-only bomb), but also of the fission explosion.

Quote:
Alarm Clock Configuration Emerges

Klaus Fuchs departed from Los Alamos on June 15, 1946, but research and development on the hydrogen bomb continued on. At the end of August 1946, Teller proposed a new bomb configuration, which he dubbed the "Alarm Clock." The scheme alternated spherical layers of fissionable materials and thermonuclear fuel (deuterium, tritium and possible their chemical compounds). Fast neutrons generated in thermonuclear reactions in the fuel layers would trigger fissions in the adjacent layers of separating materials, significantly boosting the energy release.


Image



26 Aug 2012, 12:53 am

John_Browning wrote:
AspieRogue wrote:
I love it how JB, who obviously doesn't know jack sh1t about physics, let alone nuclear weapons, is trying to troll me with ghey movie references! :D


Keep trying hard to be cool, bro. You'll get there one day. :wink:

I know what you are talking about. Your biggest scientific hurdle (money and bureaucracy not withstanding) is getting all these devices to work in sync. Getting the electronics of current devices synchronized properly is a feat. Getting quality control tolerances small enough for them to all work together PLUS the electronics to synchronize it all, well that's unlikely.

As a lab experiment a CERN it would be fascinating. Building a bomb out of it requires intelligence for the details, but if you stand back and look at the big picture, it's epically ret*d!



Well JB, you seem to think that this problem is unsolvable. The same problem was an issue during the design of the first implosion type fission weapon.............And guess what? They solved it. Getting to them to work in sync will require high speed switching, along with counting for the tiny but critical delays to ensure that the detonator signals arrive with a lag time that's not significant. The same issues arise with laser fusion: The firing of the lasers must be timed down to nanoseconds so that they all strike the spherical fusion fuel pellet at exactly the same time.



Ancalagon
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Dec 2007
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,302

26 Aug 2012, 1:27 am

AspieRogue wrote:
Well, actually, it is possible to detonate explosives simultaneously(including nuclear explosives). This requires high speed switching which is used in detonating an implosion type fission device.

Implosion fission bombs use ordinary explosives.

For your idea to work, you would have to get 2 nuclear weapons to go off side-by-side in such a way that neither one would disrupt the other. Mentioning that conventional explosives can be made to go off right next to each other without disrupting each other doesn't convince me that it could be done with nuclear weapons.


_________________
"A dead thing can go with the stream, but only a living thing can go against it." --G. K. Chesterton


John_Browning
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,456
Location: The shooting range

26 Aug 2012, 2:49 am

AspieRogue wrote:
Well JB, you seem to think that this problem is unsolvable. The same problem was an issue during the design of the first implosion type fission weapon.............And guess what? They solved it. Getting to them to work in sync will require high speed switching, along with counting for the tiny but critical delays to ensure that the detonator signals arrive with a lag time that's not significant. The same issues arise with laser fusion: The firing of the lasers must be timed down to nanoseconds so that they all strike the spherical fusion fuel pellet at exactly the same time.

I know it was solved and it's theoretically possible to do the same with the setup you propose. Now keep in mind everyone on the internet is a former green beret, master of ninjitsu, kung-fu, krav maga, is a UFC champ, and has a phd in any subject that comes up. Now if you really do have the credentials to know how to construct any of this, why not sell the license for this electronic signaling system to computer manufacturers and buy your own private Hawaiian island?


_________________
"Gun control is like trying to reduce drunk driving by making it tougher for sober people to own cars."
- Unknown

"A fear of weapons is a sign of ret*d sexual and emotional maturity."
-Sigmund Freud