Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: unsettled on 1 Feb 2007 13:37 Eeyore wrote: > > unsettled wrote: > > >>Phil Carmody wrote: >> >>>jmfbahciv(a)aol.com writes: >>> >>> >>>>The US started with no knowledge and built bombs within 3 years. >>>>This included all of the infrastructure required. >>>>The knowledge has been around for five decades so nobody >>>>has to do that work. >>> >>> >>>It also includes the requirement that you think 6 is 3. >>> >>>BAH maths is BAD maths. >>> >>>It also presumes that Szil�rd, Teller, Einstein and Oppenheimer, >>>had no knowledge before they started working on the projects. >> >>Why didn't you simply include the entire history of mankind >>and start with "Adam" then" >> >>Einstein *never* worked on the bomb project. His input was >>limited to sending a letter at Szilard's request. >> >>The rest of them, including the important work done by >>Wheeler's group at Princeton and Bohr, started with the >>Manhattan Project. The problems to be solved were not >>whether or not a bomb could work, but actually making it >>work, and a contingent trying to figure out whether or not >>once started a chain reaction wouldn't extend to the entire >>planet. >> >> >>>Weird, as Szil�rd was researching the matter at about the same >>>time as the Erm�chtigungsgesetz was kicking in (but not publishing >>>his work for that very reason). >> >>Szilard and others were trying to keep up with what the Germans >>were doing in their nuclear program. We sent a mission to >>destroy Germany's heavy water facility in Norway. >> >>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norwegian_heavy_water_sabotage >> >> >>>BAH history is BAD history. >> >>She's accurate with her time scale of 3 years. And her point >>is also correct that any country with decent math, science and >>technology can duplicate the effort in ~3 years, perhaps less, >>by mounting an effort much smaller than the Manhattan Project >>was given the wealth of knowledge in the public domain. > > > The big problem is making enough fissile material. A huge effort was required to > make enough for the 3 bombs the USA exploded before the end of WW2. Less material is needed today.
From: Phil Carmody on 1 Feb 2007 14:40 unsettled <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> writes: > Phil Carmody wrote: > > > jmfbahciv(a)aol.com writes: > > > >>The US started with no knowledge and built bombs within 3 years. > >>This included all of the infrastructure required. > >>The knowledge has been around for five decades so nobody > >> has to do that work. > > It also includes the requirement that you think 6 is 3. > > BAH maths is BAD maths. > > It also presumes that Szil�rd, Teller, Einstein and Oppenheimer, > > had no knowledge before they started working on the projects. > > Why didn't you simply include the entire history of mankind > and start with "Adam" then" Because all of the above had were in America, and had some part > Einstein *never* worked on the bomb project. His input was > limited to sending a letter at Szilard's request. And by doing so he validated the theories underpinning the work. Theories come before practice. Without that input from him, the research may well not have got underway in 1939. > The rest of them, including the important work done by > Wheeler's group at Princeton and Bohr, started with the > Manhattan Project. The problems to be solved were not > whether or not a bomb could work, but actually making it > work, and a contingent trying to figure out whether or not > once started a chain reaction wouldn't extend to the entire > planet. Wrong. The US-based research got underway in 1939. > > Weird, as Szil�rd was researching the matter at about the same > > time as the Erm�chtigungsgesetz was kicking in (but not publishing > > his work for that very reason). > > Szilard and others were trying to keep up with what the Germans > were doing in their nuclear program. We sent a mission to > destroy Germany's heavy water facility in Norway. > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norwegian_heavy_water_sabotage Irrelevant. Szil�rd's results were from 1933. That alone counters BAH's absurd claim. > > BAH history is BAD history. > > She's accurate with her time scale of 3 years. Wrong. The US research was underway in 1939. 1945-1939 is 6 years. Your maths and history are as bad as BAH's. Phil -- "Home taping is killing big business profits. We left this side blank so you can help." -- Dead Kennedys, written upon the B-side of tapes of /In God We Trust, Inc./.
From: Lloyd Parker on 1 Feb 2007 10:00 In article <18252$45c23358$4fe74a9$30893(a)DIALUPUSA.NET>, unsettled <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> wrote: >Eeyore wrote: > >> >> unsettled wrote: >> >> >>>Phil Carmody wrote: >>> >>>>jmfbahciv(a)aol.com writes: >>>> >>>> >>>>>The US started with no knowledge and built bombs within 3 years. >>>>>This included all of the infrastructure required. >>>>>The knowledge has been around for five decades so nobody >>>>>has to do that work. >>>> >>>> >>>>It also includes the requirement that you think 6 is 3. >>>> >>>>BAH maths is BAD maths. >>>> >>>>It also presumes that Szil�rd, Teller, Einstein and Oppenheimer, >>>>had no knowledge before they started working on the projects. >>> >>>Why didn't you simply include the entire history of mankind >>>and start with "Adam" then" >>> >>>Einstein *never* worked on the bomb project. His input was >>>limited to sending a letter at Szilard's request. >>> >>>The rest of them, including the important work done by >>>Wheeler's group at Princeton and Bohr, started with the >>>Manhattan Project. The problems to be solved were not >>>whether or not a bomb could work, but actually making it >>>work, and a contingent trying to figure out whether or not >>>once started a chain reaction wouldn't extend to the entire >>>planet. >>> >>> >>>>Weird, as Szil�rd was researching the matter at about the same >>>>time as the Erm�chtigungsgesetz was kicking in (but not publishing >>>>his work for that very reason). >>> >>>Szilard and others were trying to keep up with what the Germans >>>were doing in their nuclear program. We sent a mission to >>>destroy Germany's heavy water facility in Norway. >>> >>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norwegian_heavy_water_sabotage >>> >>> >>>>BAH history is BAD history. >>> >>>She's accurate with her time scale of 3 years. And her point >>>is also correct that any country with decent math, science and >>>technology can duplicate the effort in ~3 years, perhaps less, >>>by mounting an effort much smaller than the Manhattan Project >>>was given the wealth of knowledge in the public domain. >> >> >> The big problem is making enough fissile material. A huge effort was required to >> make enough for the 3 bombs the USA exploded before the end of WW2. > >Less material is needed today. > But that's with sophisticated designs which require sophisticated computers and modelling to make.
From: T Wake on 1 Feb 2007 16:10 <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message news:epslnf$8qk_011(a)s807.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... > In article <K_udnV1AiOLCUV3YnZ2dnUVZ8qqlnZ2d(a)pipex.net>, > "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: >> >><jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message >>news:epqcu0$8ss_001(a)s1000.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... >>> In article <2fa56$45bf5287$4fe71bb$1435(a)DIALUPUSA.NET>, >>> unsettled <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> wrote: >> >>><snip> >>>> >>>>I think eventually we'll discover they've found other ways >>>>to do the training they used to do in their camps. >>> >>> Nono. You forget that we've only eradicated one set >>> of camps whose protectors were located in a geographic >>> area the world calls Afghanistan. >>> >>>> It >>>>appears that one approach might be to run their people >>>>through standard military combat training at the expense of >>>>countries all around the world, then answer the call to jihad >>>>whenever they're directly called upon by whoever their handler >>>>is. >>> >>> Or a code word that is part of a news item. Or it could be >>> tasks that are to be done when a riot occurs. >>> >>><snip> >> >>Can I ask a simple question? >> >>What is your "endstate?" >> >>By this, I mean at what point will you decide the mission is achieved and >>the war is over? > > There won't be any. It will be a gradual change of mindset > over the years. To achieve this, those who have the goal > to destroy Western civilization have to be kept from achieving it. > > I suggest that you listen to Bush's speech. He explained all > of this but nobody seems to have heard it in their zeal to > "defeat" Bush by ceding to the Islamic terrorists. So you are saying your "state of war" is going to last for ever then? You are also saying that the "sacrifices made" because of this state of war will be in place for ever? Please, try to avoid turning this into your local political forum.
From: unsettled on 1 Feb 2007 16:21
Phil Carmody wrote: > unsettled <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> writes: > >>Phil Carmody wrote: >> >> >>>jmfbahciv(a)aol.com writes: >>> >>> >>>>The US started with no knowledge and built bombs within 3 years. >>>>This included all of the infrastructure required. >>>>The knowledge has been around for five decades so nobody >>>>has to do that work. >>> >>>It also includes the requirement that you think 6 is 3. >>>BAH maths is BAD maths. >>>It also presumes that Szil�rd, Teller, Einstein and Oppenheimer, >>>had no knowledge before they started working on the projects. >> >>Why didn't you simply include the entire history of mankind >>and start with "Adam" then" > > > Because all of the above had were in America, and had some > part This is stupidity. If you really want the origin of the A bomb you'd have to go back at least to 1905 and Einstein's paper. However, nobody in the US was formally researching "making a bomb" till the Manhattan project so far as I know. That there were a few mathematical physicists around the world, including the USA, who were toying with the possibilities isn't disputed. What is fact is that it took 3 years to make the bomb once anyone got serious about it. >>Einstein *never* worked on the bomb project. His input was >>limited to sending a letter at Szilard's request. > And by doing so he validated the theories underpinning the > work. Theories come before practice. Without that input from > him, the research may well not have got underway in 1939. Einstein's purpose was to counter the Nazi threat in Europe. He had no need to validate his theory to Roosevelt who couldn't personally have cared less about Einstein's theories. "The letter has often been seen as the origins of the Manhattan Project, the successful wartime nuclear weapons project which produced the bombs which were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945. The path from the letter to the bombings though is considerably longer than just this: the Advisory Committee on Uranium did not vigorously pursue the development of a weapon, and at least two other organizations superseded it (the National Defense Research Committee and the Office of Scientific Research and Development) before the work of fission research was finally superseded by the Manhattan Engineering District in 1942 and became a full-scale bomb development program." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Einstein-Szil%C3%A1rd_letter An image of the original Einstein letter can be seen at http://www.aip.org/history/einstein/ae43a.htm >>The rest of them, including the important work done by >>Wheeler's group at Princeton and Bohr, started with the >>Manhattan Project. The problems to be solved were not >>whether or not a bomb could work, but actually making it >>work, and a contingent trying to figure out whether or not >>once started a chain reaction wouldn't extend to the entire >>planet. > Wrong. The US-based research got underway in 1939. Name names, locations, and funding sources. We're talking about making a bomb, not generalized nuclear research on limited budgets at universities. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_Pile-1 Nuclear chain reaction wasn't even proved till 1942. So much for your earlier "research." >>>Weird, as Szil�rd was researching the matter at about the same >>>time as the Erm�chtigungsgesetz was kicking in (but not publishing >>>his work for that very reason). >>Szilard and others were trying to keep up with what the Germans >>were doing in their nuclear program. We sent a mission to >>destroy Germany's heavy water facility in Norway. >>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norwegian_heavy_water_sabotage > Irrelevant. Szil�rd's results were from 1933. That alone > counters BAH's absurd claim. >>>BAH history is BAD history. >>She's accurate with her time scale of 3 years. > Wrong. The US research was underway in 1939. 1945-1939 is 6 years. > Your maths and history are as bad as BAH's. All criticism coming from you is a compliment. Besides you've provided nothing to substantiate your claims and you're known for your empty blather. |