Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: jmfbahciv on 2 Feb 2007 07:49 In article <877iv1n7xs.fsf(a)nonospaz.fatphil.org>, Phil Carmody <thefatphil_demunged(a)yahoo.co.uk> 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. >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). > >BAH history is BAD history. There is a huge difference between theory and playing in the labs and putting something into production. With the bomb, both were happening at the same time. It's still an amazing managment effort. Unfortunately, it takes war to get everybody to aim at the same goal. /BAH
From: jmfbahciv on 2 Feb 2007 07:53 In article <45C2B502.DDC4BF7F(a)hotmail.com>, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > >MassiveProng wrote: > >> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> Gave us: >> >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. >> > >> >> That was just over 100 Lbs of first generation weak grade material. >> >> NOW, we can do it with less weight, and much more responsive media. > >We can, but can a beginner get it right ? You are suffering, again, from European thinking. Iran isn't a beginner. Their education level is higher than pre-school. /BAH
From: MassiveProng on 2 Feb 2007 08:02 On Fri, 02 Feb 07 12:40:44 GMT, jmfbahciv(a)aol.com Gave us: >You people sure seem to have to think in absolutes. Like you and your stove.
From: jmfbahciv on 2 Feb 2007 07:57 In article <58776$45c259f5$4fe752c$2080(a)DIALUPUSA.NET>, unsettled <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> wrote: <snip> >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. If you ever get a chance to visit Oakridge, don't forget to look up. I was stunned to see all the strung wire. A lot of it was accumulated over the years, but still, the manpower to put it up there was just astounding. It was one the beautiful moments in my life. Perhaps they've cleaned it up. That would be said if they have. <snip> /BAH
From: MassiveProng on 2 Feb 2007 08:07
On Fri, 02 Feb 07 12:53:20 GMT, jmfbahciv(a)aol.com Gave us: >In article <45C2B502.DDC4BF7F(a)hotmail.com>, > Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> >> >>MassiveProng wrote: >> >>> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> Gave us: >>> >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. >>> > >>> >>> That was just over 100 Lbs of first generation weak grade material. >>> >>> NOW, we can do it with less weight, and much more responsive media. >> >>We can, but can a beginner get it right ? > >You are suffering, again, from European thinking. Iran >isn't a beginner. Their education level is higher than >pre-school. > >/BAH You are suffering from horse with blinders on, single word, single definition mentality again. The word beginner in this context refers to beginner in the nuclear war device realm. How can you be so utterly stupid so often? The fact remains that they are receiving assistance in this area. |