What was designated as atmosphere when members of the Manhattan Project were ‘concerned about creating a chain effect in the atmosphere that would envelope the globe’?

From the physics point of view “atmosphere” is relative to momentum. Deconstructed this requires that a centre of momentum chain reaction be absorbed in the direction of centre of momentum.

I am genuinely concerned that with first testing of nuclear devices the Manhattan Project has demonstrated some of the complexities of forward momentum in time. I do not believe the atmospheric dispersal recorded is what confined the chain reaction. The angular momentum was dipersed to the air but the centre of momentum is dispersed to globe and travels toward the core. I believe it took from 1945 to 2011 for the mass absorbed shockwave to reach the earth’s core where it rebounded as a cascade of deteriorating particles that ended in the japanese tsunami. Watch out! That nuclear device is a boomerang haha. But seriously?

I won’t go into deep explanation but defining where angular momentum is dispersed and where centre of momentum is dispersed is absolutely essential for predicting where to look for chain reaction. Both fission and fusion are defined by centre of momentum. What was observed on the surface was the dispersal of angular momentum. The centre of momentum can only be absorbed in the direction of gravitation.

So that leaves me till 2017 to try to figure out if I am unduly concerned(possibly paranoid) or if the world is in for an escalating series of catastrophic earthquakes that won’t cease until all the centre of momentum that was expended in subsequent testing reaches the core.

I’m not a crazy. I have become so good at shutting this concern out that I forget why I take breaks from studying physics. Everything I can reference physics-wise only supports this dispersal of momenta. Unfortunately only providing the maths will remove this concern from my mind before 2018 or so.

Now that I’ve described this concern accurately I won’t be able to completely forget about it like I have till now. Shit. :/

The centre of momentum shockwave that is absorbed by the globe in a nuclear blast does not resolve till it reaches the core. I cannot find any solution to this shockwave taking considerable time to resolve at the core before it can be dispersed.

you do realise that you aren’t doing science, don’t you?

Is there something special about a nuclear explosion and shock waves compared to a conventional explosion of the same size?

JudgeMental said:

you do realise that you aren’t doing science, don’t you?

so you can’t differentiate your angular momentum from your centre of momentum?

Peak Warming Man said:

Is there something special about a nuclear explosion and shock waves compared to a conventional explosion of the same size?

The centre of momentum isolation required. By shitloads.

Peak Warming Man said:

Is there something special about a nuclear explosion and shock waves compared to a conventional explosion of the same size?

The angular momentum you confine is what is dispersed to the air. Centre of momentum can only be absorbed by the globe.

Postpocelipse said:

I believe it took from 1945 to 2011 for the mass absorbed shockwave to reach the earth’s core

Why?

Postpocelipse said:

Peak Warming Man said:

Is there something special about a nuclear explosion and shock waves compared to a conventional explosion of the same size?

The centre of momentum isolation required. By shitloads.

If 2011 was the rebound from hiroshima and Nagasaki by the time we get to when they test fusion bombs things could have got pretty monotonous. Might take time to adjust if you aren’t prepared though.

party_pants said:

Postpocelipse said:

I believe it took from 1945 to 2011 for the mass absorbed shockwave to reach the earth’s core

Why?

Angular momentum is dispersed to the atmosphere. Centre of momentum is dispersed as shockwave through the globe. Because of the degree of centre of momentum applied resolution does not occur till the wave is entirely absorbed to the core. At this point there is a cascade of nuclear decay.

Mike was the first thermonuclear device detonated in 1952.

JudgeMental said:

Mike was the first thermonuclear device detonated in 1952.

Was that a detonation of any magnitude?

I is da bomb!

Was that a detonation of any magnitude?

10 megatons.

JudgeMental said:

Was that a detonation of any magnitude?

10 megatons.

Somewhat larger than the kiloton figures for fission weapons.

Postpocelipse said:

party_pants said:

Postpocelipse said:

I believe it took from 1945 to 2011 for the mass absorbed shockwave to reach the earth’s core

Why?

Angular momentum is dispersed to the atmosphere. Centre of momentum is dispersed as shockwave through the globe. Because of the degree of centre of momentum applied resolution does not occur till the wave is entirely absorbed to the core. At this point there is a cascade of nuclear decay.

“Angular momentum” is already taken. You’ll have to choose another name for the concept you are trying to describe.

yeah MV, they use a fission device to set the fusion device off.

Postpocelipse said:

JudgeMental said:

Mike was the first thermonuclear device detonated in 1952.

Was that a detonation of any magnitude?

Magnitude matters to breadth of shockwave but centre of momentum defines degree of penetration to the ground absorbed shockwave. What matters about the degree of centre of momentum required to detonate fission is that rebound from the core does not occur till the entire shockwave is absorbed. Resolution occurs as a cascade of fission in the core.

I’m not sure that spells very good things forsubsurface testing.

COM is taken as well. though i doubt postie understands it.

I thought you might be able to provide something in graphs and numbers Michael V. Just going with the chuckle?

PostPoc, your recent behavior on the forum suggests to me that something isn’t quite right.

Are you OK?

If you would like to talk off forum I’m happy to.

diddly-squat said:

PostPoc, your recent behavior on the forum suggests to me that something isn’t quite right.

Are you OK?

If you would like to talk off forum I’m happy to.

I would enjoy talking to someone who can accurately measure shockwave dispersal. I had managed to keep this earthquake concern out of my head until I worked out how to describe it.

Michael V said:

I is da bomb!

That was me making a joke about a bomb called “Mike”.

I know nothing about nuclear weapons, other than the general stuff, so I don’t comment. I have no idea where to get graphs about what you are discussing.

you were da bomb. you blew up in 52.

Postpocelipse said:

diddly-squat said:

PostPoc, your recent behavior on the forum suggests to me that something isn’t quite right.

Are you OK?

If you would like to talk off forum I’m happy to.

I would enjoy talking to someone who can accurately measure shockwave dispersal. I had managed to keep this earthquake concern out of my head until I worked out how to describe it.

dv is a geophysicist, I’m confident he can settle any concerns you have in regards to the propagation of seismic waves. However I’m not sure this is really where your problem lies.

Postpocelipse said:

diddly-squat said:

PostPoc, your recent behavior on the forum suggests to me that something isn’t quite right.

Are you OK?

If you would like to talk off forum I’m happy to.

I would enjoy talking to someone who can accurately measure shockwave dispersal. I had managed to keep this earthquake concern out of my head until I worked out how to describe it.

One moment I’m discovering which end of physics I can absorb the most information from the next I’ve remembered why I have a love/hate relationship with physics. I’d prefer to be proven wrong.

diddly-squat said:

Postpocelipse said:

diddly-squat said:

PostPoc, your recent behavior on the forum suggests to me that something isn’t quite right.

Are you OK?

If you would like to talk off forum I’m happy to.

I would enjoy talking to someone who can accurately measure shockwave dispersal. I had managed to keep this earthquake concern out of my head until I worked out how to describe it.

dv is a geophysicist, I’m confident he can settle any concerns you have in regards to the propagation of seismic waves. However I’m not sure this is really where your problem lies.

thanks I know good psychologists already so you’d have to show better qualifications to wield that concern very far.

Postpocelipse said:

Postpocelipse said:

diddly-squat said:

PostPoc, your recent behavior on the forum suggests to me that something isn’t quite right.

Are you OK?

If you would like to talk off forum I’m happy to.

I would enjoy talking to someone who can accurately measure shockwave dispersal. I had managed to keep this earthquake concern out of my head until I worked out how to describe it.

One moment I’m discovering which end of physics I can absorb the most information from the next I’ve remembered why I have a love/hate relationship with physics. I’d prefer to be proven wrong.

dude, your interest for the subject matter is admirable… however if you are truly interested in learning then I would suggest you look at entering into some type of formal educational program. Once you have the basic concepts and nomenclature down, as well as a handle on the mathematics required to describe the physical systems you are describing I’m confident you will be better placed to develop any theories you may have.

Michael V said:

Michael V said:

I is da bomb!

That was me making a joke about a bomb called “Mike”.

I know nothing about nuclear weapons, other than the general stuff, so I don’t comment. I have no idea where to get graphs about what you are discussing.

Ohh. First laugh I’ve had since I remembered this little parcel of headache earlier. :)

Postpocelipse said:

party_pants said:

Postpocelipse said:

I believe it took from 1945 to 2011 for the mass absorbed shockwave to reach the earth’s core

Why?

Angular momentum is dispersed to the atmosphere. Centre of momentum is dispersed as shockwave through the globe. Because of the degree of centre of momentum applied resolution does not occur till the wave is entirely absorbed to the core. At this point there is a cascade of nuclear decay.

I think you misunderstood my question. I’m interested to know why you think this process takes ~66 years to work through, rather than 66 minutes, or 66 hours or 66 days – or some other shorter period of time. Can you explain why this process is so slow?

diddly-squat said:

Postpocelipse said:

Postpocelipse said:

I would enjoy talking to someone who can accurately measure shockwave dispersal. I had managed to keep this earthquake concern out of my head until I worked out how to describe it.

One moment I’m discovering which end of physics I can absorb the most information from the next I’ve remembered why I have a love/hate relationship with physics. I’d prefer to be proven wrong.

dude, your interest for the subject matter is admirable… however if you are truly interested in learning then I would suggest you look at entering into some type of formal educational program. Once you have the basic concepts and nomenclature down, as well as a handle on the mathematics required to describe the physical systems you are describing I’m confident you will be better placed to develop any theories you may have.

At this point I am most interested in removing this concern from my consciousness. It will take a long time to do that through familiarising myself with what is directly relevant and available as reference material. I have absorbed enough of that I am more than convinced that I can find no other resolution.

party_pants said:

Postpocelipse said:

party_pants said:

Why?

Angular momentum is dispersed to the atmosphere. Centre of momentum is dispersed as shockwave through the globe. Because of the degree of centre of momentum applied resolution does not occur till the wave is entirely absorbed to the core. At this point there is a cascade of nuclear decay.

“Angular momentum” is already taken. You’ll have to choose another name for the concept you are trying to describe.

Spin Gravity?

looks over shoulder

looks over shoulder

hello.

Uh-oh…

JudgeMental said:

looks over shoulder

hello.

It is not you whom I’m worried about. Well, it is, but in this case I have a different worry.

party_pants said:

Postpocelipse said:

party_pants said:

Why?

Angular momentum is dispersed to the atmosphere. Centre of momentum is dispersed as shockwave through the globe. Because of the degree of centre of momentum applied resolution does not occur till the wave is entirely absorbed to the core. At this point there is a cascade of nuclear decay.

I think you misunderstood my question. I’m interested to know why you think this process takes ~66 years to work through, rather than 66 minutes, or 66 hours or 66 days – or some other shorter period of time. Can you explain why this process is so slow?

A basic breakdown of distribution of detonation above ground. Electron mass is dispersed to the atmosphere. Proton mass does not disperse till the blast rebounds from the ground. The blast that rebounds from the ground is entirely angular momentum energy from the fissioning proton mass. The shockwave absorbed to the ground is a small part angular momentum and the entirety of the contained centre of momentum. The angular momentum absorbed to the ground can be measure to dissipate rapidly. The centre of momentum cannot dissipate till it has coalesced with the centre of momentum at the core.

thanks I know good psychologists already…

i suggest you book an appointment then.

Be alert Postpocelipse

http://psychcentral.com/encyclopedia/2008/delusion-of-grandeur/

JudgeMental said:

thanks I know good psychologists already…

i suggest you book an appointment then.

Are you telling me how to catch up with friends now?

i’m telling you that you need help.

Postpocelipse said:

party_pants said:

Postpocelipse said:

Angular momentum is dispersed to the atmosphere. Centre of momentum is dispersed as shockwave through the globe. Because of the degree of centre of momentum applied resolution does not occur till the wave is entirely absorbed to the core. At this point there is a cascade of nuclear decay.

I think you misunderstood my question. I’m interested to know why you think this process takes ~66 years to work through, rather than 66 minutes, or 66 hours or 66 days – or some other shorter period of time. Can you explain why this process is so slow?

A basic breakdown of distribution of detonation above ground. Electron mass is dispersed to the atmosphere. Proton mass does not disperse till the blast rebounds from the ground. The blast that rebounds from the ground is entirely angular momentum energy from the fissioning proton mass. The shockwave absorbed to the ground is a small part angular momentum and the entirety of the contained centre of momentum. The angular momentum absorbed to the ground can be measure to dissipate rapidly. The centre of momentum cannot dissipate till it has coalesced with the centre of momentum at the core.

But that would take only minutes or hours.

tauto said:

Be alert Postpocelipse

http://psychcentral.com/encyclopedia/2008/delusion-of-grandeur/

yup grandeur. ok. I’m wondering what the world will look like once the below ground tests re-detonate and you think you have me summed with that collection of syllables? Hmmm

party_pants said:

Postpocelipse said:

party_pants said:

I think you misunderstood my question. I’m interested to know why you think this process takes ~66 years to work through, rather than 66 minutes, or 66 hours or 66 days – or some other shorter period of time. Can you explain why this process is so slow?

A basic breakdown of distribution of detonation above ground. Electron mass is dispersed to the atmosphere. Proton mass does not disperse till the blast rebounds from the ground. The blast that rebounds from the ground is entirely angular momentum energy from the fissioning proton mass. The shockwave absorbed to the ground is a small part angular momentum and the entirety of the contained centre of momentum. The angular momentum absorbed to the ground can be measure to dissipate rapidly. The centre of momentum cannot dissipate till it has coalesced with the centre of momentum at the core.

But that would take only minutes or hours.

No. There is a time dilation that must resolve before the shockwave coalesces at the core. It can be graphed but so far the only comparable I have to develop against is 9.0< earthquakes.

once the below ground tests re-detonate

not going to happen.

There is a time dilation

nah, not going to be relativistic speeds involved.

JudgeMental said:

once the below ground tests re-detonate

not going to happen.

You should sell that line in little packets called valium. It has less side effects.

Postpocelipse said:

tauto said:

Be alert Postpocelipse

http://psychcentral.com/encyclopedia/2008/delusion-of-grandeur/

yup grandeur. ok. I’m wondering what the world will look like once the below ground tests re-detonate and you think you have me summed with that collection of syllables? Hmmm

—-

They will not re-detonate.. Below the mantle it is a slow fluid and the shockwaves would have been sent in many directions.

JudgeMental said:

There is a time dilation

nah, not going to be relativistic speeds involved.

who said anything about speed?

ok then, not enough gravitational effects. take your pick. time dilation ain’t going to happen.

JudgeMental said:

There is a time dilation

nah, not going to be relativistic speeds involved.

uranium provides high mass/centre of momentum.

word salads.

Postpocelipse said:

party_pants said:

Postpocelipse said:

A basic breakdown of distribution of detonation above ground. Electron mass is dispersed to the atmosphere. Proton mass does not disperse till the blast rebounds from the ground. The blast that rebounds from the ground is entirely angular momentum energy from the fissioning proton mass. The shockwave absorbed to the ground is a small part angular momentum and the entirety of the contained centre of momentum. The angular momentum absorbed to the ground can be measure to dissipate rapidly. The centre of momentum cannot dissipate till it has coalesced with the centre of momentum at the core.

But that would take only minutes or hours.

No. There is a time dilation that must resolve before the shockwave coalesces at the core. It can be graphed but so far the only comparable I have to develop against is 9.0< earthquakes.

I’m not convinced. I’m not concerned you’ve found anything alarming I need to worry about.

I might go drink beer and eat cabanossi (without any cheese or crackers) instead. I’ll leave you to your state of anxiety.

tauto said:

Postpocelipse said:

tauto said:

Be alert Postpocelipse

http://psychcentral.com/encyclopedia/2008/delusion-of-grandeur/

yup grandeur. ok. I’m wondering what the world will look like once the below ground tests re-detonate and you think you have me summed with that collection of syllables? Hmmm

—-

They will not re-detonate.. Below the mantle it is a slow fluid and the shockwaves would have been sent in many directions.

That is a description of the outer core. The core is iron. Angular momentum can be dispersed at the outer core. All actions of centre of momentum at the surface of a massed body must resolve at the core before dispersal. It becomes an equal and opposite reaction.

JudgeMental said:

ok then, not enough gravitational effects. take your pick. time dilation ain’t going to happen.

If you say so. You want to explain to me exactly how any explosion is’nt a dilation of space and therefore the time within that space?

party_pants said:

Postpocelipse said:

party_pants said:

But that would take only minutes or hours.

No. There is a time dilation that must resolve before the shockwave coalesces at the core. It can be graphed but so far the only comparable I have to develop against is 9.0< earthquakes.

I’m not convinced. I’m not concerned you’ve found anything alarming I need to worry about.

I might go drink beer and eat cabanossi (without any cheese or crackers) instead. I’ll leave you to your state of anxiety.

Yes I implied in the title that if you had nothing to provide or somethig better to do you probably should.

You want to explain to me exactly how any explosion is’nt a dilation of space and therefore the time within that space?

if you actually knew what time dilation is you wouldn’t need to ask that question.

JudgeMental said:

You want to explain to me exactly how any explosion is’nt a dilation of space and therefore the time within that space?

if you actually knew what time dilation is you wouldn’t need to ask that question.

oh you got me with a supposition. I’m not going to spend time proving your opinions wrong.

Postpocelipse said:

party_pants said:

Postpocelipse said:

No. There is a time dilation that must resolve before the shockwave coalesces at the core. It can be graphed but so far the only comparable I have to develop against is 9.0< earthquakes.

I’m not convinced. I’m not concerned you’ve found anything alarming I need to worry about.

I might go drink beer and eat cabanossi (without any cheese or crackers) instead. I’ll leave you to your state of anxiety.

Yes I implied in the title that if you had nothing to provide or somethig better to do you probably should.

You obviously agitated and concerned you have uncovered some impending disaster that awaits the planet. Trying to set your mind at ease, I don’t think your interpretation is correct. The two possible outcomes are that there is some impending disaster, or you have got your modelling wrong. I’m suggesting the latter.

because you can’t.

because you don’t know science.

because you have mental problems and are deluded.

party_pants said:

Postpocelipse said:

party_pants said:

I’m not convinced. I’m not concerned you’ve found anything alarming I need to worry about.

I might go drink beer and eat cabanossi (without any cheese or crackers) instead. I’ll leave you to your state of anxiety.

Yes I implied in the title that if you had nothing to provide or somethig better to do you probably should.

You obviously agitated and concerned you have uncovered some impending disaster that awaits the planet. Trying to set your mind at ease, I don’t think your interpretation is correct. The two possible outcomes are that there is some impending disaster, or you have got your modelling wrong. I’m suggesting the latter.

This thread does not need further psychology. It isn’t that far off scientology really.

JudgeMental said:

because you don’t know science.

The particular question I asked was presented as a trick question. If you genuinely understood time dilation you would have picked that up.

bullshit.

JudgeMental said:

because you have mental problems and are deluded.

In 2025 when I’m happily sitting round with the knowledge that I am wrong I’ll try to remember that.

JudgeMental said:

bullshit.

If you say so. Do you want me to point out what you missed?

JudgeMental said:

bullshit.

—

Scientologist…say no more

no, because it wont be science just some shit you’ve made up.

tauto said:

JudgeMental said:

bullshit.

—

Scientologist…say no more

who is? If your pointing at me your pointing in the wrong direction.

Postpocelipse said:

JudgeMental said:

bullshit.

If you say so. Do you want me to point out what you missed?

—-

Not really. We don’t like scientologists around these parts.

JudgeMental said:

no, because it wont be science just some shit you’ve made up.

well at least you aren’t taking the idiots way out.

Postpocelipse said:

party_pants said:

Postpocelipse said:

Yes I implied in the title that if you had nothing to provide or somethig better to do you probably should.

You obviously agitated and concerned you have uncovered some impending disaster that awaits the planet. Trying to set your mind at ease, I don’t think your interpretation is correct. The two possible outcomes are that there is some impending disaster, or you have got your modelling wrong. I’m suggesting the latter.

This thread does not need further psychology. It isn’t that far off scientology really.

It is not psychology to suggest that you might be wrong and therefore should reconsider the source of your anxiety.

I was brought up in a born-again Christian household expecting any day that the Lord would return in the rapture and the righteous would be saved and the wicked would be left behind. One day my mum didn’t pick us up after school, so we eventually walked home instead. When we got home the house was empty. I had a feeling of dread that the rapture had happened and I hadn’t made the grade to be saved. Turns out Dad’s work was throwing out a whole load of industrial shelving and he wanted to retrieve some out of the skip bin. He usually caught the train home, but rang Mum to bring the car so he could carry it home, thinking that we’d just cope and eventually walk home by ourselves.

I’m suggesting your anxiety is in a similar way.

Postpocelipse said:

tauto said:

JudgeMental said:

bullshit.

—

Scientologist…say no more

who is? If your pointing at me your pointing in the wrong direction.

—-

i don’t think so.

tauto said:

Postpocelipse said:

JudgeMental said:

bullshit.

If you say so. Do you want me to point out what you missed?

—-

Not really. We don’t like scientologists around these parts.

Well you and I having a similar disinterest doesn’t remove my concern. Thanks for trying. Think I’ll go to bed so I can get some work in tomorrow.

Posti being a scientologist makes so much sense of all his posts .

party_pants said:

Postpocelipse said:

party_pants said:

You obviously agitated and concerned you have uncovered some impending disaster that awaits the planet. Trying to set your mind at ease, I don’t think your interpretation is correct. The two possible outcomes are that there is some impending disaster, or you have got your modelling wrong. I’m suggesting the latter.

This thread does not need further psychology. It isn’t that far off scientology really.

It is not psychology to suggest that you might be wrong and therefore should reconsider the source of your anxiety.

I don’t need warm and fuzzy either though I genuinely appreciate the effort. This is a maths problem. I’ve thought about it before and that is about when I usually put the physics books down for a while. I figured out how to resolve the exercise I had going in my head and that led to being able to define exactly what I thought was concerning at any point I started getting the deepest into reference material. I’ve only just figured out that if 2011 was as I say that only gives me till 2017 to have any idea of the extent things might be disrupted. I thought I’d ask for some help with the maths not counselling for the after effects.

tauto said:

Posti being a scientologist makes so much sense of all his posts .

tauto is a some sort of twit

haven’t you forgotten about Tunguska , the massive blast in Russia ?

well before any atomic bombs

then you’ve got things like Krakatoa – that was a mighty blast – the sound that was heard around the world.

you are getting too wrapped up in nuclear blasts – which are small fry

wookiemeister said:

haven’t you forgotten about Tunguska , the massive blast in Russia ?

well before any atomic bombs

then you’ve got things like Krakatoa – that was a mighty blast – the sound that was heard around the world.

you are getting too wrapped up in nuclear blasts – which are small fry

Actually the sound was heard at its furthest, 3000 km away, the pressure waves however went around the world seven times, each one declining in intensity.

In the book Krakatoa the author describes how the victorian invention that was popular in well to do houses of a line graph barograph allowed accurate measurements and times to be collated in a huge report. They even detected tiny wave pulses at the Thames.

Hmm. Detonation while in freefall would be required to provide the transferal of centre of momentum as I have described. That seems a lot easier to plot and a great deal less potentially destructive. I guess I’ll look up aerial detonations and see what that tells me. Makes this thread of some practical use apart from exercising my word muscles.

silicon chip magazine had an article showing you how you make a seismograph that hooked up to the computer I think

wookie is like the graffiti artist of the internet.

wookiemeister said:

silicon chip magazine had an article showing you how you make a seismograph that hooked up to the computer I think

That’d be cool.

nuclear bombs when used for real are mostly aerial blasts

a major city might be hit by a bomb in the middle with bombs in a ring around the suburbs , the multiple warhead configuration means no escape

wookiemeister said:

silicon chip magazine had an article showing you how you make a seismograph that hooked up to the computer I think

a seismograph could not measure the wave I would be looking for. That is a useful angle. Figure out how it might be measured. That could take me a while if I’m taking time off doing things like working and trying to find out when I’ll be seeing my kid but that approach is pretty well how I’d have to think about it. That is helpful wookie. Cheers.

ok explain to me in no more than three or fours sentences exactly what you are thinking

wookiemeister said:

ok explain to me in no more than three or fours sentences exactly what you are thinking

You are funny. But I’ll explain what you mean by what i am thinking. Right now I’ve isolated the effect I have described to only being a possibility of detonation in freefall. That makes thing highly manageable. It also further defines how I can graph this shockwave.

Postpocelipse said:

wookiemeister said:

ok explain to me in no more than three or fours sentences exactly what you are thinking

You are funny. But I’ll explain what you mean by what i am thinking. Right now I’ve isolated the effect I have described to only being a possibility of detonation in freefall. That makes thing highly manageable. It also further defines how I can graph this shockwave.

it I were you I would try to get some rest

so definitely no serious alarm since I also don’t think it is transferred as efficiently to a liquid surface. I don’t know what percentage of freefall detonations were done over a solid surface. Pretty sure the russian hydrogen detonation was freefall. That might be about the worst.

wookiemeister said:

Postpocelipse said:

wookiemeister said:

ok explain to me in no more than three or fours sentences exactly what you are thinking

You are funny. But I’ll explain what you mean by what i am thinking. Right now I’ve isolated the effect I have described to only being a possibility of detonation in freefall. That makes thing highly manageable. It also further defines how I can graph this shockwave.

it I were you I would try to get some rest

I think I can now that I know what direction I’m going with it. Cheers.

If there was a before and after Hiroshima global gravity map the shockwave would be easily plotted. If there was a before and after 2011 you could make out the change but if this shockwave is there you would have to wait till the effects of any detonations in freefall over solid ground subsided before having a picture of the globe as it would appear before freefall detonation.

If there was a before and after Hiroshima global gravity map

bit hard without satellites.

Postpocelipse said:

If there was a before and after Hiroshima global gravity map the shockwave would be easily plotted. If there was a before and after 2011 you could make out the change but if this shockwave is there you would have to wait till the effects of any detonations in freefall over solid ground subsided before having a picture of the globe as it would appear before freefall detonation.

-

Ask Tom Cruise…..

JudgeMental said:

If there was a before and after Hiroshima global gravity map

bit hard without satellites.

Yes that is unfortunate. The important bit is that this effect can only be achieved by detonations in freefall. This isolates centre of momentum in the manner required to produce the shockwave.It cannot be tracked with seismology but could be tracked with real time gravity mapping.

It apears this scenario was keeping that exercise in my head. I seem to be sleeping and concentrating better now. Cheers.

> So that leaves me till 2017 to try to figure out if I am unduly concerned (possibly paranoid)

Not paranoid, I went paranoid one weekend so I know what it is like. Possibly crazy, I can think of dozens of “pocelipse“s that are far more of a concern.

> What was designated as atmosphere when members of the Manhattan Project were ‘concerned about creating a chain effect in the atmosphere that would envelope the globe’?

Google “US standard atmosphere”. The concern was that at the time it was not known whether nitrogen in the atmosphere would undergo a thermonuclear reaction such as 14N +14N = 28Si. If this had occurred then energy from binding energy per nucleon would be released causing heating and more reactions so more heat. In other words chain reaction – kaboom.

> The angular momentum …

Perhaps you are missing the point that angular momentum isn’t conserved. Yes I know that there is a law of conservation of angular momentum, but that holds only in the absence of friction and viscosity. Friction and viscosity cause angular momentum to decrease to nothing. Fluid dynamics people even have a piece of poetic doggerel that describes the process.

‘Big whirls have little whirls, that feed on their velocity. And little whirls have lesser whirls, and so on to viscosity.’

The viscosity of the Earth’s atmosphere, Earth’s oceans and Earth’s mantle wipes out angular momentum.

Momentum

You keep using that word but I don’t think it means what you think it does,

These terms are well defined and are not just ‘cool terms’ to fit into what ideas you have ..

“Perhaps you are missing the point that angular momentum isn’t conserved. Yes I know that there is a law of conservation of angular momentum, but that holds only in the absence of friction and viscosity.”

Incorrect. Conservation of angular momentum always holds. Friction can dissipate kinetic energy (as heat, mainly) but it can’t reduce total angular momentum.

dv said:

“Perhaps you are missing the point that angular momentum isn’t conserved. Yes I know that there is a law of conservation of angular momentum, but that holds only in the absence of friction and viscosity.”

Incorrect. Conservation of angular momentum always holds. Friction can dissipate kinetic energy (as heat, mainly) but it can’t reduce total angular momentum.

I was a little surprised to see that suggestion as well. Good to know that if I have it wrong, dv has it wrong as well.

Having skimmed the whole thread I endorse the points made by d-s, and would add:

It is true that the evolution of the momentum from the explosion does involve compression waves travelling through the Earth, but these can be and are measured regularly. Every large earthquake is monitored by literally 1000’s of wave measuring devices across the globe, and nuclear explosions were similarly monitored when they used to happen.

It is true that nothing is certain in science, but one of the things that is closest to certain is that the effects of nuclear explosions do not take years to dissipate through the Earth. The rate of dissipation can be modelled mathematically, and these calculations agree very well with the 1000’s of measurements in every case.

p.s.

I posted a link to a song the other day, which if you only watched the beginning you might have thought was intended to be insulting. The song was actually about the singer’s respect for his father, even though everyone else thought he was a dead loss.

HTH

The Rev Dodgson said:

dv said:

“Perhaps you are missing the point that angular momentum isn’t conserved. Yes I know that there is a law of conservation of angular momentum, but that holds only in the absence of friction and viscosity.”

Incorrect. Conservation of angular momentum always holds. Friction can dissipate kinetic energy (as heat, mainly) but it can’t reduce total angular momentum.

I was a little surprised to see that suggestion as well. Good to know that if I have it wrong, dv has it wrong as well.

Having skimmed the whole thread I endorse the points made by d-s, and would add:

It is true that the evolution of the momentum from the explosion does involve compression waves travelling through the Earth, but these can be and are measured regularly. Every large earthquake is monitored by literally 1000’s of wave measuring devices across the globe, and nuclear explosions were similarly monitored when they used to happen.

It is true that nothing is certain in science, but one of the things that is closest to certain is that the effects of nuclear explosions do not take years to dissipate through the Earth. The rate of dissipation can be modelled mathematically, and these calculations agree very well with the 1000’s of measurements in every case.

p.s.

I posted a link to a song the other day, which if you only watched the beginning you might have thought was intended to be insulting. The song was actually about the singer’s respect for his father, even though everyone else thought he was a dead loss.

HTH

Appreciate the thought with the song. I have referenced within the thread that this shockwave is not a seismic wave. It as an expression of the boundaries of elasticity not the degree of freedom of elasticity. I have defined where and how to start applying complex numbers to it. That has got the exercise out of my head that was driving me nuts.

Thank you very much for your concern for my mental equilibrium.

:)

dv said:

“Perhaps you are missing the point that angular momentum isn’t conserved. Yes I know that there is a law of conservation of angular momentum, but that holds only in the absence of friction and viscosity.”

Incorrect. Conservation of angular momentum always holds. Friction can dissipate kinetic energy (as heat, mainly) but it can’t reduce total angular momentum.

Thank you DV. I will not illustrate how this supports my supposition but it does.

Postpocelipse said:

dv said:

“Perhaps you are missing the point that angular momentum isn’t conserved. Yes I know that there is a law of conservation of angular momentum, but that holds only in the absence of friction and viscosity.”

Incorrect. Conservation of angular momentum always holds. Friction can dissipate kinetic energy (as heat, mainly) but it can’t reduce total angular momentum.

Thank you DV. I will not illustrate how this supports my supposition but it does.

Apart from observing that your statement confirms that this shockwave can only be produced by detonation in freefall.

Postpocelipse said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

dv said:

“Perhaps you are missing the point that angular momentum isn’t conserved. Yes I know that there is a law of conservation of angular momentum, but that holds only in the absence of friction and viscosity.”

Incorrect. Conservation of angular momentum always holds. Friction can dissipate kinetic energy (as heat, mainly) but it can’t reduce total angular momentum.

I was a little surprised to see that suggestion as well. Good to know that if I have it wrong, dv has it wrong as well.

Having skimmed the whole thread I endorse the points made by d-s, and would add:

It is true that the evolution of the momentum from the explosion does involve compression waves travelling through the Earth, but these can be and are measured regularly. Every large earthquake is monitored by literally 1000’s of wave measuring devices across the globe, and nuclear explosions were similarly monitored when they used to happen.

It is true that nothing is certain in science, but one of the things that is closest to certain is that the effects of nuclear explosions do not take years to dissipate through the Earth. The rate of dissipation can be modelled mathematically, and these calculations agree very well with the 1000’s of measurements in every case.

p.s.

I posted a link to a song the other day, which if you only watched the beginning you might have thought was intended to be insulting. The song was actually about the singer’s respect for his father, even though everyone else thought he was a dead loss.

HTH

Appreciate the thought with the song. I have referenced within the thread that this shockwave is not a seismic wave. It as an expression of the boundaries of elasticity not the degree of freedom of elasticity. I have defined where and how to start applying complex numbers to it. That has got the exercise out of my head that was driving me nuts.

Thank you very much for your concern for my mental equilibrium.

:)

The Rev Dodgson said:

dv said:

It is true that the evolution of the momentum from the explosion does involve compression waves travelling through the Earth, but these can be and are measured regularly. Every large earthquake is monitored by literally 1000’s of wave measuring devices across the globe, and nuclear explosions were similarly monitored when they used to happen.

It is true that nothing is certain in science, but one of the things that is closest to certain is that the effects of nuclear explosions do not take years to dissipate through the Earth. The rate of dissipation can be modelled mathematically, and these calculations agree very well with the 1000’s of measurements in every case.

As I said, this is not a seismic wave. I now understand what it is referred to as in standard theory. I have identified where my confusion was and now that I have the page the right way up there are a couple of things I have brought up previously that I no longer intend to refer to directly. I am only growing more certain that all aerial detonations following 1945 will rebound as 9.0 + seismic activity. There is the duty of care aspect but there is also the opportunity to take measurements on something that is still being sought. If you cannot imply the nature of the wave by the means I have indicated will detect it then my attempts to show discression may need further polishing.

Postpocelipse said:

I am only growing more certain that all aerial detonations following 1945 will rebound as 9.0 + seismic activity.

no

diddly-squat said:

Postpocelipse said:

I am only growing more certain that all aerial detonations following 1945 will rebound as 9.0 + seismic activity.

no

All purpose word that one. It would be nice to believe that standard theory might be further ahead than stated but it is starting to look unlikely. Any chance you would hazard a guess at the wave I am stating was developed? Can’t hurt can it?

> Incorrect. Conservation of angular momentum always holds. Friction can dissipate kinetic energy (as heat, mainly) but it can’t reduce total angular momentum.

The TOTAL angular momentum change to the Earth due to the explosion hydrogen bomb is exactly zero. So you can’t reduce that anyway.

By the way, Postpocelipse, do you know that the angular momentum of the whole Earth (axis through the centre) varies anyway due to the tidal influences of the Moon on the Earth’s mantle and due to the movement of the Ocean’s water currents. Look up nutation and Chandler Wobble. This has nothing to do with earthquakes.

mollwollfumble said:

> Incorrect. Conservation of angular momentum always holds. Friction can dissipate kinetic energy (as heat, mainly) but it can’t reduce total angular momentum.

The TOTAL angular momentum change to the Earth due to the explosion hydrogen bomb is exactly zero. So you can’t reduce that anyway.

By the way, Postpocelipse, do you know that the angular momentum of the whole Earth (axis through the centre) varies anyway due to the tidal influences of the Moon on the Earth’s mantle and due to the movement of the Ocean’s water currents. Look up nutation and Chandler Wobble. This has nothing to do with earthquakes.

I will assuming it will be relaxing reading. The angular momentum is inconsequential and is excluded from the production of a gravity wave. I am not seeking attention. It is simply something that I think should be brought to the attention of the appropriate people.

Thankfully the Holiday Forum is just the place for such insight

Dropbear said:

Thankfully the Holiday Forum is just the place for such insight

It’s what I have to begin with. I can’t exactly go calling anyone up until I have plotted some measurables that can be assessed which I have only begun to understand how to do. I’ve really just been trying to get on with life but this has niggled at me till the tumblers fell into place. I believe we don’t need to look beyond our globe for gravity waves because I believe the earth is still under the influence of the ones we’ve already managed to create. I am not sure they work quite the way they are being looked for but I still have to define that with some plotting. When I put together anything on this particular subject that can be savaged it will make it’s way here. Apart from that I don’t think I have any further burgeoning requirement to discuss physics.

just checking in to where this is at

wookiemeister said:

just checking in to where this is at

I can’t cancel this model out in my head. I can consider it better with what I have identified in this thread. I will let you know if I can find a way to cancel it or imeasure it.

A basic description of what I am assessing is that this analysis provides momentum to a portion of the involved particles that provides them a geodesic that puts them ahead of the globe in time. These particles are entangled with the globes centre of momentum so the momentum eventually equilibrates the particle paths to the core providing a cascade of annihilation.

momentum is Newtonian physics

quantum is Einsteinium physics

I’m not sure the two fit together

wookiemeister said:

momentum is Newtonian physics

quantum is Einsteinium physics

I’m not sure the two fit together

I think you have that somewhat confused. Aside, I will qualify my supplying the following analysis with mentioning that I definitely did not go looking for this scenario. What I DID go looking for is a relatiavistic experiment that explored the limits of terminal velocity. I cannot cancel the scenario I can only measure it as follows.

Hiroshima = 2004 quake

Nagasaki = 2011 quake

Arrival time is calculated against detonation magnitude

Mass of material employed provides confinement limits for annihilation paths at the earth’s core on resolution.

This leaves me to assume that when Tsar-Bomba resolves the subsequent earthquake will not be localised to one convection point with an elongation of after-shock and will involve massive lightning discharge associated to convection points.

I can dawdle along with the rest of the maths required for analysing my relativity exercise but this one had to be removed from the confines of my head. It is very disturbing.

Japan is well known for its earthquakes

they had earthquakes before nuclear bombs

the buildings were usually lightweight so in the event of an earthquake it was less likely to kill people

wookiemeister said:

Japan is well known for its earthquakes

they had earthquakes before nuclear bombs

the buildings were usually lightweight so in the event of an earthquake it was less likely to kill people

Until the Americans burned them down.

wookiemeister said:

the buildings were usually lightweight so in the event of an earthquake it was less likely to kill people

Plus wooden construction wobbles but doesn’t break in an earthquake.

Witty Rejoinder said:

wookiemeister said:

the buildings were usually lightweight so in the event of an earthquake it was less likely to kill people

Plus wooden construction wobbles but doesn’t break in an earthquake.

There was a bamboo scaffold design on the inventors, to protect mud brick buildings in earthquake zones?

A more accurate assessment of Tsar Bomba recoil would predict a global earthquake the magnitude of which would break down as a localised earthquake in the order of 9.0+. This is due to the material accelerated being hydrogen. An instantaneous lightning discharge from the meeting point of all tectonic meeting points should be expected.

That is the best I can do to ease my,, err, alert. The only thing that can entirely ease my mind is discovering if other freefall detonations occurred before Tsar-Bomba. If the calculable time for these were to come and go I would be walking about very happy to know that I am completely wrong.

Postpocelipse said:

A more accurate assessment of Tsar Bomba recoil would predict a global earthquake the magnitude of which would break down as a localised earthquake in the order of 9.0+. This is due to the material accelerated being hydrogen. An instantaneous lightning discharge from all tectonic meeting points should be expected.

That is the best I can do to ease my,, err, alert. The only thing that can entirely ease my mind is discovering if other freefall detonations occurred before Tsar-Bomba. If the calculable time for these were to come and go I would be walking about very happy to know that I am completely wrong.

fixed

Anybody able to find a list of freefall detonations? The only one I have been able to single out is Tsar-Bomba.

Postpocelipse said:

Postpocelipse said:

A more accurate assessment of Tsar Bomba recoil would predict a global earthquake the magnitude of which would break down as a localised earthquake in the order of 9.0+. This is due to the material accelerated being hydrogen. An instantaneous lightning discharge from all tectonic meeting points should be expected.

That is the best I can do to ease my,, err, alert. The only thing that can entirely ease my mind is discovering if other freefall detonations occurred before Tsar-Bomba. If the calculable time for these were to come and go I would be walking about very happy to know that I am completely wrong.

fixed

Materials detonated that are heavier than steel will result in localised earthquakes of 9.0+ magnitude. This indicates the reason I have altered what should be predictable for Tsar-Bomba recoil.