c**i
发帖数: 6973 | 1 【 以下文字转载自 Military 讨论区 】
发信人: choi (choi), 信区: Military
标 题: Re: 关于中国核武器的两个问题.
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Sun Apr 27 14:22:53 2008)
(1) As you know, I am originally from Taiwan. So I did not know who he was,
though I heard of this name somewhere. I went to en.wikipedia.org just now
and there was no page about him.
I did some research just now and he died of rectum cancer 直肠癌. Well, I am
a biologist by training. And some Chinese are dying in China of cancers,
which people blame on water pollution. But ther | p***y
发帖数: 18037 | 2 I am not a science person, but what you said does not make sense. Are you
saying people in Hiroshima and Nagasaki did not die from the nuclear
contamination, but simply from the power of the atomic explosion? There are
evidences that many Japanese left to suffer from the radiations with
deformed bodies/mental states.
Read this from "Answers.com" - "An atomic bomb explosion produces, in
addition to the shock wave accompanying any explosion, intense neutron and
gamma radiation, both of which are | c**i
发帖数: 6973 | 3 Either you did not read the original posting which I attached to the bottom
of my earlier posting, or you misunderstood me. The original clearly said
the bomb was a dud. There was no explosion. Inside the bomb was U-235. After
explosion, there would be no bomb left, for everything was turned into
energy and released. E=MC2.
【在 p***y 的大作中提到】
: I am not a science person, but what you said does not make sense. Are you
: saying people in Hiroshima and Nagasaki did not die from the nuclear
: contamination, but simply from the power of the atomic explosion? There are
: evidences that many Japanese left to suffer from the radiations with
: deformed bodies/mental states.
: Read this from "Answers.com" - "An atomic bomb explosion produces, in
: addition to the shock wave accompanying any explosion, intense neutron and
: gamma radiation, both of which are
| p*********f
发帖数: 633 | 4
bottom
After
I didn't read your "reference" either, but the "everything was turned into
energy and released" is bullshit. For atomic bombs, which is based on
nuclear fission, only less than 1% (perhaps much less, I don't know the
exact number) of the mass is turned into energy.
I'm a physics major.
【在 c**i 的大作中提到】
: Either you did not read the original posting which I attached to the bottom
: of my earlier posting, or you misunderstood me. The original clearly said
: the bomb was a dud. There was no explosion. Inside the bomb was U-235. After
: explosion, there would be no bomb left, for everything was turned into
: energy and released. E=MC2.
| p***y
发帖数: 18037 | 5 谢谢你救了我。跟老蔡对话很累。
【在 p*********f 的大作中提到】
:
: bottom
: After
: I didn't read your "reference" either, but the "everything was turned into
: energy and released" is bullshit. For atomic bombs, which is based on
: nuclear fission, only less than 1% (perhaps much less, I don't know the
: exact number) of the mass is turned into energy.
: I'm a physics major.
| c**i
发帖数: 6973 | 6 Citations? Besides, what do you think happens to an atomic bomb after
explosion, assuming the one at issue was an atomic bomb?
【在 p*********f 的大作中提到】
:
: bottom
: After
: I didn't read your "reference" either, but the "everything was turned into
: energy and released" is bullshit. For atomic bombs, which is based on
: nuclear fission, only less than 1% (perhaps much less, I don't know the
: exact number) of the mass is turned into energy.
: I'm a physics major.
| p*********f
发帖数: 633 | 7 This is neither physics board or military board, so I don't really see the
point of such a discussion here, but since you insist...
into
Citations? Any textbook of a college physics class. Are you trying to
crack
a joke here? If yes, I don't see it.
As I said, I didn't read your "reference". You mentioned Uranium-235, and
explosion, so I natually assumed it's about an atomic bomb.
The products of a nuclear fission, besides the neutrons and alpha/beta/gamma
radiations, are different chemical | c**i
发帖数: 6973 | 8 I was serious in the previous posting. But in paragraph 3 of your reply (
attached below), you minsunderstood my question.
(1) I had read the reference I am going to cite, when I wrote the previous
posting two days ago. I knew then that you were about right regarding the
FIRST-generation atomic bomb. But I'd like to see what you have to say.
For those who don't know but is interested, see en.wikipedia.org under "
Nuclear weapon yield." Go directly to the "external links" at the bottom.
Choose No
【在 p*********f 的大作中提到】
: This is neither physics board or military board, so I don't really see the
: point of such a discussion here, but since you insist...
: into
: Citations? Any textbook of a college physics class. Are you trying to
: crack
: a joke here? If yes, I don't see it.
: As I said, I didn't read your "reference". You mentioned Uranium-235, and
: explosion, so I natually assumed it's about an atomic bomb.
: The products of a nuclear fission, besides the neutrons and alpha/beta/gamma
: radiations, are different chemical
|
| p*********f
发帖数: 633 | 9
Well, I did misunderstand your question. But as I said, I am a physics
major, so I natually assumed we are discussing physics issues, not weaponry
issues.
strongly,
be
Patsy
the
Exactly. I usually don't read through your posts, what caught my eye was
the
physics formula you used -- "E=MC2". So I read more carefully, and found
the
statements you made about the physics of atomic bombs wrong (actually just
misleading, as it turns out). I then made a correction/clarification.
I have no interest
【在 c**i 的大作中提到】
: I was serious in the previous posting. But in paragraph 3 of your reply (
: attached below), you minsunderstood my question.
: (1) I had read the reference I am going to cite, when I wrote the previous
: posting two days ago. I knew then that you were about right regarding the
: FIRST-generation atomic bomb. But I'd like to see what you have to say.
: For those who don't know but is interested, see en.wikipedia.org under "
: Nuclear weapon yield." Go directly to the "external links" at the bottom.
: Choose No
|
|
