Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A Deeply Unsettling Time Lapse Of Every Nuclear Explosion On Earth

abiggersociety.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 48 posts

Re: A Deeply Unsettling Time Lapse Of Every Nuclear Explosion On Earth

#31

Post by hcarvalhoalves »

sehugg wrote: post #25
colechristensen wrote: post #10

I, for one, am not deeply unsettled by nuclear weapons. As weapons of peace, they have made war a strongly negative sum game between advanced nations. The only way to win is not to play. The drawback of nuclear weapons isn't the actual threat or consequences of war, but using the nature of the game by a government to spread fear, uncertainty, and doubt amongst its own people to consolidate power. That, in itself, is…

In theory, yes, MAD and Nash Equilibrium and all that. In practice, people and government are irrational and make mistakes (most notably in 1983 when we almost destroyed the world due to a false alarm) -- and the cost of policing this theoretical balance of power costs a hell of a lot of resources that could be better spent doing more productive things.

> and the cost of policing this theoretical balance of power costs a hell of a lot of resources that could be better spent doing more productive things.

I don't think there's more productive use of resources than maintaining peace between big nations.

Re: A Deeply Unsettling Time Lapse Of Every Nuclear Explosion On Earth

#32

Post by stefantalpalaru »

mikeash wrote: post #22
chris_j wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would you mind expanding on that? What exaggerated perceptions do a lot of people have and in what way do they not match reality?

I'm not the guy you're replying to, but I've seen a lot of misconceptions that make them seem much worse than they are (although they are still quite terrible). Common myth: any nuclear explosion causes total destruction for miles in every direction. Because of this, old drills like "duck and cover" were foolishness at best and cold-blooded ways to placate the populace at worse. Fact: the area of total destruction is…

>months or years after the event, it's not generally going to be a big deal

Strontium-90 [1] has a half-life of 28.79 years and gets concentrated in bones causing bone cancers and leukemia.

Caesium-137 [2] has a half-life of 30.17 years and concentrates in soft tissues.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strontium-90

[2]: http://large.stanford.edu/courses/2012/ph241/wessells1/

Re: A Deeply Unsettling Time Lapse Of Every Nuclear Explosion On Earth

#33

Post by dedward »

bluedino wrote: post #13
stormpat wrote: post #6

Why am i not suprised america has the most explosions, and still they try to ban other countries from producing nuclear fuel. The future generations will probably like the fallout on us soil. Congrats, this is a wondefull vid.

It's been 50 years since the US did a non-underground test. What do you think we use all these supercomputers for? Nuclear testing.

Yup. The test partial test ban treaty was signed in 1963 by all the nuclear powers at the time - everything after then, US or otherwise, has been underground, with the exception of, I believe, India, who was not a nuclear power when the treaty was drawn up - india set of a series of undersea tests late in the century.

This was done specifically because they realized they would collectively make the planet uninhabitable if they continued.

Re: A Deeply Unsettling Time Lapse Of Every Nuclear Explosion On Earth

#34

Post by colechristensen »

ddebernardy wrote: post #23
colechristensen wrote: post #10

I, for one, am not deeply unsettled by nuclear weapons. As weapons of peace, they have made war a strongly negative sum game between advanced nations. The only way to win is not to play. The drawback of nuclear weapons isn't the actual threat or consequences of war, but using the nature of the game by a government to spread fear, uncertainty, and doubt amongst its own people to consolidate power. That, in itself, is…

I'd be curious know how you'll revisit your opinion of "weapons of peace" when a nuclear nation is on the receiving end of a nuclear storm sent by some religious nut job.

I was referring to exactly this sort of FUD. If there are conflicts between the nations and cultures of the world, the casualties can rest no blame on technologies or weapons, but on the ignorant attitudes and behaviors of people.

'nuclear storm' and 'religious nut job' are meaningless phrases designed to illicit fear and agreement with your viewpoint, not legitimate arguments.

Re: A Deeply Unsettling Time Lapse Of Every Nuclear Explosion On Earth

#35

Post by dedward »

stormpat wrote: post #6

Why am i not suprised america has the most explosions, and still they try to ban other countries from producing nuclear fuel. The future generations will probably like the fallout on us soil. Congrats, this is a wondefull vid.

The concern isn't that they are producing nuclear fuel. It's that the plutonium needed for nuclear weapons is a by-product of those reactors. Plutonium isn't naturally occurring on earth - the only place to get it is from a reactor - either yours, or buy it from someone else who has one.

Re: A Deeply Unsettling Time Lapse Of Every Nuclear Explosion On Earth

#36

Post by ddebernardy »

mikeash wrote: post #27
ddebernardy wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I blame this on pictures of Hiroshima from after the bombing there, where nearly everything is just wiped clean. People don't realize that this is because most of the buildings in the city were practically built out of paper. But then, you do realize that today's nukes are orders of magnitude stronger, right?

Bigger nukes increase the area of total destruction but they also increase the area of partial destruction. Furthermore, the area of total destruction is still not going to be big enough to cover an entire metropolitan area unless you're talking about something along the lines of Tsar Bomba. The point remains that civil defense procedures like "duck and cover" would save many lives.

As would "run for underground shelters", admittedly.

But then you're assuming reasonable and conscious plebes. Personally, I'd readily picture rednecks going "Meh, they won't finance these shelters on my dime lest it turn into yet another .gov fiasco, and I wouldn't budge anyway because .gov is just scaremongering us into living in rabit holes! I'm ME and I'm invincible. [Roar!]"

Plus, your story doesn't say if whoever goes for a subterranean shelter or ducks eventually digs her way back out. (I'd hope we never know if it does.)

Re: A Deeply Unsettling Time Lapse Of Every Nuclear Explosion On Earth

#37

Post by ddebernardy »

icegreentea wrote: post #29
ddebernardy wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I blame this on pictures of Hiroshima from after the bombing there, where nearly everything is just wiped clean. People don't realize that this is because most of the buildings in the city were practically built out of paper. But then, you do realize that today's nukes are orders of magnitude stronger, right?

Well, so Hiroshima/Nagasaki were 15-20kT weapons. While there was a while were the US and Russia were routinely plopping 5MT+ weapons on strategic platforms, these days its more down to 100-400kT range, so we're already sitting at ~one order of magnitude for most common nuclear device that'll go off near you. Granted, there will be a lot of them, but still. Ok, so outside of the immediate fireball, the majority of im…

Thank you for the sane and argumented response.

Re: A Deeply Unsettling Time Lapse Of Every Nuclear Explosion On Earth

#39

Post by skaevola »

mikeash wrote: post #22
chris_j wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would you mind expanding on that? What exaggerated perceptions do a lot of people have and in what way do they not match reality?

I'm not the guy you're replying to, but I've seen a lot of misconceptions that make them seem much worse than they are (although they are still quite terrible). Common myth: any nuclear explosion causes total destruction for miles in every direction. Because of this, old drills like "duck and cover" were foolishness at best and cold-blooded ways to placate the populace at worse. Fact: the area of total destruction is…

Can you cite sources for these claims? I've found it's very hard to find good scientific sources for the effects, but all of the research I've done on the topic suggests that you are grossly underestimating the effects.

Here is an example: http://www.amazon.com/Earth-Abolition-Stanford-Nuclear-Serie...

And here is another terrifying account of the effects of a nuclear explosion:

http://www.animatedsoftware.com/environm/no_nukes/tenw/nuke_...

And another good source which shows just how destructive a bomb would be on a major metropolitan area:

http://www.nuclearsecrecy.com/nukemap/

Re: A Deeply Unsettling Time Lapse Of Every Nuclear Explosion On Earth

#40

Post by achamayou »

dedward wrote: post #33
bluedino wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's been 50 years since the US did a non-underground test. What do you think we use all these supercomputers for? Nuclear testing.

Yup. The test partial test ban treaty was signed in 1963 by all the nuclear powers at the time - everything after then, US or otherwise, has been underground, with the exception of, I believe, India, who was not a nuclear power when the treaty was drawn up - india set of a series of undersea tests late in the century. This was done specifically because they realized they would collectively make the planet uninhabitab…

France didn't sign, and went on with atmospheric testing until 1974, and the same is true of China (although they didn't start testing until 1964, so they weren't technically part of "all the nuclear powers at the time").
Post reply on HN