"H-Bomb Secret" Now Online 502
DrDNA writes "In 1979, the US Government sued Howard Morland, Erwin Knoll and Sam Day at The Progressive Magazine for prior restraint over the planned publication of 'The H-Bomb Secret: How We Got It--Why We're Telling It,' citing national security. Six months later, a Federal appeals court vacated the restraining order on publication, and the article was published. There's an interview about the case with George Stanford, of Argonne National Lab, Illinois, a technical adviser for the Progressive Magazine. After all this time, the Progressive article is now online (4Mb pdf)."
Seemed kinda slow... (Score:5, Informative)
Google Cache (Score:3, Informative)
Re:*Awesome* editorial in this article (Score:4, Informative)
Davak
Re:Head in the Sand (Score:5, Informative)
First, censorship is bad. Period. It is something where you can very easily and without any sort of a stretch apply the 'slippery slope' principle. As soon as you censor anything, you're well on the way to censoring everything. Unlike, say, automatic assault rifles with clips that hold over ten rounds, 'bad' speech is impossible to objectively define.
Second, the secrecy around the techniques for constructing nuclear weapons makes a lot of things secret as a byproduct, because of the incredible paranoia and perceived fear by the censors. To keep people from guessing the most secret techniques needed to construct a nuclear bomb, by extension you need to keep secret even the materials and quantities required for construction. From there, you have to make secrets out of a lot of what's involved in mining, refining, processing, and manufacturing. From there, it's very easy to do things like making accident statistics or radiation exposure documentation for the town where the reactor is secret.
It is also very easy to declare independently-created works as secrets, even though they were not derived from any government program. Imagine doing some heavy research in your local library, constructing a few tests, saying the wrong things to the wrong people, and shortly the FBI shows up and carts off all of your work. This has happened. In the article, they give the example of a member of the House who wrote a letter to the Department of Energy, asking some rather pressing questions about changes in their nuclear program. In their response, they said that not only were the responses secret, the very questions themselves were of a sensitive nature and were now classified. This very highest elected official was therefore not legally allowed to distribute these questions that only came from his own mind!
In the end, it comes down to something very simple. Freedom of speech is nearly an absolute, and it is also the most important freedom we have. Giving it up is foolish no matter what the reason.
The secret has been available for ages (Score:4, Informative)
Tsk tsk (Score:5, Informative)
Captain: What happen?
Operator: Somebody set up us the bomb.
Operator: We get signal.
Captain: What!
Operator: Main screen turn on.
I know it doesn't sound right, but that's how poorly translated it was.
Much more interesting (Score:3, Informative)
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/12/2
which references www.portchicago.org
The howtos of thermonuclear are all out there in userland; this _old news_ Progressive article doesn't help much. The above links are _FAR_ more useful, IYAM(AIAAP). (If You Ask Me, And I Am A Physicist.)
Re:Head in the Sand (Score:1, Informative)
GS: Perhaps there is some fine tuning that could be done to the
Atomic Energy Act, but it seems to me that the problems lie
mainly in its implementation. The born secret concept is a
tricky one. If a person gets a brilliant idea for a weapon of
mass destruction, we would want it kept under wraps.
Nevertheless that could be no more than a delaying action, since
someone else will get the same idea before long -- especially if
it is known that the device can be made. At extremely rare
times, therefore, born secret might be useful in buying time --
but only that. What CAN be protected much more successfully (and
should be) is non-deducible results of large, expensive R&D
efforts. Common sense is called for in implementing the
guidelines -- do not try to suppress deducible conclusions, and
do not confirm or call attention to non-deducible information
that happens to leak out.
Torrent... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:A Good Read (Score:2, Informative)
Dark Sun by Richard Rhodes covers the Soviet atomic bomb development, Soviet spying and the development of the various boosted atomic bombs which ultimatly lead to the Hydrogen Bomb or the Fission-Fusion bomb.
Re:I am become death, the destroyer of worlds. (Score:5, Informative)
It's just an archaic, poetic way of saying things. The Bible is a good example: "I am become a stranger unto my brethren, and an alien unto my mother's children" (Psalms 69:8, which later goes: "My time is not yet come", another antiquated phrasing).
So? The Government already knew... (Score:4, Informative)
The government looked in to how hard it would be for people to cull together a working nuclear weapon design from available information years ago.
"Interestingly enough, the United States government conducted a controlled experiment called the Nth Country Experiment to see how much effort was actually required to develop a viable fission weapon design starting from nothing. In this experiment, which ended on 10 April 1967, three newly graduated physics students were given the task of developing a detailed weapon design using only public domain information. The project reached a successful conclusion, that is, they did develop a viable design (detailed in the classified report UCRL-50248) after expending only three man-years of effort over two and a half calendar years. In the years since, much more information has entered the public domain so that the level of effort required has obviously dropped further."
From The Nuclear Weapon Archive: a Guide to Nuclear Weapons [membrane.com]
That was back in 1967, a bit more than thirty-six years ago. It probably takes a lot less digging nowadays.
Re:Automatics with 10 Round Clips (Score:5, Informative)
Re:usually I dont feed the trolls ... (Score:4, Informative)
"The H-Bomb Secret" (Score:4, Informative)
There are ongoing rumors that a way exists to build a fusion bomb without a fission trigger. Efforts were made to develop such a weapon, the "pure fusion" bomb, in the 1950s. The "neutron bomb" was an outgrowth of that effort, although it is not a pure fusion weapon. There's a whole conspiracy theory on this, revolving around Sam Cohen, who developed the neutron bomb, and "red mercury".
The "red mercury" thing is probably disinformation, but given the amount of work LLNL has put into pulsed fusion, there may be a way to do this by now.
Very O)ld news (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Just in time (Score:5, Informative)
Anyway, it's much more easy and likely that Osama would simply bribe/steal one from some Russian, Chineese, indian, or Pakistani army general down on his luck without proper staff to "account" for an already made nuke!!! When the Cold war was just Us and Russia, it was easy to track nukes.. now that Russia has broken up, there are a frightening number "gone missing" from all the army bases Russia couldn't economically hold.
Re:"The H-Bomb Secret" (Score:2, Informative)
it was put together from unclassified information.
The information was unclassified for very good reasons. There is absolutely nothing technical in the Progressive article, that was not already common knowledge, even back in 1979. Heck, even highschool textbooks showed the basic principle, with diagrams and all, and every physics sophomore student knew at least theoretically, how to build a fusion bomb.
The real secret is the Engineering part, not the widely known physics: What kind of material do you use? Electronics? And, most importantly, geometry! Even this is not really secret, it just requires digging out publicly available papers.
The biggest challenge to everyone willing to put an H-bomb togther, is to find a test area! Every A-bomb (and of course H-bomb) test would immediately trigger sensors all around the world! The kind of vibrations is very typical, and specialists can tell, simply by looking at the waveform what kind of device detonated, how strong it was, where it happened, etc.
Oh, and testing nukes is illegal for non-governmental institutions everywhere in the world. The only practical way to develop such weapons is to do it in a rogue state, that refuses to participate in the non-proliferation treaty. Or, do it on the hidden side of the moon (but then, you'd have so much resources that you won't bother with H-bombs anymore!)
Re:usually I dont feed the trolls ... (Score:3, Informative)
I suggest you read "The Last Great Victory" by Stanley Weintraub. It gives a very good and balanced account of the last days of WW II.
A few points:
Stalin knew about the atomic bomb from his spies within Los Alamos. Truman also told him about the bomb at Potsdam before they were dropped.
Stalin was asked by the US and Britain to invade Manchuria. There was great fear that the Japanese Army would not surrender in Manchuria. Only the Soviet Union had the logistical wherewithall to deal with that eventuality.
It is true that the Japanese cabinet was divided as to surrender in the waning days of WW II. We knew what was going on because of our interception of the Japanese diplomatic code.
It is likely in retrospect that the Navy's blockade of Japan would have worked and caused Japan's surrender. But the political realites of the time demanded all and any means be used to effect Japan's surrender. To Truman the atomic bomb was another tool to bring Japan to the surrender table.
As to the casualty figures for the invasion of Japan, most historians agree the figure of 1 million allied casualties is probably way too high. The actual figure for allied casualty estimates ranged as high as 265,000 with an estimate of 76,000 killed in action. This is still a very high figure and not much comfort to the troops already in the Pacific theater and those being transfered from Europe to the Pacific in preparation for Olympic (the invasion of Kyushu).
No estimate was given for Japanese casualties, although they would likely be far higher given the experience with the invasion of Okinawa. But be mindful that the primary focus of allied war planners was on allied casualties.
Even though this more realistic casualty figure is lower than the 1 million which has achieved an almost mythic dimension, it is still a large number and Truman was determined to use any means at his disposal to shorten the war and the casualty figure.
As for the use of the atomic bomb as a "demonstration" to deter Stalin, this is simply revisionist history. It is clear from the records of the time, the bombs were used to shorten the war against Japan, not to frighten the Soviet Union. We only had 2 bombs available in any event at the time. And we used both of them.
Re:Double Standards? (Score:4, Informative)
In WWII we slightly improved our Fleet submarines to dive 150 deeper than prewar and kept that change secret. Many a sailor owes his life to the fact that Japanese never set their depth charges deeper than the publically known pre-war depth. (And many a ton of Japanese shipping was sunk by those sailors.)
During the Cold War the broadcast frequency to our SSBN's was kept busy 24/7, if there was not enough official traffic, then messages were repeated, or other filler material was broadcast. As a result, our SSBN OPTEMPO could not be derived from the volume of traffic. (Traffic volume is an important indicator in COMINT, increased traffic almost always means Something Is Up.)
These are two of many examples. Security by obscurity (real security, not the bogus examples you provide) is a valuable part of a security toolbox, the error most amateurs make is to depend on it standalone. (Another example is a burgular who cannot dodge a camera he does not know about, nor can an interloper devise a counter to a measure he does not know exists.)
Practical H-Bomb Construction Details (Score:2, Informative)
"Assualt Rifles" vs "Assualt Weapons" (Score:2, Informative)
The term "Assualt Rifle" is defined in military text books (sorry, no link handy), part of the definition describes that to be classed as an "Assualt Rifle" it must be capable of "full auto", ie, more than one round fired when you pull the trigger. True assualt rifles have been illegal in the USA for civilian use since before WW2, you can get a permit but it costs a bundle and the ATF, FBI, et al, get to check you out with a colonoscope. Same goes for suppressors, aka "silencers".
The term "Assualt Weapons" on the other hand has no set definition, its just something the congress critters and state politico's shout about when ever someone uses a civilian nock off of a true assualt rifle in a crime. The AK-47 that is always touted as an assualt weapon is in fact a true assualt rifle and controled under the laws relating to ownership of automatic firearms, but the "AK-47's" used in the "schoolyard massacres" are in fact a civilian version that can only fire in semi-auto. All of the "Assualt Weapons" that have been banned in various states CAN NOT fire in full auto as purchased. Yes, some "Assualt Weapons" can be modified to fire full auto, most can't, or at least not easily, and yes there are exceptions to this, nothing is ever absoulute.
All the laws to restrict or ban "Assualt Weapons" acomplish is deprive the average citizen of firepower that is close to what they will face if the people ever have to prevent the imposition of a tyrany through the force of arms, and even then the military will be better armed/trained/prepared. Don't think our troops would fire on unarmed civilians, two words, "Kent State",
http://www.dispatch.com/news/newsfea00/m
The fact of the mater is that a revolver can fire more rounds per second than an Assualt Weapon", the AKS just has more rounds to fire, and I have seen a revolver fire 16 rounds in under 4 seconds, even an M-16 cant beat that.
Re:"Assualt Rifles" vs "Assualt Weapons" (Score:3, Informative)
An assault rifle must conform to these guidelines, else it is not an assault rifle.
1. Must fire in fully automatic mode.
2. Must fire low calibre rounds (.223 for example, as opposed to the
3. Must be small enough to be carried and fired by one person of average size.
That means that your civilian AR-15 clones (such as the Bushmaster
Ignorance is no excuse.
Some facts about atomic weapons (Score:4, Informative)
- There was a betting pool at the Manhattan Project over whether or not the Earth's atmosphere would be consumed in a planet-wide fireball during the first atomic test explosion (Trinity).
- The second explosion of an atomic device was over the mainly civilian target of Hiroshima, Japan, later that year. President Truman, upon hearing of the successful explosion, said it was "the greatest day in history." 70,000 people died instantly, 200,000 died in total. At Nagasaki, 3 days later, 40,000 people died instantly, 140,000 died in total. Contrary to the initial reports by the U.S. Government that the attacks had shortened the war considerably, it has come to light that Japan's Emporer had agreed to contional surrender before these attacks. The only condition was that he remain Emporer and so the Japanese state remain intact. However, with the awesome destuctive will and power of the U.S. demonstrated, we emerged from the attacks as the sole nuclear power in the world, and largely determined the shape of the post WWII world, in which we later came to be the sole great power.
- As mentioned in the linked PDF, the second h-bomb test (Bravo) went awry, with a yield of twice what was thought possible, 15 megatons. The plume was 62 miles wide, 40 miles high. The exclusion zone after the test was 850 miles wide, or about 1% of the Earth's surface. The fallout cloud reached a distance that would, in comparison, cover the entire U.S. North-Eastern Seaboard.
- Testing was expanded to high atmospheric explosions, where h-bombs were exploded in the ionosphere. They variously disrupted, destroyed and created new layers in the Van Allen Belts, the natural magnetic layers that shield the Earth from solar and cosmic radiation. Those belts have been changed ever since.
- The U.S. nuclear power monopoly ended with a series of Russian tests that yielded the largest explosion yet, at 50 megatons. The shockwave rounded the Earth 3 times. The Russian program had discovered a 3rd stage fusion mechanism, which could have led directly to 100-150 megaton weapons, and virtually unlimited theoretical maximums.
- The U.S. underground testing in Nevada has exploded nearly 1000 devices, turning a large region there into a pockmarked surface, much like the face of the moon.
- At last count, there are 12 countries (U.S., Russia, U.K., France, China, India, Pakistan, North Korea, South Africa, Israel, Iraq, Iran) who are known to have, or reasonably suspected of having had, active nuclear weapons programs, 7 of which have demonstrated capability (the first 7 of those). This does not include the probable fragmentation of the Soviet stockpile after the collapse of the U.S.S.R, smaller NGOs, or describe the liklihood of nuclear arms being sold. There were reports, just before the recent reversal of M.E. policy by the Bush Administration (i.e. to no invade Syria and Iran) that Russia and China had deployed nuclear missiles along the northern borders of those countries, likely pointed at Israel, the strongest nuclear power in the M.E..
- The combined (known) stockpiles of the U.S. and Russia (including former states) is estimated to be around ~3 Gigatons accross ~10k warheads each. At a total of about 6 Gigatons of explosive force, we're plenty close to the 75-100GT energy of the (K-T event) asteroid that wiped out the dinosaurs 65 million years ago, thank you very much.
- The U.S. has resumed manufacturing the nuclear trigger devices. Maintenance and testing is now almost fully virtualized, being done mainly in simulation, using the U.S.'s most powerful computers provided by IBM.
- Ironically (or perhaps obviously), Japan, the only victim of nuclear warfare, is using what is now the most powerful supercomputer in the world for a completely different purpose: to simulate the natural processes of the Earth.