[Rictor]

Ah jeez. I guess I better start brushing up on my Biblical end-times reading. I don't want to pick the wrong team whe the **** hits the fan.

[Kosh]

What do you think they have?  The oft rumored Neutron bomb?

Often used boxers that haven't been washed in 3 years

[Descenterace]

I doubt they have nukes. Maybe dirty bombs, but not nukes. Nuclear devices are not easy to produce in numbers, and unless you have the facilities for building them properly there's a fair chance they'll go off in storage, or during launch.

As for neutron bombs... they're even more difficult to make, because you need to produce appreciable quantities of deuterium and tritium.

[Kosh]

Nuclear devices are not easy to produce in numbers, and unless you have the facilities for building them properly there's a fair chance they'll go off in storage, or during launch

Who says you need to actually build any of them? Over a dozen went missing when the Soviet Union broke up. It could very well be one of them......

[Tyrian]

What do you think they have?  The oft rumored Neutron bomb?

No.  It's called the "Pure Fusion Device." 

Standard nukes work like this:  They split a nucleus of a heavy metal, usually an isotope of Uranium or Plutonium.  A very small amount of the nucleus's mass is converted to energy (Roughly less than 0.001%).  That's where the bang comes from.  And also a huge amount of radiation.

Pure Fusion works like this:  A deuterium or tritium mass is put under extreme temperature and pressure.  It's basically the same conditions as those in the sun.  The resulting explosion is even more massive than even the largest nukes, even Russia's Tsar Bomba.  Even worse, there is almost no long term fallout.  That means no reason not to use them.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pure_Fusion_Weapon

Most important (Quoted from article):

Pure fusion weapons offer the possibility of generating very small nuclear yields and the advantage of reduced collateral damage stemming from fallout because these weapons would not create the highly radioactive byproducts associated with fission-type weapons. Yet, the lethality of these weapons due to prompt nuclear radiation and explosive force would still be great. For instance, a pure fusion weapon with an explosive force equivalent to one ton of TNT would affect an area nearly a hundred times larger than a conventional bomb with the same explosive force.

The Pure Fusion Device is the black sheep of the US arsenal.  Everyone knows it's there, being researched, just no one will acknowledge it.  The US denies it is working on it.  At the time the US disavowed the project, it was estimated that the US was 18 months away from a functioning prototype.  That was about 16 months ago. 

In addition, it is confirmed that France and possibly Russia is working on a prototype.  If at least two nations are working on it, it seems a pretty good bet that US is too, they just don't want to admit it.

Not a real pretty image for the future of war is it?

[vyper]

Bet you london to an orange we don't have one...

[Tyrian]

We might not, but then where is the proof to say we don't?

But then we might, but where is the proof to say we do?

Personally, I prefer to err on the side of caution.

[vyper]

We (UK) probably don't because we're too pussified.

[perihelion]

Uh, the idea that such a weapon wouldn't produce fallout is a sick joke.  Most of the fallout from a nuclear explosion is not caused by remnants of the nuclear fuel used to create the explosion but matter that was caught in the heart of the blast (the weapon casing, the ground if it was near enough, etc.).  You have all that vaporized material in a space chock full of ionizing radiation, and you get nuclear instability all across the board.  Not just in heavy elements, in virtually all of them.

There is no such thing as a clean nuclear bomb.  Period.

[Ace Pace]

Uh, the idea that such a weapon wouldn't produce fallout is a sick joke.  Most of the fallout from a nuclear explosion is not caused by remnants of the nuclear fuel used to create the explosion but matter that was caught in the heart of the blast (the weapon casing, the ground if it was near enough, etc.).  You have all that vaporized material in a space chock full of ionizing radiation, and you get nuclear instability all across the board.  Not just in heavy elements, in virtually all of them.

There is no such thing as a clean nuclear bomb.  Period.

Yes, there is. Most nuclear radiation as you said comes from matter sucked in, but most nuclear devices are detonated at a high altitude to maximise damage, at that level there is very little radiation.

[Sandwich]

There is no such thing as a clean nuclear bomb.  Period.

Sure there is. Use lots of soap.

Lots.

[Tyrian]

I agree with Ace Pace.  If you detonate a PFD at high altitude, you get very little additional matter in the fusion reaction.  Also, the reason a PFD produces so little radiation, is that the bomb is detonated based on fusion principles, not with a fission primary.  In a standard fusion device, an initial fission reaction is used to bring the deuterium or tritium into a state conducive to fusion.  That initial fisson reaction produces all the radiation, as you are using heavy particles, such as neutrons, to divide another nucleus in an uncontrolled chain reaction.  Neutron flux, which results from fission, is really nasty.  It only takes a few seconds exposure to shave several years off your life, not to mention the side effects it causes...

A PFD does not use a fission primary to induce fusion.  It uses other methods, such as a laser or conventional compression explosive.  And since there is no fission involved, there is no massive release of radiation.  Fusion works on the principle of crushing, not splitting.  When you crush something, parts of it do not shoot out (i.e.: Neutrons).  It stays together, making the release of radiation minimal, if not non-existant.

[Ace Pace]

I agree with Ace Pace.  If you detonate a PFD at high altitude, you get very little additional matter in the fusion reaction.  Also, the reason a PFD produces so little radiation, is that the bomb is detonated based on fusion principles, not with a fission primary.  In a standard fusion device, an initial fission reaction is used to bring the deuterium or tritium into a state conducive to fusion.  That initial fisson reaction produces all the radiation, as you are using heavy particles, such as neutrons, to divide another nucleus in an uncontrolled chain reaction.  Neutron flux, which results from fission, is really nasty.  It only takes a few seconds exposure to shave several years off your life, not to mention the side effects it causes...

A PFD does not use a fission primary to induce fusion.  It uses other methods, such as a laser or conventional compression explosive.  And since there is no fission involved, there is no massive release of radiation.  Fusion works on the principle of crushing, not splitting.  When you crush something, parts of it do not shoot out (i.e.: Neutrons).  It stays together, making the release of radiation minimal, if not non-existant.

Regardless of that, modern devices used by the U.S(kinda three stage devices) are very clean in terms of efficiency, when they use the Fusion stage to retrigger the fission stage, anahilating roughly 97% of the Uranium which is rather good.

[Herra Tohtori]

Actually, if you fuse tritium and deuterium, you do indeed get a neutron out of the reaction, in addition to energy released as gamma/röntgen radiation and kinetic energy of helium and neutron... And if you fuse two tritium nuclei, you get even two neutrons per reaction.

In fact, the modern fusion bombs rely on neutron flux to produce their tritium. Their fuel of choice is lithium deuteride, or rather, lithium-6 deuteride. When lithium is exposed to neutron bombardment, the reaction produces tritium. The preferrance of solid fuel instead of liquified deuterium or tritium is obvious - solid fuel is easier to keep solid. Anyway, the reaction goes like this:

Li-6 + n => 2 H-3 + He-4

H-2 + H-3 => He-4 + n + ENERGY

The resulting tritium then reacts with deuterium that was in the lithium deuteride. The reaction can be triggered by any means that produce sufficient pressure and temperature, but in any case, some neutrons are needed to create some tritium to make the fusion reaction possible. This makes it quite clear that a small fission device is best suited to fire up the lithium deuteride.

And speaking of annihilation - that is a different thing altogether. It is true that the slow neutrons will affect the uranium particles from the fission detonator so that most of it goes through a fission reaction, but that doesn't really annihilate the radioactive particles (ie. transmute them into pure, massless energy in form of electromagnetic radiation). Instead, the released energy (kinetic, or thermal, whatever you prefer) blows the radioactive daughter nuclei (like Strontium, Krypton, Barium and Xenon) on a wide area. They form the most of radioactive fallout - and when they decay, the reaulting nuclei, of course.

Besides, most of the neutrons emanating from the fusion reaction are too fast to trigger fission reaction in the spare uranium nuclei that still are around. The Uranium-235 -fissionable requires slow neutrons to change the nuclei into Uranium-236, which is spontaneously fissionable. That triggers the fission chain reaction. U-238 is in the mixture to make the fisson material stable enough not to blow up spontaneously from one stray neutron...


Actually, the neutron flux is probably going to play a big role in future fusion reactors as means of producing tritium. It's simple - just cover the insides of the reactor torus with lithium.

[Tyrian]

When I said deuterium or tritium, I meant a fusion reaction between deuterium and deuterium or tritium and tritium...

Either way it's a moot point...I just got skooled by Herra Tohtori... 

Herra ==> 
Me ==>        OW!

[vyper]

On an Israel-Palestine note:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/5123262.stm

Israel's military has attacked a major bridge in Gaza in what it says is an effort to stop militants from moving a captured Israeli soldier.

The Israeli military has been on alert following the capture of Gilad Shalit by Palestinian militants on Sunday.

Unconfirmed reports say Israeli tanks massed on the border with Gaza have begun to move - but Israel denies this.

[IceFire]

Mmm never heard of a Pure Fusion Device....I'll add that to rumored semi-scifi weapons list that you hear about from time to time.  Personally the Laser on the JSF is cooler but not as explosive.

I haven't heard much about this story in the major news media.  I guess its on the down-low right now.  With the airstrike and stories of tanks massing at the borders I'm a might bit concerned about whats going to happen.  But I don't disagree with Israel...I'd be pissed too.  I'd want my soldier back.

[Tyrian]

Laser weapons on aircraft aren't a rumor anymore.  USAF built two 767's with solid state lasers in the nose.  Those babies can shoot down ICBM's at a distance of over 200 miles.  One was in Iraq, before Saddam got captured.  I don't know where that one is currently, same goes for the second.

[perihelion]

@Herra

Ach!  Ye beat me to it.  Could not have put it better, though.

[Tyrian]

I'm on summer break...Don't school me again!