Oh no, your understatement was fine. I just felt the need to expand.Indeed. I was going for (and clearly failing) the traditional understatement.
Oh no, your understatement was fine. I just felt the need to expand.Indeed. I was going for (and clearly failing) the traditional understatement.
By time that was done in the US, much research and much live testing was done with superior implosion methods(core material and geometry, number of lenses detonation speed ofnthe lenses, tamper material and geometry, and replacement of Polonium initiators with Neutron tubes)A fusion boosted/initiated bomb still requires the fissionable material (U-233,235/Pu-239) but at a much smaller scale compared to the simple fission designs of the Manhattan Project, the W54 warhead I think had around 2 Kgs of Pu 239 and 1 of Uranium. (What I had in mind about this is the fact that requiring a smaller fission material would be more economical to Germany)
And that's with the North Korean's knowing a bomb was definitely possible and a general idea of what was required for a working weapon, two items that 1941 Nazi Germany didn't have.By time that was done in the US, much research and much live testing was done with superior implosion methods(core material and geometry, number of lenses detonation speed ofnthe lenses, tamper material and geometry, and replacement of Polonium initiators with Neutron tubes)
Getting usable amounts of Tritium without a reactor is neither cheap or quick.
And doing it all, right out of the gate?
Forget about it.
Look at the North Korean program problems.
Lol. Safety Cadmium Bucket Pour Man is just not as interesting as SCRAM.toss in chunks of Cadmium and hope
I very much doubt that. But, for the sake of it, let's say you are right, the 1941 Nazi Germany did not know what was needed for a nuclear weapon, the 1942 Nazi Germany did.And that's with the North Korean's knowing a bomb was definitely possible and a general idea of what was required for a working weapon, two items that 1941 Nazi Germany didn't have.
Nobody in 1941 knew what was needed to make a bomb work, or indeed if one would work at all. It took four years of work at Los Alamos and elsewhere to confirm the basics and come up with a design for a weapon that would actually work. The practicalities of a working bomb are far removed from the items you are describing. And by 1942 the Germans had correctly concluded that building a bomb would take years, if it was possible at all, which was not on the cards for Nazi Germany where they had concluded, again correctly, that they would lose such a war of attrition. And if you want on invoke Heisenberg you also need to allow for the fact he made a mess of critical calculations.I very much doubt that. But, for the sake of it, let's say you are right, the 1941 Nazi Germany did not know what was needed for a nuclear weapon, the 1942 Nazi Germany did.
Even though isotope separation research already started in 1940 and ultracentrifuge work in 1941, so they knew what was needed.
Did you even check Heisenberg's 1942 lecture? Or the other document about his Critical Mass Paradox?
You mean the materials and engineering needed? Or the physics? Because the physics were known. (And if nobody knew in 1941 why does it matter if Nazi Germany also did not know?) And, they were experimenting with nuclear reactors (or testing the theory), the Leipzig L-I,II,III, IV. Berlin-VII,VIII (This was Heisenberg's team), Gottow-I,II,III,IV (Diebner team)Nobody in 1941 knew what was needed to make a bomb work, or indeed if one would work at all. It took four years of work at Los Alamos and elsewhere to confirm the basics and come up with a design for a weapon that would actually work. The practicalities of a working bomb are far removed from the items you are describing. And by 1942 the Germans had correctly concluded that building a bomb would take years, if it was possible at all, which was not on the cards for Nazi Germany where they had concluded, again correctly, that they would lose such a war of attrition. And if you want on invoke Heisenberg you also need to allow for the fact he made a mess of critical calculations.
ETA: Just to ask are you still using Irving as a reference or have you found someone credible and not a holocaust denier?
It matters because the Allies had the resources to spend on a speculative program that would take years even if it did succeed, Nazi Germany didn't. Its not like they didn't consider a program, they just correctly concluded that it was too speculative and would take too long even if it did work. People with more detailed knowledge than myself have explained the myriad reasons why a Nazi bomb isn't going to happen, from engineering to the expulsion of Jewish scientists.You mean the materials and engineering needed? Or the physics? Because the physics were known. (And if nobody knew in 1941 why does it matter if Nazi Germany also did not know?) And, they were experimenting with nuclear reactors (or testing the theory), the Leipzig L-I,II,III, IV. Berlin-VII,VIII (This was Heisenberg's team), Gottow-I,II,III,IV (Diebner team)
Your joke is so old, NY will have had internet for 50 years, pretty soon!old joke that
An archeologist digging down to 30’ in New York discovered an old copper cable and announced that New York had internet 50 years ago.
Two days later, Not to be out done by New York, An archeologist digging down to 40 in California found piece of plastic and Announced that California had High Speed fiberoptic internet 75 years ago.
Not to be left behind, the next day, Bubba digging a new hole for an outhouse found absolutely NOTHING and announced that that Hazard countya hundred years ago had gone wireless…
The point being that you A) have to have a dependable trustworthy unbiased source to trully have evidence and B) some tgings just cant be proved but are still pretty obvious.
You cant really prove a negative with evidence.
And, they were experimenting with nuclear reactors (or testing the theory), the Leipzig L-I,II,III, IV.
Telegram for Mongo...Nowhere, because they don't have a delivery system.
Unless of course the Post Office's program makes the bomb, they could mail it to Roosevelt, Churchill and Stalin.
"Hey, we've got a package for you, please sign here...Yes, I know it's large, but don't worry, it will self destruct."
It's the Third Reich, it'd be sent back because they couldn't afford enough postage.Telegram for Mongo...
Citation Required.Sigh, I was trying to make the point that the concept of using fusion to initiate fission wasn't unknown or hardly to come to it during the early 40s to physicists.
Curiously no such paper exists in any academic database. I wonder why....(From Forgotten Creators, on the topic of fusion-fission, it gives the source of G-367. Wolfgang Ferrant. Proposal for a New Method of Releasing Nuclear Energy by a Beam of Heavy Particles. 1945.)
So you're heading off into conspiracy theory land then? Or will you be producing some evidence for a German heavy water production facility?Really? I don't understand how people are so certain that Germany had not even one heavy water plant throughout the war.
Do you have the slightest understanding of the effort required to separate hydrogen isotopes? The amount of energy for large scale electrolysis? I refer you to the costings from the Manhattan Project.Or that they were incapable to build one compared to the Norwegians. What made the Norwegian D2O plant so good was that it was cheap.
Sigh. Did you actually read those papers? Leunawerke was attempting to develop the sulphide exchange method of separation deuterium but the plant never went into production beyond pilot scale (a few grammes) due to corrosion problems and lack of suitable alloys.As to where they would get their heavy water, deuterium, tritium? From at least the Leuna Werke plant.
(https://www.academia.edu/39288090/H...2_France_Karl-Hermann_Geib_biographical_essay) and a CIA report on the plant post war (CIA-RDP81-01028R000100080011-0 - https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP81-01028R000100080011-0.pdf)
You've glossed over the fact that the Nazi regime was incapable of producing sufficient fissile material for a critical mass and attempted to divert into (unsupported) claims of fusion initiated fission.Where did I denied that?
I assume you'll be citing the source for that amount of fissile material? Certainly my sources suggest around four kilogrammes in the core. And that's for a weapon designed in the late 1950s, using over a decade of additional research. The wartime MK3 plutonium bomb, unboosted, used 6.4kg.A fusion boosted/initiated bomb still requires the fissionable material (U-233,235/Pu-239) but at a much smaller scale compared to the simple fission designs of the Manhattan Project, the W54 warhead I think had around 2 Kgs of Pu 239 and 1 of Uranium. (What I had in mind about this is the fact that requiring a smaller fission material would be more economical to Germany)
Then stop citing him.It is an unreliable source.
Sweet Jeebus. You're actually continuing to cite a source you admit is unreliable because you can't find a better one..........But it is the only source that I currently have (on ultracentrifuges), if any of you have a more up to date one, that I wish I had, I sincerely hope that you will post it to shine some light on the German ultracentrifuges development. (Better if there are the G reports) (I also think he based everything regarding the ultracentrifuge development on the contents of said reports)
A possibility. Certainly an 'atomic engine' was one of the reasons for US Navy research into nuclear energy, before the Manhattan Project started and I believe the 'Uranium Club' used the concept when there wee looking for funds. However food imports by submarine is utterly impractical.How likely is it that Germany in the 1930s would seek to develop nuclear submarines: either as a weapon of war, or as a means to import food that could circumvent a British naval blockade (the threat of which is what motivated the Nazis to seek to depopulate Eastern Europe in the first place)?
It would obviously be more likely if the Nazis don't take over Germany in the first place...
A lot of people took extended holidays in saner climes. I have fairly detailed notes sopmewhere on Einstein's time in England, his meetings with Churchill, and his time in Locker-Lampson's holiday hut in Norfolk when there was a price on his head.You can trace the impact of Nazi anti-semitism on nuclear research right back to one of the original discoverers of Uranium fission Lise Metiner
Lise Meitner - Wikipedia
en.m.wikipedia.org
Not to mention the likes of Leo Szilard who fled the Nazi occupation of their homelands.
It's also important to remember that even before his Holocaust denial became explicit he was a terrible historian, hence the libel action over his book on PQ17 which he lost.He has been barred from Austria, Germany, Italy, Australia and Canada for Holocaust denial. We actually arrested and deported him from Canada in 1992. At which time he outright lied to the court about the circumstances of his entry to Canada, which probably did not help his case. He was later called to present before a French Court, but as extradition was not included, refrained from appearing.
During his libel suite against the author and publishers of Denying the Holocaust the publishers called as witness, among others, Professor of Modern History at Cambridge Richard Evans, who said:
David Irving - Wikipedia
en.m.wikipedia.org
He is about as discredited as you can get as a historian. Now most of this centred on his Holocaust denial, but it still speaks to his general credibility when discussing the third reich in general.
Indeed. It's almost as if Irving is an unreliable source.
.....
It is an unreliable source. But it is the only source that I currently have (on ultracentrifuges), if any of you have a more up to date one, that I wish I had, I sincerely hope that you will post it to shine some light on the German ultracentrifuges development. (Better if there are the G reports) (I also think he based everything regarding the ultracentrifuge development on the contents of said reports)
And because I only learned this recently I'll mention it here, Irving pretty much started off in a bad place. When he was 23 he seconded none other than Oswald Mosley in a debate @ UCL about Commonwealth immigrationIt's also important to remember that even before his Holocaust denial became explicit he was a terrible historian, hence the libel action over his book on PQ17 which he lost.
I'm going to stray a little off-topic but the mentions of cadmium reminds me of the early heavy water saga.Lol. Safety Cadmium Bucket Pour Man is just not as interesting as SCRAM.
Citations? They had no idea of the critical mass, how to obtain it, how to construct a neutron reflector or an initiator, how to build the implosion lenses and a vast amount more.I very much doubt that. But, for the sake of it, let's say you are right, the 1941 Nazi Germany did not know what was needed for a nuclear weapon, the 1942 Nazi Germany did.
Even though isotope separation research already started in 1940 and ultracentrifuge work in 1941, so they knew what was needed.
Did you even check Heisenberg's 1942 lecture? Or the other document about his Critical Mass Paradox?