Imagine:
A devastatingly powerful two kiloton yield bomb the size of a hand grenade…. a device to allow you to zap your enemies with lightning bolts (as though you’re Storm of the X-Men)…… an incendiary bomb so powerful that it burns everything in its range and sucks up all the oxygen in a wide range, killing all remaining hidden occupants….
(Image from this site.)
These are the things that the US Department of Defence pours a huge amount of development money into trying to make into viable weapons. A lot of the science these things are based on is sometimes flawed (at best), ridiculous at times. (The last one, the “hyperbaric bomb” is real, by the way, and was deployed for the first time in Afghanistan in recent years.) Nevertheless, there can still be a lot of support for several of these dubious projects, for a variety of reasons. Sometimes the reasons are political - that same story we’ve been hearing a lot under the current administration - resulting from an alarmingly common willingness to disregard scientific opinion of considerable weight in favour of a pet project that just sounds so good… or just fits nicely with a political agenda (remember Star Wars? Or more recently, bunker-busting nuclear bombs?). It’s somewhat frightening, to be honest.
On the way home from the conference a short while ago I listened to a fantastic interview with Sharon Weinberger on NPR’s Fresh Air. I recommend it. She has recently written a book about this subject, and Terry Gross takes her into refreshingly unblinking (for US primetime radio) detail about some of the science, the “Imaginary Weapons” (title of her book) and the current and past politics of the issue. The super hand grenade, for example, is an attempt to make an explosive from an isomer of Hafnium (the nucleus is in an excited state), Hf-178. There was a rumoured successful experiment which supposedly managed to get some Hf-178 to release its energy after being irradiated with X-rays from a dental X-ray machine. Various groups have tried to reproduce this experiment, and various panels of scientists have spoken of the unfeasibility of this avenue of investigation as a viable weapons program…. but still the research gets support, the goal being a so called “isomeric bomb”.
And then there’s the Voice of God weapon, or the Lightning device (basically a Tesla coil)….. you can read about them in a Washington Post article by the same author here.
Have a listen to the interview as well. Let us know what you think.
-cvj
June 13th, 2006 at 3:58 am
Clifford,
Glad you are back! It’s weak leadership which means that dangerous weapons are stockpiled. Consider Sam Cohen of RAND Corp who invented the neutron bomb and received a lot of group-think type abuse, but was rewarded by the Pope the Vatican Peace Medal for his contributions to reducing the risks of collateral damage in war: http://glasstone.blogspot.com/
The 2 kt neutron bomb helped to deter war in Europe during the 1980s when the Soviets had a 3:1 tank superiority. But President Bush Senior removed it from the stockpile. Cohen points out in his book that the neutron bomb design in combination with its use (burst height, etc.) eliminates all collateral damage by blast, heat and residual radiation, but intensifies the initial radiation (it was tested in nevada in 1962):
“‘As for the enemy soldiers, the bad guys, who during a war we make out to be as barbaric as the troops of Attila the Hun (they usually are), those that die are dead; but that’s always been the main objective in battlefield conflict — to kill. As to how they die, which hasn’t been of real concern in conventional war, all I can say is I doubt whether the agony an irradiated soldier goes through in the process of dying is any worse than that produced by having your body charred to a crisp by napalm, your guts being ripped apart by shrapnel, your lungs blown in by concussion weapons, and all those other sweet things that happen when conventional weapons (which are preferred and anointed by our official policy) are used.’ (Page 130.)
That is real deterrence to end war for once and for all. Instead of 1-2 kt neutron bombs, they choose to stockpile 300-400 kt dirty bombs. Why? Groupthink, or rather lack of think. The idea is that making nuclear weapons more effective and credible for deterring war is immoral is a lie. Consider long term effects of initial nuclear radiation in Hiroshima and Nagasaki:
In a controlled sample of 36,500 survivors, 89 people got leukemia over a 40 year period, above the number in the unexposed control group. Published in Radiation Research volume 146:1-27, 1996: http://www.rerf.or.jp/eigo/faqs/faqse.htm#faq2
Over 40 years, in 36,500 survivors monitored, there were 176 leukemia deaths which is 89 more than the control (unexposed) group got naturally. There were 4,687 other cancer deaths, but that was merely 339 above the number in the control (unexposed) group, so this is statistically a much smaller rise than the leukemia result.
Natural leukemia rates, which are very low in any case, were increased by 51 % in the irradiated survivors, but other cancers were merely increased by just 7 %.
Adding all the cancers together, the total was 4,863 cancers (mainly natural), which is just 428 more than the unexposed control group. Hence, the total increase over the natural cancer rate was 9 %, spread over 40 years.
What about the long term effects from conventional weapons injuries? Lead poisoning, etc? Nobody bothers about that.
June 13th, 2006 at 4:03 am
When I worked in a US govt. lab just after 9/11, we had a visit from the management to talk about how we can contribute to the war on terror. The proposals they had already received from others ranged from the detection of a single plutonium atom to faster-than-light communication. We pretty much spent the whole session trying to convince the guy that these things are not feasible at best (Pu detection), and completely impossible at worst (superluminal signalling). I don’t think we succeeded…
PS. Glad you’re back, Clifford.
June 13th, 2006 at 4:32 am
When I was at JPL back in the mid to late 80’s, it was mostly military cr*p that I worked on. (All of the “fun creative stuff”..the funding went away.) One of them was Reagan’s SDI nonsense..it was a joke among even our group leader. Years later, I heard a quote from a L-cubed (Lawrence Livermore Labs) physicist, on SDI:
“laser this..THAT DIDN’T WORK, this XX..DIDN’T WORK..”
The concept was flawed from a Physics standpoint, more (bad) Concept than Reality. Finally, internal corruption (JPL..run by Caltech!) just made me pickup & leave..I didn’t get all this Book Knowledge (3 degrees) to waste-it-away on idiotic projects w/idiotic people.
You may have seen (or heard lectures) by Ted Postol/MIT..he came to Caltech a few yrs ago to talk. I 1st saw him on CBS 60 Minutes. He basically summarized what’s wrong with a lot of military-funded programs. Flawed ideas, Bad execution, LOTS of wasted tax-payer dollars.
June 13th, 2006 at 4:48 am
forgot this link from the Boston Globe, Ted Postol/MIT is leading a charge. Wow, he’s comparing MIT’s president Susan Hockfield to Ken Lay of Enron. This is beginning to sound something like L. Summers/Harvard, except it’s reversed: a female President is acting stupid. Politics is opaque to sex, skin color, etc.
R. Feynman’s letter to S. Wolfram is applicable:
“Either YOU [ technical person ] will drive THEM [ Administrative types ], or THEY will drive YOU wild”
– Stephenwolfram.com
In the above article, there is a reference to a missile shot from Kwajalein Island. Well, I worked on THAT..the JPL project which used a 40″ telescope (on Mt. Haleakala, Maui/Hawaii) to monitor these missile shots. It was a JOKE! I’ll forego the details.
Mind numbing, Mind boggling, & finally..Mind Blowng. My neurons finally couldn’t take it anymore. Yay Ted Postol!
June 13th, 2006 at 8:48 am
That lightning’s got nothing on the Sandia Z Machine.
June 13th, 2006 at 9:20 am
Stupid weird ideas for weapons are not new.
Back during Nazi times in Germany, Heinrich Himmler (Reichsfuehrer SS) tried to build a weapon resembling Thor’s Hammer. (Himmler was the head of the SS, Gestapo, and was one of the main architects of the “Final Solution” holocaust). The idea was that this “magical” weapon would shut down all the electric equipment of Allied troops. Some company even proposed an implementation for Himmler’s idea by finding a way of “removing” the insulating effect of the atmosphere. Even the SS technical office said the scheme was a joke, but Himmler still believed in his “magical” weapon!
(see page 282-284 of “The Master Plan: Himmer’s Scholars and the Holocaust” by Heather Pringle)
June 13th, 2006 at 9:33 am
After Iraq was invaded and no WMD were found, a common refrain was “Saddam was out of it and gave money to scientist with wild ideas that had no real chance of success.” Sadly, this is happening on massive scales in the United States.
June 13th, 2006 at 9:40 am
With “prophetic skills of another” I once read about a situation that was set upon an invading force, coming down into India from Pakistan, which was quickly halted?
The Sonic Weapon of Vladimir Gavreau,
Yes of course very speculative, until one wondered about the physiological effects.
Maybe one has felt such a sickness upon them?
June 13th, 2006 at 9:40 am
Here’s another Postol link.
http://www.estarwars.net/tedpostal.htm
Nuclear Missle defense has been a complete waste of money. If the “fiscal conservatives” want a program to cut to reduce expenditures, this is the one.
If we thought N. Korea, Iran or any other “rogue regime” was about to have nuclear missle capability, our best and most effective option would be to destroy it before launch with a cruise missle.
This is money down the drain.
Elliot
June 13th, 2006 at 9:43 am
Reality check: Stupidity and worthlessness aren’t limited to military projects. Just take a gander at hep-th, gr-qc, or even any issue of Phys Rev D.
June 13th, 2006 at 9:58 am
This would work quite well provided that they notify you in advance of the locations of their mobile launchers and as a further courtesy loiter a couple of hours so that your cruise missles have time to reach them.
Actually, the rogue state scenario (where the enemy can only launch a few missles) is the case in which missle defense make the most sense.
June 13th, 2006 at 10:01 am
…uhm… is this the real reason one should never do electrical work while standing on a metal ladder? Regardless…Clifford, glad to see you’ve been released from parole!!
June 13th, 2006 at 10:35 am
I won’t argue the cost/benefit of these programs, but one must at least consider the psycological effect of new weapons technology on the enemy. I have two examples.
In the fifties, US scientists fooled with making a nuclear jet engine. The thinking was, we could stay aloft for arbitrarily long periods of times—no refueling—these would have been made obsolete by nuclear attack submarines. The engineering part was simple—the engine has no moving parts. But the US eventually decided that it wouldn’t work—aside from spewing a trail of radioactive exaust, the pilots would receive unhealthy amounts of radiation. An issue of Popular Science revealed that the Soviets had already constructed a nuclear powered bomber, and the US program was revived with much more funding.
Second, Regan’s SDI initiative, unviable though it may be, did scare the Soviets. They perceived this as a very real program, and were genuinely worried that the US could shoot their missles out of the sky with satellites in space.
The point is, just having the psychological edge may be worth funding far out projects that may or may not ever be intended to be used.
I would also point out, that in hindsight, things like SDI are easy to attack. Early on, Hans Bethe was convinced of its fesability.
June 13th, 2006 at 12:37 pm
What’s this, “Toys for Boys”? Not wanting to rain on anyone’s parade, and all the fun and games, research grants can allow you to have, but you do not need nuclear weapons to make France or Germany, but to mention two, GO HOT. Conventional aircraft or a ‘flying object’ like that which slammed into the pentagon, hitting a couple of dozen nuclear power plants would have the same effect. And yes we do have fly by wire, no ‘kamikaze’ pilots needed.
Anyway who exactly are we worried about, is one of Saddams scuds gonna reach the East Coast US mainland?
Anything fired from Iran can be shot down over Iran. The same goes for N Korea. So come on guys, in this wonderful real or non-video game world, which bit of land are you defending, and who is the enemy.
PS - Russia might have had 3-1 tanks and might or might not have been able to walk all over Europe, but how exactly were they gonna invade US mainland. And let us not forget walking all over Europe or Iraq, is the easy part, suppressing any resistance is always the tenuous + tedious downside.
PPS - I have to agree with Science, the how of killing and dying, is superfluous. Imagine next time you go out for a heavy session (boozing) ‘waking-up’ with your throat cut. It will make any previous day thoughts or talk of superweapons slightly irrelevant. So enjoy your night out & Sweet dreams every one.
June 13th, 2006 at 12:40 pm
Belizean,
If our global intelligence apparatus can’t inform us of a fairly imminent nuclear attack so we can take preemptive countermeasures, we are in deeper trouble.
The fact is that SDI will simply not work if the enemy uses decoys as the infrared signiture of the decoys is indistinguisable from the real target.
Pragmatically, we’d be better off taking the billions of dollars we are throwing away, and “buying off” the leadership of these countries.
One of the underlying premises of this system is that the command and control software system needs to work absolutely flawlessly the FIRST TIME it is used in production. Anybody EVER seen that happen?
June 13th, 2006 at 1:14 pm
You’d better be careful what you wish for.
The same gullible govt officials who approve these wild, far out ideas with flawed scientific basis are often the same ones willing to fund wild, far out ideas like string theory.
June 13th, 2006 at 1:40 pm
Between funding unviable superweapons and viable superweapons, I prefer the former. (Yes, I know; we want other options beyond the two, ones which involve no superweapons.)
June 13th, 2006 at 2:08 pm
Ok Robin, I get your drift. U just want the funding for research, and U hope never to have to use it. But I presume you know mainland US is pretty safe from any attack from anywhere, meaning Russia & China. And the EU is not likely to fall out with the US as long as there is enough oil or other fossil fuels to keep emitting CO2 on both sides of the Atlantic. And the US already has total air superiority. So U can only be talking about striking someone at will. Pre-emptive strikes. But hold on the US already has the ability to do that at will.
PS - Not being funny but even fighter pilots must be close to redundant now, if they aren’t already. So faster ballistics (for defence) what’s the top speed now? Faster missiles on faster planes with stealth technology beyond the reach of Iraqi radar. Unless you are thinking of attacking someone who can shoot down your planes, then use faster unmanned craft with the ability to fire faster missiles. Hopefully you are not thinking of anywhere in Europe.
PPS - Another good reason why Iran, Egypt, Turkey, Pakistan, et al should be allowed to develop nuclear power plants: they are impossible to defend from a ‘real’ air (USAF) threat. Laters … Q
June 13th, 2006 at 5:12 pm
Twenty years ago, an atomic hand grenade would be part of the setup for a Polish joke sort of like the bit about the guy who put up braille billboards to reach the lucrative blind market.
June 13th, 2006 at 6:44 pm
Jim, don’t laugh: A former colleague of mine told me about a trip to an army museum somewhere in Alabama. On display were nuclear mortars with a firing range of three miles. The blast radius of the grenades was about four miles.
June 13th, 2006 at 7:16 pm
PK,
You are probably referring to the Anniston Army Depot in Alabama. Furthermore, this depot is the home of one of the largest poison-chemical waste site in the country. This fact is yet another reason that I am embarrassed to have to admit living in such a backwater State of the Union.
June 14th, 2006 at 11:52 am
PK, you must be thinking about the Davy Crockett. You have the range about right, but the blast radius was a lot smaller than you think so the crew would survive using it. It only had a yield of 10-20 tons.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Davy_Crockett_%28nuclear_device%29
June 14th, 2006 at 2:36 pm
You do realise that if the CIA find this “post” about WMD weapons of mass destruction, the American President would have to send in the US Marines to invade your website. But hold on is this website based in America (USA). lol! - As JoAnne says, one has to laugh to keep the ’sanity’. lol again!
June 14th, 2006 at 10:36 pm
The weapon systems that really work are seldom talked about very much before their debut for the obvious reason that the military has every reason to keep them secret. Fantasies like Star Wars, on the other hand, are publicized widely. Since they are unlikely to work, their only value is political and they may as well be bragged up.
I don’t find it a comforting thought that the real breakthroughs in weaponry are kept secret. Who knows what terrifying toys are under wraps?
June 15th, 2006 at 4:41 am
Thomas Palm: Thanks for the wiki link. I have not been to the army museum myself, so I am not sure if it’s the same one. In any case, I am glad these weapons have been abandoned (or have they…).
June 27th, 2006 at 5:10 pm
Imagine:
A weapon that can turn a Human being into a bomb. One that can collapse all wave functions into one, one that leads a person into to taking in, so much energy, into the mind, that there consciousness meets it’s anti-matter version, of it’s self. The explosion, I believe could have an unlimited energy release. Current knowledge of the universe could probably produce, an explosion about the size of an atomic bomb, although you would need a Quantum mask (and only chance could make such a thing) to hide your mind from the universe.
Imagine that, a man walking in a city with no weapon or bomb, then levels it with just his mind. You can destroy your self’s completely, if you wish and no one or no thing will stop you.
We all have minds that can, not only create a story that can start world war 3, but destroy the universe, the multi-verse, everything and who is going to stop us… No one! No one at all, so go ahead go blow your self’s up!