Re: Al Gore Gets Global Warming Science Right According To Experts

Alan Baker wrote:
In article <91hqg.33754$VE1.24684@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
"Edwin" <thorne25@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

Alan Baker wrote:
In article <1Qfqg.79680$4L1.37165@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
"Edwin" <thorne25@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

<snip>

[snip]

"In an atomic bomb the chain reaction is designed to increase in
intensity until much of the material has fissioned. This increase is
very rapid and produces the extremely sharp, tremendously energetic
explosions characteristic of such bombs. In a nuclear reactor the
chain reaction is maintained at a controlled, nearly constant level.
Nuclear reactors are so designed that they cannot explode like
atomic bombs."

Well, Edwin? Are all these sources wrong? Or will you just admit
that you weren't as well-informed as you thought you were -- that
you were simply wrong about this?

I don't disagree with any of the above (except where you call me not
well informed or wrong). I didn't mean to say a reactor would
spontaneously explode. My only point was that the principle of
the atomic bomb is simple, to have enough of a atomic material in
one place. A reactor is also just so much atomic material in one
place. The two are not completely unsimilar concepts. I said
from the beginning that a reactor dilutes this material to the point
that it won't make an atom bomb.

The experts say that enough material can't combine from the melting
of the fuel to make an atomic blast, so I'll accept that. Thanks
for doing the Google searches to find out about this stuff.

But your "only point" is simply incorrect. The principle of an atomic
bomb is *not* simple once you realize that the "enough material" means
converting uranium into a gas in order to separate the isotopes by
atomic weight until you've removed enough of the U-238 to make the
remaining amount of U-235 of sufficient *density* to achieve
criticality.

Hmm... it seems to me the middle of a molten reactor core is a good place to
vaporize things into gases and let them condense into layers according to
density...

It's not that you need x grams of U-235 to get a critical reaction,
you've got to have x grams per cubic centimetre to get enough neutrons
spontaneously released to cause enough neutrons to be released by
collision to achieve that runaway chain reaction.

Thanks for the repeat, but I got that already.

One of the flaws in your understanding to this point is the idea that
nuclear fuel is diluted. As I said above, nuclear fuel must be
enriched in a vary complex process. Fuel for nuclear reactors is
never enriched to the point where that is *ever* possible.

Nobody has allowed a large amount of this material to just melt together to
see what would happen. Not even at Three Mile Island.

What you've been saying is akin to saying that since TNT and
nitroglycerine are both nitrogen based explosives, they must both
behave the same way.

No, I'm not.

It is *different* atomic material than that
used to make nuclear weapons and so it has inherently different
properties.

No, it's not. They're both either U235 or Pu-239, the difference is the
percentage of each present.


But I can see this is just another of your "wrong again" crusades,
so I'll just leave it at that. It was almost an enjoyable
conversation for awhile, but your need to talk down to others is
just winning out again.

It's not a *crusade*, Edwin.

Sure it is.

Look at how I started. I just tried to
give you better information than you had had up to that point.

You arrogantly decided I lacked information, or my information is of poor
quality.

I
tried to show you that your understanding was incorrect without any
insult or condescension,

No, you were your usual arrogant, condescending self, as you continue to be.

and you immediately told me that I was
wrong.

I disagreed with you.

You told me that nuclear fuels use the same mix of isotopes as
the nuclear material for bombs, without even doing the courtesy of
any further checking of any kind.

Now you're lying again. I provided quotes that showed they are the same
isotopes, U235 and Pu239.

There wouldn't have been any kind of "crusade" at all, if you'd just
actually went and checked the facts that are easily available from
google search.

Once again you resort to libel.

Frankly, you owe me an apology.

Frankly, you have that ass backwards.


.

Relevant Pages