Peace through practical, proved civil defence for credible war deterrence
  • Please see also post linked here, and our summary of the key points in Herman Kahn's much-abused call for credible deterrence, On Thermonuclear War, linked here.

  • Hiroshima's air raid shelters were unoccupied because Japanese Army officers were having breakfast when B29s were detected far away, says Yoshie Oka, the operator of the Hiroshima air raid sirens on 6 August 1945...

  • In 1,881 burns cases in Hiroshima, only 17 (or 0.9 percent) were due to ignited clothing and 15 (or 0.7%) were due to the firestorm flames...

  • Dr Harold L. Brode’s new book, Nuclear Weapons in ...

  • 800 war migrants drowned on 22 April by EU policy:...

  • Photographed fireball shielding by cloud cover in ...

  • Nuclear weapons effects "firestorm" and "nuclear w...

  • Proved 97.5% survival in completely demolished houses ...

    "There has never been a war yet which, if the facts had been put calmly before the ordinary folk, could not have been prevented." - British Foreign Secretary Ernest Bevin, House of Commons Debate on Foreign Affairs, Hansard, 23 November 1945, column 786 (unfortunately secret Cabinet committees called "democracy" for propaganda purposes have not been quite so successful in preventing war). Protection is needed against collateral civilian damage and contamination in conventional, chemical and nuclear attack, with credible low yield clean nuclear deterrence against conventional warfare which, in reality (not science fiction) costs far more lives. Anti scientific media, who promulgate and exploit terrorism for profit, censor (1) vital, effective civil defense knowledge and (2) effective, safe, low yield air burst clean weapons like the Mk54 and W79 which deter conventional warfare and escalation, allowing arms negotiations from a position of strength. This helped end the Cold War in the 1980s. Opposing civil defense and nuclear weapons that really deter conventional war, is complacent and dangerous.

    War and coercion dangers have not stemmed from those who openly attack mainstream mistakes, but from those who camouflage themselves as freedom fighters to ban such free criticism itself, by making the key facts seem taboo, without even a proper debate, let alone financing research into unfashionable alternatives. Research and education in non-mainstream alternatives is needed before an unprejudiced debate, to establish all the basic facts for a real debate. “Wisdom itself cannot flourish, nor even truth be determined, without the give and take of debate and criticism.” – Robert Oppenheimer (quotation from the H-bomb TV debate hosted by Eleanor Roosevelt, 12 February 1950).

    “Apologies for freedom? I can’t handle this! ... Deal from strength or get crushed every time ... Freedom demands liberty everywhere. I’m thinking, you see, it’s not so easy. But we have to stand up tall and answer freedom’s call!” – Freedom Kids

  • Wednesday, March 29, 2006

    Outward pressure times area is outward force...

    Image above is taken from Dr Samuel Glasstone's Effects of Nuclear Weapons 1957. The outward force of the blast always has an equal and opposite reaction (3rd law of motion), in this case underpressure (suction), pulling instead of pushing. See the tree stand in the middle of this video clip of the 15 kiloton Grable nuclear test. Close to ground zero, before the suction phase develops, the reaction is simply the symmetry of the blast (the reaction of the Northwards part of the blast is the Southwards moving blast, while there is still high pressure connecting them - this breaks down when a vacuum forms near ground zero, and from then on the reactive force is the inward or suction blast phase). Likewise, in a sound wave, you have to have an outward pressure followed by an inward (underpressure) force. The relationship between force and pressure is force equals pressure times area acted upon.

    This whole approach to understanding sound waves, explosion blast waves, and consequently the big bang gravity mechanism, is suppressed. The logic that you get an inward force in an explosion (which by Newton's 3rd law balances the outward force) is also inherent in the implosion principle of nuclear weapons, as Glasstone explained:

    If you don't have an equal and opposite reaction in a pressure wave, it isn't a sound wave.

    The force you get against your eardrum isn't just a push, but a push followed by equal pull.

    This mechanism explains the gauge boson inward push in the big bang, predicting gravity.

    The outward force in any explosion always has an equal and opposite reaction (Newton's 3rd empirical law). If you just push air, the energy disperses without propagating as a 340 m/s oscillatory sound wave. Air must be oscillated to create sound. It delivers an oscillatory force, outward and then inward. Merely using wave equations does not explain the physical process, even where the maths happens to give a good fit to data. Sound waves are particulate molecules deep down, carrying an oscillatory force.

    This makes various predictions and contains no speculation whatsoever, it is a fact based mechanism, employing Feynman's mechanism as exhibited in the Feynman diagrams - virtual photon exchange causing forces in QFT. He noted that path integrals has a deeper underlying simplicity:

    "It always bothers me that, according to the laws as we understand them today, it takes a computing machine an infinite number of logical operations to figure out what goes on in no matter how tiny a region of space, and no matter how tiny a region of time. How can all that be going on in that tiny space? Why should it take an infinite amount of logic to figure out what one tiny piece of space/time is going to do? So I have often made the hypothesis that ultimately physics will not require a mathematical statement, that in the end the machinery will be revealed, and the laws will turn out to be simple, like the chequer board with all its apparent complexities." - Richard P. Feynman, Character of Physical Law, Penguin, 1992, pp 57-8.

    (In the same book he discusses the problems with the LeSage gravity mechanism as per 1964.)


    At 10:14 pm, Blogger nige said...

    Copy of a comment

    Of course matter is accelerated in all kinds of directions in shock waves. The key thing about a shock wave is that it needs a medium of gas or dust to propagate it.

    The outgoing shell or "shock front" is continuously engulfing new matter, and thus having to accelerate that new matter up to speed.

    Hence, it exerts outward force, F=ma, which is related to outward pressure by P = F/A, where A is the spherical surface area 4*Pi*R^2 for shock front radius R. See where we get an analytical solution of shock waves from a bit more mathematical modelling: you need to scroll down there for the proof that in a strong shock wave the strong shock front velocity is U = (2/5)R/t, where R is shock front radius and t is time, assuming that U is much bigger than the ambient speed of sound. The 2/5 factor is the deceleration factor (the shock wave velocity is ever decelerating, ambient pressure and ambient sound speed being neglected).

    The shock wave radius is there proved to be R

    = {[75E(gamma - 1)t^2]/(8*Pi*Rho_o)}^{1/5},

    where E is the energy of the explosion, gamma is the usual ratio of specific heats of the gas (generally gamma is in the range of 1.2-1.4), t is time, and Rho_o is the ambient gas or dust density.

    I'd like to get this proof on arxiv, because the only mainstream thing which comes near to it is G.I. Taylor in Proceedings of the Royal Society (v. 201A, pp. 159-86), but he uses a long-winded (27 pages) numerical integration of the equations of motion instead of the analytical solution based on causal mechanism I use. I can't get it on arxiv since they censored me for the gravity formula.

    Because of the outward force in any explosion, Newton's 3rd law says there must be an equal inward force. The region in the middle of an explosion becomes very low density very soon (which is why the fireball in an explosion is buoyant and thus rises once the shock wave departs), so the reaction force is not a symmetry effect with the outward force on one side being balanced by a reaction from the shock wave on the opposite side which is going in the other direction.

    Instead, the reaction force occurs in a second shell where gas or dust travels INWARDS, with inward force. See

    nigel cook | Homepage | 11.17.06 - 5:08 pm | #


    Post a Comment

    << Home