Searching \ for '[OT] Big Explosion in N Korea' in subject line. ()
Make payments with PayPal - it's fast, free and secure! Help us get a faster server
FAQ page: www.piclist.com/techref/index.htm?key=big+explosion+korea
Search entire site for: 'Big Explosion in N Korea'.

Exact match. Not showing close matches.
PICList Thread
'[OT] Big Explosion in N Korea'
2004\09\13@102312 by Mike Hord

picon face
Just as a check against the news here (and especially the information being
"provided" by the US government), has anyone on the PIClist, especially
those closer to N Korea, noticed any indication that the mushroom cloud is
of nuclear origin?  Sharp spikes in background radiation, things of that nature?

Just my paranoid fears and a desire to check "facts" against reality...

Mike H.
_______________________________________________
http://www.piclist.com
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

2004\09\13@110218 by Marc Nicholas

flavicon
face
You mean you don't believe the Korean's were moving a mountain? ;-)

What would be funny (not "haha") is if they'd decided to use one of
their supposed-nuclear devices to do the demolition for the hydro
project.

-marc

{Original Message removed}

2004\09\13@131312 by M. Adam Davis

flavicon
face
The discussion on slashdot seemed to center around various siesmograph
readings that are open to the public.  Apparently this explosion wasn't
big enough to generate much data except very close to the site.  Even a
low yield nuke would have created a larger spike in the readings, though
this is all complicated by an earthquake in Japan several hours later.

Some wonder if it was a fuel air explosive, but it shouldn't have made a
real crater, though from space a huge black spot that may simply be
burned land could appear to be a crater.

It takes a lot of effort to create a 2km diameter mushroom cloud without
a nuke, but I can't believe someone in the region wouldn't be screaming
about radiation if such a signature were found.  Many, many technical
universities are in that region which would surely notice a change and
would spread in around to other educational and research institutions.  
It's not something that the US, China, Korea, Russia, Japan, etc could
keep a secret even if they wanted to, which I can't currently conceive
of a reasonable reason to keep this secret, nevermind trying to form a
coalition to keep it secret.

The only nice thing about a nuke is the ratio of the size of the weapon
to the size of the explosion.  Perhaps the korean's were detonating it
above ground to throw off suspician for an exactly timed underground
nuke test.  Perhaps they wanted to see how much ruckus it would create
before really testing their nukes.  Perhaps, perhaps, perhaps...  Is
their official response still "mushroom cloud casued by forest fire"?  
Talk about a flash forest fire...

-Adam

Mike Hord wrote:

{Quote hidden}

_______________________________________________
http://www.piclist.com
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

2004\09\13@133448 by Dave VanHorn

flavicon
face

>Perhaps, perhaps, perhaps...  Is their official response still "mushroom cloud casued by forest fire"?  
>Talk about a flash forest fire...

Now they say they were dynamiting for a dam.
Seems a very odd way to do it.
More and smaller blasts are generally safer. Less to go wrong, for one thing.

_______________________________________________
http://www.piclist.com
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

2004\09\13@141830 by Marc Nicholas

flavicon
face
" Seems a very odd way to do it. More and smaller blasts are generally
safer. Less to go wrong, for one thing."

They were taking out a mountain. They'd be there for years with small
blasts! ;-)



-marc

{Original Message removed}

2004\09\13@142445 by Peter L. Peres

picon face


On Mon, 13 Sep 2004, Marc Nicholas wrote:

> You mean you don't believe the Korean's were moving a mountain? ;-)
>
> What would be funny (not "haha") is if they'd decided to use one of
> their supposed-nuclear devices to do the demolition for the hydro
> project.

Why are you assuming they were trying to move the mountain when they moved
it ? You know, s**t happens. A cigarette butt here, a short circuit there,
a little bit of rain where it shouldn't get, lightning hits a phone line
...

Peter
_______________________________________________
http://www.piclist.com
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

2004\09\13@160257 by Spehro Pefhany

picon face
At 01:12 PM 9/13/2004 -0400, you wrote:
>The discussion on slashdot seemed to center around various siesmograph
>readings that are open to the public.  Apparently this explosion wasn't
>big enough to generate much data except very close to the site.  Even a
>low yield nuke would have created a larger spike in the readings, though
>this is all complicated by an earthquake in Japan several hours later.
>
>Some wonder if it was a fuel air explosive, but it shouldn't have made a
>real crater, though from space a huge black spot that may simply be burned
>land could appear to be a crater.
>
>It takes a lot of effort to create a 2km diameter mushroom cloud without a
>nuke, but I can't believe someone in the region wouldn't be screaming
>about radiation if such a signature were found.  Many, many technical
>universities are in that region which would surely notice a change and
>would spread in around to other educational and research institutions.
>It's not something that the US, China, Korea, Russia, Japan, etc could
>keep a secret even if they wanted to, which I can't currently conceive of
>a reasonable reason to keep this secret, nevermind trying to form a
>coalition to keep it secret.

Consider this:

http://www.thebulletin.org/issues/1997/nd97/nd97albright.html

Apparently a real nuclear test in 1979 and they are still not sure which
country/countries were responsible and where exactly it happened.
But South Africa and/or Israel and/or Taiwan are
suspected. And the fallout effects were minimal and disputable.

>The only nice thing about a nuke is the ratio of the size of the weapon to
>the size of the explosion.  Perhaps the korean's were detonating it above
>ground to throw off suspician for an exactly timed underground nuke
>test.  Perhaps they wanted to see how much ruckus it would create before
>really testing their nukes.  Perhaps, perhaps, perhaps...  Is their
>official response still "mushroom cloud casued by forest fire"?
>Talk about a flash forest fire...

Blasting a mountain for a hydroelectric project, they say. Which doesn't
address the type of explosion, of course, as Marc suggests. I imagine an
atmospheric test would be far less visible seismically than an underground
test.

Prevailing winds are typically from the North-East world-wide in the
Northern hemisphere, so maybe being 20 miles from the sparsely populated
mountainous China border area is not that big a deal.

Best regards,

Spehro Pefhany --"it's the network..."            "The Journey is the reward"
spam_OUTspeffTakeThisOuTspaminterlog.com             Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog  Info for designers:  http://www.speff.com




_______________________________________________
http://www.piclist.com
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

2004\09\13@170903 by Mike Hord

picon face
> Consider this:
>
> www.thebulletin.org/issues/1997/nd97/nd97albright.html
>
> Apparently a real nuclear test in 1979 and they are still not sure which
> country/countries were responsible and where exactly it happened.
> But South Africa and/or Israel and/or Taiwan are
> suspected. And the fallout effects were minimal and disputable.

That's hardly a reassuring article.  I was laboring under the belief
that nuclear
tests, anywhere on Earth, are fairly easy to pick out due to released fission
products, radiation, and seismographic readings.  Apparently not so.

> Blasting a mountain for a hydroelectric project, they say. Which doesn't
> address the type of explosion, of course, as Marc suggests. I imagine an
> atmospheric test would be far less visible seismically than an underground
> test.

That claim doesn't hold much water IMHO.  What goes up must come down,
and I find it hard to believe any responsible engineer anywhere in the world
would sign of on a single tremendous explosion for the purpose of moving an
entire mountain.

OTOH, http://www.snopes.com/critters/disposal/whale.htm

Mike H.
_______________________________________________
http://www.piclist.com
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

2004\09\13@171251 by Jinx

face picon face
> Now they say they were dynamiting for a dam.
> Seems a very odd way to do it.
> More and smaller blasts are generally safer. Less to go wrong,
> for one thing.

I remember seeing on the news a few years ago the start of construction
for a new airport in Singapore (? Hong Kong ? somewhere out there).
Reason it made the news was the mother of an explosion to flatten a
pesky hill in pretty much one go. It was there - bang - it wasn't there

_______________________________________________
http://www.piclist.com
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

2004\09\13@172638 by Marc Nicholas

flavicon
face
Even relatively small nuclear devices will cause enough ionization
20-40km up that there will be *some* noticeable disruption in RF signals
that bounce off or are carried through the ionosphere. I know of at
least one civilian project that uses GPS signals to monitor the
ionosphere!

I suspect if this were nuclear, somebody would have definitely noticed
and not just by seismology or background radiation counts. That somebody
may well be the U.S. military, however, and we all know how forthcoming
they are when it comes to fact ;-)

-marc

{Original Message removed}

2004\09\13@180425 by hilip Stortz

picon face
you know, there's just enough data there to believe you know what
probably happened.  from the timing of the test south africa admitted to
2 months later, it sounds very much like south africa and israel did
some joint development of nuclear weapons and they figured out a way to
make it very hard to prove.  what's most alarming is that we had
detection satellites, but they were 2 years past their lifetime and not
everything on them was working properly, that alone is suspicious and
stinks of a cover up.  i could easily believe that the u.s. government
and others chose to remain silent and conceal most of the evidence from
the public for various political reasons.  
if it wasn't a nuke test, there were sure a lot of coincidences, and at
least one explanation, the meteor theory is pretty absurd, though just
the type of thing most citizens would believe, just like the "sleeping"
gas the russians used, yeah, right, experimental sleeping gas that some
how killed all the captors who would have had any available food and
water and been in better physical shape but only some of the hostages,
yeah, right.  
it will be interesting to see the stories and spin develop around this
most recent event, i don't expect to hear anything beyond spin and
stories on something like this unfortunately.  testing a new nuke design
and claiming to have used an existing bomb and not been running a test
but just blowing up a mountain would be another somewhat clever cover
story.  sadly, you really can't trust anyone in government, the trust
worthy honest people simply are not allowed to reach the higher levels,
only the whores, pimps and lying criminals are.  
after all, that's what corporate america wants, people they can buy, and
so they vote with their dollars and do so well enough to keep the people
from having a real choice most of the time.  then again, i'm disgusted
that i've never voted for a president, but rather always voted for the
less dangerous of those few choices available.  i'd love to vote for a
president one day rather than against the scarier one, live and dream. ah, the smell of official fiction.  
you know, i've always wanted to do more monitoring myself to detect such
events, perhaps when i have the money.  a world wide volunteer network
of private citizen controlled monitoring equipment would be a really
neat thing, if it were ever allowed.  it would also be a great project
for pic chips, though the best radiation detectors i've heard of are
certain flowers that reliably change color when exposed to radiation,
and the effect is linear until it hits saturation.  the flowers just
happen to have a color gene that mutates reliably when exposed to gamma
radiation, which is about all you can detect at a distance any way. i've also always wanted a bumper mounted wide alpha, beta, gamma
detector to map out americas hot roads, and i'm sure some are.  i know a
friend of mine had a physics teacher that got his own radiation sources
for teaching, apparently he knew where along which road rocks tended to
fall off the trucks but he wouldn't say where it was.  he did say some
were so hot he didn't get near them (the uranium in ore is not uniformly
distributed, it tends to be clustered like most things, a uniform
distribution is very non random).  
i also know of an old mine and refining facility that's still being
cleaned up, and i know that a lot of radioactive dust has blown away
from the immediate area.  it's scary to see the place, they actually
made a small lake around small mountains/large hills in the area and
filled it with ore and sulfuric acid!  it was huge.  once the damn did
break and flood out some of the offices and other equipment, i forget
how many gallons it was.  this was just the first step in refinement of
course, to get the uranium dissolved so it could be collected and dried
into "yellow cake".  while working briefly on this site i saw the earth
movers expose yellow cake more than once, in my brief 2 weeks before
they decided they didn't like my background check...  i really should
have found out why.  i also know that in some government store room
there's a picture of me looking straight up into the sky, a spy plane
was flying over directly through the sun.  i say spy plane because it
was at a very high altitude and had an unusual con trail, and because
there weren't normally flights passing nearby.  i was helping a surveyor
plant sticks showing how much higher or lower the cover ground should be
in that spot.  the whole idea was to slow down the release of radon and
hence the levels released as radon has a short half life.  my boots did
get "hot" one day and had to be decontaminated, i suspect the fact that
i did write that in the log was part of why they didn't like me.  oh
well.  apparently when the mine was in operation, many tons of yellow
cake went missing and couldn't be accounted for.  hopefully it just blew
out of trucks, that's the best thing that could have happened to the
missing material.  and the guy that gave the "radiation training" was a
major joke, mostly reminding us all of how safe and cheap nuclear power
was and how the anti-nuke people were just wrong.  he also mentioned how
they managed to track down and fire a whistle blower, a not so subtle
threat.  i wish i had the clown on tape.

Spehro Pefhany wrote:
-------
>
> Consider this:
>
> www.thebulletin.org/issues/1997/nd97/nd97albright.html
---------

-- Philip Stortz--"In Germany they came first for the Communists, and I
didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a
Jew. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn't speak up because I
wasn't a trade unionist. Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn't speak up because I was a
Protestant. Then they came for me, and by that time no one was left to speak up."
-- Martin Niemöller, 1892-1984 (German Lutheran Pastor), on the Nazi
Holocaust, Congressional Record 14th October 1968 p31636.

_______________________________________________
http://www.piclist.com
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

2004\09\13@181021 by hilip Stortz

picon face


Mike Hord wrote:
>
> > Consider this:
> >
> > www.thebulletin.org/issues/1997/nd97/nd97albright.html
-------
> That's hardly a reassuring article.  I was laboring under the belief
> that nuclear
> tests, anywhere on Earth, are fairly easy to pick out due to released fission
> products, radiation, and seismographic readings.  Apparently not so.

yeah, it alarmed me as well that we aren't actually more able to
decisively monitor these things, at least not officially.  i really hope
we really can tell exactly what's going on.

> That claim doesn't hold much water IMHO.  What goes up must come down,
> and I find it hard to believe any responsible engineer anywhere in the world
> would sign of on a single tremendous explosion for the purpose of moving an
> entire mountain.
----------
err, i don't know, remember chernobyl?  that wasn't an accident.  they
wanted to see what would happen if they bypassed the safeties and
stopped the coolant water.  well, they found out what any engineer from
any practice, much less someone who supposedly knows about nuke stuff,
should have been able to tell them.  and people call me a mad scientist ;)

-- Philip Stortz--"In Germany they came first for the Communists, and I
didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a
Jew. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn't speak up because I
wasn't a trade unionist. Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn't speak up because I was a
Protestant. Then they came for me, and by that time no one was left to speak up."
-- Martin Niemöller, 1892-1984 (German Lutheran Pastor), on the Nazi
Holocaust, Congressional Record 14th October 1968 p31636.

_______________________________________________
http://www.piclist.com
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

2004\09\13@184030 by Lawrence Lile

flavicon
face
Secretary of State Colin Powell yesterday said a large explosion over communist North Korea "was not any kind of nuclear event."

Of course, this is the same guy that said "Saddam has weapons of mass destruction"  "Saddam is linked to al-Queda" "Iraq is a threat to the US"  and so on.  

How can we relate this to PICs?  Do they make good A-bomb timers? I would imagine the North Koreans would use a Hitachi chip instead of a PIC.  


-- Lawrence Lile, P.E.
Electrical and Electronic Solutions
Project Solutions Companies
http://www.projsolco.com
> {Original Message removed}

2004\09\13@215403 by Russell McMahon

face
flavicon
face
>... though from space a huge black spot that may simply be
> burned land could appear to be a crater.

In the Super Bowl nuke fizzle the 10 kT or so of yield gave a much higher
thermal signature and was mistaken by satellites for a thermonuclear device
due to the high thermal output from the tarmac surrounding it. (Ironically
it was what it appeared to be, but didn't work properly. If it had worked
properly it wouild have been all on due to all the wrong reasoning.)(Note:
Always check your tritium purity). Also ...

bzzzt.
Whoops ....
Wrong universe
Sorry ..
:-)

           RM


Tom Clancy fans will understand.
(That's the REAL Tom Clancy before whatever happened half way through
Rainbow 6 happened and he became unable to write decently any more).



_______________________________________________
http://www.piclist.com
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

2004\09\13@215404 by Russell McMahon

face
flavicon
face
> and I find it hard to believe any responsible engineer anywhere in the
world
> would sign of on a single tremendous explosion for the purpose of moving
an
> entire mountain.

Presumably you aren't well abreast of the logic behind most official actions
in North Korea these days ;-)


       RM



_______________________________________________
http://www.piclist.com
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

2004\09\13@224331 by Mark Jordan

flavicon
face
On 13 Sep 2004 at 21:49, Denny Esterline wrote:

> Wow! I hadn't heard of that one. Previously I thought the Halifax Harbor
> explosion was the largest non-nuke blast. (2,300 tons of wet and dry picric
> acid, 200 tons of TNT, 10 tons of gun cotton and 35 tons of benzol) Emptied
> the harbor as I recall.
>
> Hmmm... googleing.... Here we go:
> http://museum.gov.ns.ca/mma/AtoZ/HalExpl.html
>
> -Denny
>

       Hummm, not forgetting the Tunguska event in 1908.
       That was a serious blast of energy!

       Mark Jordan

_______________________________________________
http://www.piclist.com
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

2004\09\13@230510 by Jinx

face picon face
> Previously I thought the Halifax Harbor explosion was the largest
> non-nuke blast. (2,300 tons of wet and dry picric

I remember this from one of those World's Worst/Biggest....  programmes

http://sdsd.essortment.com/texascityexplo_rkvi.htm

_______________________________________________
http://www.piclist.com
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

2004\09\14@030458 by Wouter van Ooijen

face picon face
> That claim doesn't hold much water IMHO.  What goes up must come down,
> and I find it hard to believe any responsible engineer
> anywhere in the world
> would sign of on a single tremendous explosion for the
> purpose of moving an
> entire mountain.

I can imagine that in N-Korea no engineer needs to sign off, just a
politician that shouts. Once. When the engineer does not comply there
will be a few others who will blow the mountain rather than see their
children starve.

Wouter van Ooijen

-- -------------------------------------------
Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl
consultancy, development, PICmicro products
docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: http://www.voti.nl/hvu


_______________________________________________
http://www.piclist.com
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

2004\09\14@042121 by Russell McMahon

face
flavicon
face
> When the engineer does not comply there
> will be a few others who will blow the mountain rather than see their
> children starve.

The children may well starve. But the engineer is unlikely to see them do so
:-(


       RM



_______________________________________________
http://www.piclist.com
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

2004\09\14@042252 by Russell McMahon

face
flavicon
face
> Hummm, not forgetting the Tunguska event in 1908.
> That was a serious blast of energy!

But no claims to be man made AFAIK :-)
if one wants to start on natural terrestrial events, the best "explosion" in
the past 20,000 years occurred in my country. We call the result Lake Taupo.
The mountain is so large that people can't see it :-). The lake (aka crater)
is about 30 miles  x 20 miles. Far larger than eg Krakatoa or Mt St Helens.

Still mildly active too. Not many people who holiday there seem to know
that.  :-)


       RM


_______________________________________________
http://www.piclist.com
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

2004\09\14@051520 by Hopkins

flavicon
face
Hey Russell do they know how deep Lake Taupo is - last I heard they did
not know.

_______________________________________
Roy
Tauranga
New Zealand
_______________________________________

if one wants to start on natural terrestrial events, the best
"explosion" in
the past 20,000 years occurred in my country. We call the result Lake
Taupo.
The mountain is so large that people can't see it :-). The lake (aka
crater)
is about 30 miles  x 20 miles. Far larger than eg Krakatoa or Mt St
Helens.

Still mildly active too. Not many people who holiday there seem to know
that.  :-)




---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.760 / Virus Database: 509 - Release Date: 10/09/2004


_______________________________________________
http://www.piclist.com
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

2004\09\14@060444 by Jinx

face picon face
> But no claims to be man made AFAIK :-)
> if one wants to start on natural terrestrial events, the best "explosion"
> in the past 20,000 years occurred in my country. We call the result
> Lake Taupo.

http://history-nz.org/plateau.html

http://www.extremescience.com/BiggestVolcano.htm

> do they know how deep Lake Taupo is

Around 160m

Why Auckland isn't particularly bicycle-friendly (up/down, up/down)

http://www.gns.cri.nz/what/earthact/volcanoes/nzvolcanoes/aucklandprint.htm

Figure 2 is interesting, in a "hmmm, how fast can I run" sort of way

And Mother Nature's not done with Wellington yet

http://members.tripod.com/NZPhoto/volcano/atectonic2a.htm


_______________________________________________
http://www.piclist.com
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

2004\09\14@065206 by Russell McMahon

face
flavicon
face
>> if one wants to start on natural terrestrial events, the best
>> "explosion" in the past 20,000 years occurred in my country.
>> We call the result Lake Taupo.

> Hey Russell do they know how deep Lake Taupo is - last I heard they did
> not know.

World Lakes database says 161 metres max

       http://www.ilec.or.jp/database/oce/doce01.html

Depth coloured 3D depth contour map

       http://www.niwa.co.nz/pubs/wa/10-3/tools1_large.jpg/view

There are active hot springs in the water and on the shoreline at bottom
right (southern end) and top centre (northern end by taupo township).
Encouraging to know that the worlds largest volcano in 20,000 years can
still heat water to boiling at both end of its 30 odd mile length. There are
also hot springs slightly down the east coast (top centre) and a boiling
stream runs into the Waikato river just north of the lake (brown shallow
portion at top centre). Makes you wonder about the people living there :-)
(It's a nice place to holiday at).


       RM


_______________________________________________
http://www.piclist.com
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

2004\09\14@075406 by Russell McMahon

face
flavicon
face
Jinx posted

>
http://www.gns.cri.nz/what/earthact/volcanoes/nzvolcanoes/aucklandprint.htm

That's a superb page that I hadn't seen before on Auckland volcanoes.
We are overdue for the next one. It will probably be larger than all the
rest that have been before. It will probably be in the richer or eastern
suburbs of the city. It may possibly be at Jinx's place. it won't be at
mine. My house value would rise substantially once they got the city sorted
out and people realised that volcanoes do happen, but not where I live.
Famous last words.


       RM

_______________________________________________
http://www.piclist.com
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

2004\09\14@081755 by Howard Winter

face
flavicon
picon face
On Mon, 13 Sep 2004 23:43:47 -0300, Mark Jordan wrote:

> On 13 Sep 2004 at 21:49, Denny Esterline wrote:
>
> > Wow! I hadn't heard of that one. Previously I thought the Halifax Harbor
> > explosion was the largest non-nuke blast. (2,300 tons of wet and dry picric
> > acid, 200 tons of TNT, 10 tons of gun cotton and 35 tons of benzol) Emptied
> > the harbor as I recall.
> >
> > Hmmm... googleing.... Here we go:
> > http://museum.gov.ns.ca/mma/AtoZ/HalExpl.html

I love the description there following the list of cargo: "a highly explosive mixture" ... in the same way
that Hamlet had "a bit of a disagreement" with his uncle!  :-)

>        Hummm, not forgetting the Tunguska event in 1908.
>        That was a serious blast of energy!

But not actually an explosion, I think?  I have a picture of a map of London with the Tunguska blast area
overlayed on it - almost all of Greater London, out to the M25, would have been destroyed if it had hit at a
critical point near Dartford.  In fact, I'll upload it so others can see:  
http://www.Hibernaculum.org.uk/PicPics/Tunguska.jpg

As it happens, I live just outside the marked area! :-)

Cheers,


Howard Winter
St.Albans, England


_______________________________________________
http://www.piclist.com
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

2004\09\14@084814 by Lawrence Lile

flavicon
face
In 1812 there was a quake in Missouri called New Madrid.  It made the Mississippi river run backwards, people rode out the aftershocks on treetrunks, as they made waves in the ground, and it rang churchbells in Boston 1000 miles away.  

It is said to go off about every 200 years.  New Madrid has been pretty quiet theser last 200 years, we are about due.  

Most of St. Louis, which is well within the damage radius, is built of brick to no earthquake standards

-- Lawrence Lile, P.E.
Electrical and Electronic Solutions
Project Solutions Companies
http://www.projsolco.com
573-443-7100 ext 221

> {Original Message removed}

2004\09\14@091646 by Jinx

face picon face
> http://www.Hibernaculum.org.uk/PicPics/Tunguska.jpg

Aw, no no no, that's so unfair. It missed Slough but got, sniff,
choke, Chigwell


_______________________________________________
http://www.piclist.com
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

2004\09\14@092925 by Mike Hord

picon face
It occurs to me that during another New Madrid quake would be the one time
I'd be glad I'm living in a mobile home- nothing worth mentioning to collapse on
me!

Of course, in Iowa, a tornado is MUCH more likely...

Has anyone heard about the "super volcano" forming in IIRC Yellowstone?
Many kilometers long and the surface of the park on top of it is rapidly
forming a depression.  The estimate is that last time it blew, almost the
entire continent of North America was covered in six inches of ash.

Here it is:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caldera
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellowstone_Caldera

Kind of an uncomfortable thing.

Mike H.

On Tue, 14 Sep 2004 07:43:40 -0500, Lawrence Lile <.....llileKILLspamspam@spam@projsolco.com> wrote:
> In 1812 there was a quake in Missouri called New Madrid.  It made the Mississippi river run backwards, people rode out the aftershocks on treetrunks, as they made waves in the ground, and it rang churchbells in Boston 1000 miles away.
>
> It is said to go off about every 200 years.  New Madrid has been pretty quiet theser last 200 years, we are about due.
>
> Most of St. Louis, which is well within the damage radius, is built of brick to no earthquake standards
>
> -- Lawrence Lile, P.E.
_______________________________________________
http://www.piclist.com
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

2004\09\14@093624 by Howard Winter

face
flavicon
picon face
Jinx,

On Wed, 15 Sep 2004 01:15:30 +1200, Jinx wrote:

> > www.Hibernaculum.org.uk/PicPics/Tunguska.jpg
>
> Aw, no no no, that's so unfair. It missed Slough but
got, sniff,
> choke, Chigwell

Yes, it would have been an ideal opportunity to vastly
improve Slough! :-)

Cheers,


Howard Winter
St.Albans, England


_______________________________________________
http://www.piclist.com
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

2004\09\14@103122 by Dave VanHorn

flavicon
face
At 07:43 AM 9/14/2004, Lawrence Lile wrote:

>In 1812 there was a quake in Missouri called New Madrid.  It made the Mississippi river run backwards, people rode out the aftershocks on treetrunks, as they made waves in the ground, and it rang churchbells in Boston 1000 miles away.  
>
>It is said to go off about every 200 years.  New Madrid has been pretty quiet theser last 200 years, we are about due.  
>
>Most of St. Louis, which is well within the damage radius, is built of brick to no earthquake standards

The New Madrid city hall, housing police and fire, is an unreinforced (from external view anyway) brick building.  There are buildings there with steel exoskeletons.
The whole town is sitting next to a levee for the river that is probably 20' high.
I don't know where the town is WRT typical river level, but it doesn't look too good to me.


_______________________________________________
http://www.piclist.com
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

2004\09\14@103600 by Dave VanHorn

flavicon
face
At 08:29 AM 9/14/2004, Mike Hord wrote:

>It occurs to me that during another New Madrid quake would be the one time
>I'd be glad I'm living in a mobile home- nothing worth mentioning to collapse on
>me!
>
>Of course, in Iowa, a tornado is MUCH more likely...
>
>Has anyone heard about the "super volcano" forming in IIRC Yellowstone?
>Many kilometers long and the surface of the park on top of it is rapidly
>forming a depression.  The estimate is that last time it blew, almost the
>entire continent of North America was covered in six inches of ash.

For that matter, the big island of hawaii is splitting, and at some point, half of it will fall away. This should cause a tidal wave that would likely scrub all life off the remaining islands.  There's plenty of evidence that this has happened in the past.  The rift valley is getting wider....


_______________________________________________
http://www.piclist.com
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

2004\09\14@120425 by Mike Reid

picon face
I was in Indianapolis this past weekend for the CEDIA trade show. This
is the big one for home automation and theater stuff. There was a small
earthquake Sunday morning in the area, about 3-4 on the Richter scale.
We didn't feel it but there were discussions on the radio about the New
Madrid fault.



In 1812 there was a quake in Missouri called New Madrid.  It made the
Mississippi river run backwards, people rode out the aftershocks on
treetrunks, as they made waves in the ground, and it rang churchbells in
Boston 1000 miles away.  

It is said to go off about every 200 years.  New Madrid has been pretty
quiet theser last 200 years, we are about due.  

Most of St. Louis, which is well within the damage radius, is built of
brick to no earthquake standards

-- L

_______________________________________________
http://www.piclist.com
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

2004\09\14@123147 by Dave VanHorn

flavicon
face
At 11:02 AM 9/14/2004, Mike Reid wrote:

>I was in Indianapolis this past weekend for the CEDIA trade show. This
>is the big one for home automation and theater stuff. There was a small
>earthquake Sunday morning in the area, about 3-4 on the Richter scale.
>We didn't feel it but there were discussions on the radio about the New
>Madrid fault.

I was about 30 mi east in Muncie, didn't notice anything.


_______________________________________________
http://www.piclist.com
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

2004\09\14@131745 by Lawrence Lile

flavicon
face
Yes, the Yellowstone volcano is another ticking time bomb.  They discovered it, because a geologist found a deep layer of ash in Nebraska - looong way away from any volcanoes.  Some sleuthing showed that it was produced aboutn 600,000 years ago.

More sleuthing showed that this particular volcano goes off about every 600,000 years.  Ulp.  

You know the Yellowstone valley?  Well there used to be a mountain there.  

In the last 100 years, the floor of the Yellowstone valley has risen 3 feet.  Usually this is a sign of imminent volcanic activity.  

P.S. Don't buy any ling term real estate in Yellowstone.  Nor New Madrid either.

-- Lawrence Lile, P.E.
Electrical and Electronic Solutions
Project Solutions Companies
http://www.projsolco.com


> {Original Message removed}

2004\09\14@150331 by Peter L. Peres

picon face

On Mon, 13 Sep 2004, Mike Hord wrote:

>> Blasting a mountain for a hydroelectric project, they say. Which doesn't
>> address the type of explosion, of course, as Marc suggests. I imagine an
>> atmospheric test would be far less visible seismically than an underground
>> test.
>
> That claim doesn't hold much water IMHO.  What goes up must come down,
> and I find it hard to believe any responsible engineer anywhere in the world
> would sign of on a single tremendous explosion for the purpose of moving an
> entire mountain.
>
> OTOH, http://www.snopes.com/critters/disposal/whale.htm

Otoh maybe you should read the list of nuclear accidents Russell posted
some time ago on this list. It mentions several bombs dropped by accident
or mistake from/by US planes whose implosion detonators went off (not
synchronously as intended) afair. The effect was impressive (iirc one in a
plane that crashed on takeoff and then burned with weapons on board at a
US base until the explosives went off).

Peter
_______________________________________________
http://www.piclist.com
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

2004\09\14@150337 by Peter L. Peres

picon face

On Mon, 13 Sep 2004, Mark Jordan wrote:

> On 13 Sep 2004 at 21:49, Denny Esterline wrote:
>
>> Wow! I hadn't heard of that one. Previously I thought the Halifax Harbor
>> explosion was the largest non-nuke blast. (2,300 tons of wet and dry picric
>> acid, 200 tons of TNT, 10 tons of gun cotton and 35 tons of benzol) Emptied
>> the harbor as I recall.
>>
>> Hmmm... googleing.... Here we go:
>> http://museum.gov.ns.ca/mma/AtoZ/HalExpl.html
>>
>> -Denny
>>
>
>        Hummm, not forgetting the Tunguska event in 1908.
>        That was a serious blast of energy!

We are talking man-made oopses. If you say Tunguska I raise you a Pelee
(Santorini) and there were other, bigger ones. That would be 'erasing a
mountain' done by nature. On that scale the NC probably erased a small
hill.

Peter
_______________________________________________
http://www.piclist.com
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

2004\09\14@150416 by Peter L. Peres

picon face

On Mon, 13 Sep 2004, Marc Nicholas wrote:

> " Seems a very odd way to do it. More and smaller blasts are generally
> safer. Less to go wrong, for one thing."
>
> They were taking out a mountain. They'd be there for years with small
> blasts! ;-)

They were taking out a mountain but their explosives just so happened to
go off in perfect timing and caused said mushroom because their detonator
wiring just so happens to be accurate enough for an implosion weapon ?

Peter
_______________________________________________
http://www.piclist.com
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

2004\09\14@150424 by Peter L. Peres

picon face


On Tue, 14 Sep 2004, Hopkins wrote:

> Hey Russell do they know how deep Lake Taupo is - last I heard they did
> not know.

The depth changes all the time depending on how strongly the lava pushes
below ;-) How about some extreme diving ? No ?

Peter
_______________________________________________
http://www.piclist.com
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

2004\09\14@150443 by Peter L. Peres

picon face


On Mon, 13 Sep 2004, Lawrence Lile wrote:

> How can we relate this to PICs?  Do they make good A-bomb timers? I
> would imagine the North Koreans would use a Hitachi chip instead of a
> PIC.

A good clue as to the precision and power level required is in the
Waasenaar (sp ?!) treaty list of materials that require licensing for
export from Europe ;-)

Peter
_______________________________________________
http://www.piclist.com
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

2004\09\14@154102 by Jinx

face picon face
> about 3-4 on the Richter scale

A little pet peeve of mine (nothing personal Mr Mike) - why is
an earthquake magnitude expressed that way ? For example, a
speeding driver in the news is not reported as travelling at "200
on the kilometers per hour scale"

It's not like anything but the Richter Scale is in common usage,
and "X magnitude earthquake" would do (and sometimes, if
rarely, that's what's reported). Every time I hear that other
clunky phrase, the newsroom concerned gets a fax

What I should do is propose the units "RM" (Richter Magnitude)
and get Russell doing my dirty work for me

_______________________________________________
http://www.piclist.com
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

2004\09\14@160815 by Wouter van Ooijen

face picon face
> A good clue as to the precision and power level required is in the
> Waasenaar (sp ?!) treaty list of materials that require licensing for
> export from Europe ;-)

Wassenaar, small place a few kilometers north of the Hague, Netherlands.

Wouter van Ooijen

-- -------------------------------------------
Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl
consultancy, development, PICmicro products
docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: http://www.voti.nl/hvu


_______________________________________________
http://www.piclist.com
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

2004\09\14@173650 by Howard Winter

face
flavicon
picon face
Jinx,

On Wed, 15 Sep 2004 07:40:12 +1200, Jinx wrote:

{Quote hidden}

Well there's another Magnitude scale: Moment Magnitude (Mw), and also Intensity scales, such as Modified
Mercalli.

Apparently Richter is correctly called "Local Magnitude" and has the letters Ml (capital em, little el)

> Every time I hear that other clunky phrase, the newsroom concerned gets a fax

> What I should do is propose the units "RM" (Richter Magnitude)
> and get Russell doing my dirty work for me

You could tell them they should say "Local Magnitude 3" or "Ml3"...

Ain't Google wonderful?  :-)

Cheers,




Howard Winter
St.Albans, England


_______________________________________________
http://www.piclist.com
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

2004\09\14@190852 by Richard.Prosser

flavicon
face

Just out of interest, Taupo is experiencing a small (so far) swarm of
earthquakes at the moment. - Around the 2.5 (RM ??) level and about 5km
deep. see http://www.geonet.org.nz for more detail.

RP

On Tue, 14 Sep 2004, Hopkins wrote:

> Hey Russell do they know how deep Lake Taupo is - last I heard they did
> not know.

The depth changes all the time depending on how strongly the lava pushes
below ;-) How about some extreme diving ? No ?

Peter
_______________________________________________
http://www.piclist.com
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist




_______________________________________________
http://www.piclist.com
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

2004\09\15@063056 by Russell McMahon

face
flavicon
face
> We are talking man-made oopses.
> If you say Tunguska I raise you a Pelee
> (Santorini) and there were other, bigger ones.

I see you a Taupo

       RM
_______________________________________________
http://www.piclist.com
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

2004\09\15@064312 by Russell McMahon

face
flavicon
face
> Otoh maybe you should read the list of nuclear accidents

> (iirc one in a
> plane that crashed on takeoff and then burned with weapons on board at a
> US base until the explosives went off).


Greenham Common. UK


       RM


_______________________________________________
http://www.piclist.com
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

2004\09\15@074454 by Alan B. Pearce

face picon face
>Greenham Common. UK

You mean there was a nuclear explosion at Greenham Common?

Alan (going into panic mode, live not that far from there)
_______________________________________________
http://www.piclist.com
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

2004\09\15@081501 by Dan Smith

face picon face
On Wed, 15 Sep 2004 12:46:38 +0100, Alan B. Pearce <a.b.pearcespamKILLspamrl.ac.uk> wrote:
> >Greenham Common. UK
> You mean there was a nuclear explosion at Greenham Common?
> Alan (going into panic mode, live not that far from there)

>From Russell's nuclear accidents post...

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

February 28, 1958 - At the US airbase at Greenham Common, England, a B-47E
of the 310th Bomb Wing developed problems shortly after takeoff and
jettisoned its two 1,700 gallon external fuel tanks. They missed their
designated safe impact area and one hit a hanger whilst the other struck the
ground 65 feet behind a parked B-47E. The parked B-47E, which was fuelled
with a pilot onboard and carrying a 1.1 megaton B28 thermonuclear free fall
bomb, was engulfed by flames. The conflagration took sixteen hours and over
a million gallons of water to extinguish, partly because of the magnesium
alloys used in the aircraft. The fire detonated the high explosives in the
nuclear weapon and convection spread plutonium and uranium oxides over a
wide area - foliage up to 13 kilometres away was contaminated with
uranium-235. Although two men were killed and eight injured, the US and UK
governments kept the accident secret - as late as 1985, the British
Government claimed that a taxiing aircraft had struck a parked one and that
no fire was involved.

Dan
_______________________________________________
http://www.piclist.com
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

2004\09\15@082242 by Howard Winter

face
flavicon
picon face
Alan,

On Wed, 15 Sep 2004 12:46:38 +0100, Alan B. Pearce
wrote:

> >Greenham Common. UK
>
> You mean there was a nuclear explosion at Greenham
Common?

Yes, that didn't exactly hit the headlines, did it?

> Alan (going into panic mode, live not that far from
there)

Well it's a bit late now - but I think I'll check the
background radiation a bit more often now, just in
case...

Howard Winter
St.Albans, England (not very near Greenham Common, but
not far enough to feel comfortable!)


_______________________________________________
http://www.piclist.com
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

2004\09\15@092309 by Russell McMahon

face
flavicon
face
> You mean there was a nuclear explosion at Greenham Common?

Nuclear explosion - No.

Conventional explosive exploding H bomb(s) - apparently.
Late 1950's.
Some nuclear material reportedly ended up outside the base.
BUT you can be sure there would have been a VERY thorough cleanup.

A plane on takeoff had difficulties and dropped two LARGE drop tanks (1700
gallons?). One fell near a bomber loaded with several H bombs. Plane and
bomb(s) were incinerated. AFAIR the reports (which I referenced here
recently) two died and rather more injured. Apparently, official reports of
what happened still do not match various eye witness reports.

I'd NOT be too worried by it myself if I lived near there.



       RM

_______________________________________________
http://www.piclist.com
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 2004 , 2005 only
- Today
- New search...