Jump to content

Nolan's Oppenheimer


TheLastWolf
 Share

Recommended Posts

38 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Hold on… does this create the possibility that a truely crazy nation could build a device large enough to actually ignite the atmosphere?  Then hold the world hostage?

No. As Bethe pointed out, this is mathematically impossible. The curves were close based on very conservative estimations (eg the fusion cross-section for nitrogen was treated as unity, when it is in fact much lower than that). Also, temperatures in a fission bomb or a thermonuclear detonation reach hundreds of millions of degrees, which is three orders of magnitude less than the hundreds of billions of degrees required to establish a sustained nitrogen fusion chain reaction.

@Deadlines? What Deadlines? Good video!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, IFR said:

No. As Bethe pointed out, this is mathematically impossible. The curves were close based on very conservative estimations (eg the fusion cross-section for nitrogen was treated as unity, when it is in fact much lower than that). Also, temperatures in a fission bomb or a thermonuclear detonation reach hundreds of millions of degrees, which is three orders of magnitude less than the hundreds of billions of degrees required to establish a sustained nitrogen fusion chain reaction.

@Deadlines? What Deadlines? Good video!

Thank God.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Deadlines? What Deadlines? said:

That’s a thing the youths are actually doing these days.

Splurging my college allowance for a triple feature, MI7 and Barbenheimer, all in IMAX. Sadly no girl mad enough to sit with me for that long at the cinemas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Thank God.

Even though Oppenheimer was fond of quoting Sanskrit verses from the Gita, he was most likely secular (as probably were Bethe, Teller and many of the others involved in the project). We should thank the highly stable nucleus of nitrogen instead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It still freaks me out that at one point there was a chance the chain reaction doesn’t dissipate, or rather the fuel doesn’t burn off quickly enough or becomes redundant, and they decided…for the rest of the ignorant planet…to risk everyone else without their knowledge or consent. 
 

That’s gotta be some kind of record when it comes to arrogance. 

Edited by James Arryn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, James Arryn said:

It still freaks me out that at one point there was a chance the chain reaction doesn’t dissipate, or rather the fuel doesn’t burn off quickly enough or becomes redundant, and they decided…for the rest of the ignorant planet…to risk everyone else without their knowledge or consent. 
 

That’s gotta be some kind of record when it comes to arrogance. 

The really interesting thing is the Germans were aware of this possibility as well, which turned Hitler off to the idea. It's possibly one of the reasons the Germans pursued the atomic bomb so unenthusiastically.

I believe this is briefly mentioned in Rhodes' book (The Making of the Atomic Bomb).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, IFR said:

The really interesting thing is the Germans were aware of this possibility as well, which turned Hitler off to the idea. It's possibly one of the reasons the Germans pursued the atomic bomb so unenthusiastically.

I believe this is briefly mentioned in Rhodes' book (The Making of the Atomic Bomb).

I’m more vague on the actual project itself, but I had to do research about the decision to drop the bomb, mostly from communiques and the journals of people like Stimson. I encourage no one to pursue similar understanding; one of the most depressing things I’ve ever read. The agreed upon narrative (that they dropped the bombs to save lives) was ‘ a relatively minor consideration’ at the time, and no two people agreed on what effect it would even have on that. Anyways, it was well behind revenge, return on investment and especially getting it over before the Russians became too involved in the Pacific to disentangle afterwards without risking US dominance of the region. But the naked racism in official communications was the most surprising. As often as not ‘Japs/Jappos/Nippers/etc. were used instead of Japanese. Really dark part of history. 
 

The most interesting thing about the agreed upon narrative was that it took years to be circulated as such…for a while no one pretended much of anything, and revenge et al was more or less accepted. One of the reasons they even began worrying about the public perception of ‘why’ was because the scientists who worked on the project staged a secret strike once they found out it was intended for civilian targets. They had been assured such would never happen, and it really became a kind of big deal behind the scenes. I wonder if this will cover that, though to be honest I doubt Oppenheimer was amongst the strikers. 
 

edit for accuracy: I should also mention that US allies were also raising objections, though mostly at ~ the same level as th scientists. Ie, for example Brits but definitely not Churchill. Hell, Churchill wanted to keep using them. 

Edited by James Arryn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Deadlines? What Deadlines? said:

My teenage nieces and their whacky teenage friends are doing an Oppenheimer-Barbie double feature next weekend. That’s a thing the youths are actually doing these days.

I’m 48, and I’m totally doing a “Barbenheimer” double feature.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Thank God.

Actually, they were thanking me.

21 minutes ago, Madame deVenoge said:

I’m 48, and I’m totally doing a “Barbenheimer” double feature.

Honestly, I think the only reason they’re interested in Oppenheimer is because Iron Man is in it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Deadlines? What Deadlines? said:

Honestly, I think the only reason they’re interested in Oppenheimer is because Iron Man is in it.

You must think our generation to be that dumb huh. 

Spoiler

On an average, we are. But the few of us try and make up. He's Sherlock Holmes

They know him as Tony Stark

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, James Arryn said:

I’m more vague on the actual project itself, but I had to do research about the decision to drop the bomb, mostly from communiques and the journals of people like Stimson. I encourage no one to pursue similar understanding; one of the most depressing things I’ve ever read. The agreed upon narrative (that they dropped the bombs to save lives) was ‘ a relatively minor consideration’ at the time, and no two people agreed on what effect it would even have on that. Anyways, it was well behind revenge, return on investment and especially getting it over before the Russians became too involved in the Pacific to disentangle afterwards without risking US dominance of the region. But the naked racism in official communications was the most surprising. As often as not ‘Japs/Jappos/Nippers/etc. were used instead of Japanese. Really dark part of history.

As a kid, I used to hang out in the background and listen to my grandfather and his buddies when they got together to shoot the bull.  They were a group of guys who joined the USMC after Pearl Harbor, and my memories of their expressed opinions included the idea that the bombing of Pearl Harbor was such an evil act, nothing less than total destruction of the Japanese military was an acceptable response.

Your research lines up with perception, as I can remember at least one specific conversation they had on the point.  On that day, anyway, they were all in agreement that any US administration that failed to utterly destroy the Imperial Japanese Navy would immediately lose their political support.  They would vote for any political party or politician who committed to pursue a policy of absolute surrender, and no one else.  Pearl Harbor was an unforgiveable sin to their way of thinking.  Comparatively speaking, the European war was just kind of business as usual, while the Pacific was personal.

Henry Stimson could not have been unaware of that kind of sentiment, which had to be widespread among Americans.

Edited by Wilbur
cain't spel
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Wilbur said:

As a kid, I used to hang out in the background and listen to my grandfather and his buddies when they got together to shoot the bull.  They were a group of guys who joined the USMC after Pearl Harbor, and my memories of their expressed opinions included the idea that the bombing of Pearl Harbor was such an evil act, nothing less than total destruction of the Japanese military was an acceptable response.

This is still a wide spread sentiment today. It was seen as such a sucker punch that people to this day still get angry and emotional about it, even those who have no direct connection. It's similar to 9/11 in that way. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Deadlines? What Deadlines? said:

Hey don’t get me wrong; if Tony Stark gets them in the door I’m all for it.

The sigmas love Shelby, everyone loves Blunt and I could go on for the rest of the cast but it's one name that pulls in even the most mainstream audience. Nolan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...