Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!bellcore!decvax!decwrl!sun!falk
From: falk@sun.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.politics,net.sci
Subject: Re: Plutonium
Message-ID: <3604@sun.uucp>
Date: Tue, 29-Apr-86 02:47:11 EDT
Article-I.D.: sun.3604
Posted: Tue Apr 29 02:47:11 1986
Date-Received: Fri, 2-May-86 06:44:20 EDT
References: <358@drutx.UUCP> <1063@whuxl.UUCP> <2384@jhunix.UUCP> <708@whuts.UUCP> <796@ccird2.UUCP> <13439@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU>
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Lines: 24
Xref: watmath net.politics:15373 net.sci:766

> >There are lots of other things to worry about....  Things like possible
> >ignition of water vapor in the atmosphere....
> 
>    Water vapor is the *product* of combustion.  How could it be "ignited"??

Water vapor contains Hydrogen.  I have heard (but it was a long time ago so
I appologise if I have the details fuzzy) that at the time of the first
atomic bomb tests (or perhaps H-bomb tests) that scientists had postulated
that a big enough bomb might trigger atmospheric Hydrogen into a fusion
reaction and destroy the planet.  The decision was made that if the probability
of this happening was less than 1%, to go ahead with it.  In other words,
the powers that be were willing to take a 1% chance of destroying the world.

Luckily, the chance turned out to be infinitesimal.

I have also heard, that when tests were being made to see how big an explosion
could be produced, what was supposed to be a 50 megaton bomb actually
yielded 100 megatons.  Scientists trying to figure out where the extra
energy had come from postulated that atmospheric Nitrogen had started to
enter the reaction.  They decided not to go any higher.  Personally, I'm
not sure I believe this one, I heard it at least third generation.  Are
there any physicists out there who know about such things?
-- 
		-ed falk, sun microsystems