3 ms·
If I remember right, something like a safety factor of 30. So not really as big as people would like! More detail in this great summary: http://large.stanford.
by idlewords 10y ago
If I remember right, something like a safety factor of 30. So not really as big as people would like!
More detail in this great summary:
http://large.stanford.edu/courses/2015/ph241/chung1/ http://large.stanford.edu/courses/2015/ph241/chung1/
And the Los Alamos paper is really good reading:
http://www.sciencemadness.org/lanl1_a/lib-www/la-pubs/00329010.pdf http://www.sciencemadness.org/lanl1_a/lib-www/la-pubs/003290...
- alexbecker 10y agoMy eyes! Is there a more readable scan anywhere?
- marcosdumay 10y agoThe summary talks about a safety factor of 1000 on an extremely unreasonable scenario of 1MeV of average temperature, falling down to 10 in an incredibly more unreasonable scenario of 10MeV temperature. I don't know the actual probabilities, but I do really expect a few atoms to get over 1MeV inside a fission bomb (as the reaction emits ~5MeV of energy). But they will almost certainly not hit each other. I also don't see how any atom anywhere can reach 10MeV.
- idlewords 10y agoI'm trying to find where I remember the factor of 30 figure from. Maybe it was the equivalent calculation for hydrogen fusion in the ocean? I'll keep looking.
- marcosdumay 10y agoIt's well within the 1000 - 10 range. May be an overall approximation somewhere on the paper. But I was just summarizing it. Looks like the kind of calculation one does when he's entirely convinced it's impossible, but needs to verify anyway. I liked reading it, and I was surprised they didn't take meteors into account.