3 ms·

I'm not very keen on these things, but I do understand some of nuclear physics and the reactions thereof. Maybe I'm in over my head, but how come satellites ma

by tuxxy 9y ago

I'm not very keen on these things, but I do understand some of nuclear physics and the reactions thereof. Maybe I'm in over my head, but how come satellites made for detecting radiation or nuclear explosions didn't pick up on any of this before? If not, is it possible that satellites could detect this and produce more data for everyone on these lightning gamma ray flashes?

zamalek 9y ago
I'm no expert but I'd assume it has to do with sensor sensitivity. A nuclear bomb involves far more nuclear reactions than a lightning storm. It's as though you calibrated a scale to measure "things that have mass" but set it to 10kg, assuming everything under was weightless. Changing those calibrations might be a physical (instead of digital) process, so maybe not.
lfowles 9y ago
I seem to remember from the Las Vegas Atomic Museum that lightning would indeed trigger false positives in early gamma ray detecting satellites. Edit: The article does note that it was picked up by satellites before but there's conclusive evidence now.
- lostlogin 9y ago
  So were those false positives in fact real signal? It wouldn’t be the first time that ‘noise’ turned out to be signal.
  - lfowles 9y ago
    Yes, but the intent was to monitor Russian nuclear testing, not just measure gamma radiation in general.
hn_throwaway_99 9y ago
> Maybe I'm in over my head, but how come satellites made for detecting radiation or nuclear explosions didn't pick up on any of this before? The article explains this in detail.
lsllc 9y ago
Such satellites are cloaked in secrecy and so this may well be an fully understood phenomenon in TS & Classified circles; but just not published for us mere mortals to see.