4 ms·

There exists protocols to differentiate nuclear detonation from all other large explosions. Satellites dedicated for this purpose have gamma ray, x-rays, and n

by nabla9 5y ago

There exists protocols to differentiate nuclear detonation from all other large explosions. Satellites dedicated for this purpose have gamma ray, x-rays, and neutron detectors. They would instantly rule out nuclear explosion. Air sampling and nuclear forensics makes it possible to even identify the culprit from the radionuclides.

VLM 5y ago
nukes have a peculiar "famous" double flash Also don't forget the EMP effects of a large nuke. Just because a large nuke on the surface doesn't "vaporize all global electronics magically" doesn't mean it would be unmeasurable. I am curious how unclassified the detail level can be for seismographic analysis. Certainly, oil prospectors can output detailed 3-d models given prior preparation and "generic earthquakes" have nearly instant results for depth of the earthquake and precise location. Anyway my point is the destruction in the linked article was spread along a 100 KM (or so..) SW to NE line simultaneously whereas nukes are obviously point sources. I suppose incredibly unluckily a meteor could come precisely 90 degrees straight down to fool such analysis but those impacts are statistically unlikely. It would seem pretty trivial given enough seismographs on the ground and enough global computing power to instantly detect the difference between a single point source and a geographically long linear impact source.
- nabla9 5y ago
  Because IAEA coordinates and monitors NPT-treaty there is lots of open source information about the subject. Seismographic analysis has become really accurate. 0.1 t .. 10 t aka (extremely-low-yield testing) can be concealed from seismographs. Very-low-yield testing between 10 t and 1-2 kt is very hard to conceal, and everything from low-yield testing up (>20kt) can be detected with certainty.

4 ms·

There exists protocols to differentiate nuclear detonation from all other large explosions. Satellites dedicated for this purpose have gamma ray, x-rays, and n

by nabla9 5y ago

VLM 5y ago
nukes have a peculiar "famous" double flash Also don't forget the EMP effects of a large nuke. Just because a large nuke on the surface doesn't "vaporize all global electronics magically" doesn't mean it would be unmeasurable. I am curious how unclassified the detail level can be for seismographic analysis. Certainly, oil prospectors can output detailed 3-d models given prior preparation and "generic earthquakes" have nearly instant results for depth of the earthquake and precise location. Anyway my point is the destruction in the linked article was spread along a 100 KM (or so..) SW to NE line simultaneously whereas nukes are obviously point sources. I suppose incredibly unluckily a meteor could come precisely 90 degrees straight down to fool such analysis but those impacts are statistically unlikely. It would seem pretty trivial given enough seismographs on the ground and enough global computing power to instantly detect the difference between a single point source and a geographically long linear impact source.
- nabla9 5y ago
  Because IAEA coordinates and monitors NPT-treaty there is lots of open source information about the subject. Seismographic analysis has become really accurate. 0.1 t .. 10 t aka (extremely-low-yield testing) can be concealed from seismographs. Very-low-yield testing between 10 t and 1-2 kt is very hard to conceal, and everything from low-yield testing up (>20kt) can be detected with certainty.