3 ms·

Isn't it possible for people who want the bomb to kidnap people like this? Unlikely, but possible? Maybe it was a bad idea to declassify what they did in their

Isn't it possible for people who want the bomb to kidnap people like this? Unlikely, but possible? Maybe it was a bad idea to declassify what they did in their lives, I mean in the interest of their security and all...or at least until they were dead!

staunch 18y ago
The entire point of this story is that you don't have to be Einstein to build a nuke. Even in the 60's there was enough publicly available information that anyone with an advanced knowledge of Physics could do it. Imagine how much easier it must be now. On the other hand, we should be worried that someone will kidnap some Plutonium. That it is difficult to get is the only thing saving us. Not very comforting.
- DabAsteroid 18y ago
  we should be worried that someone will kidnap some Plutonium. Why steal it, when it is so easy to make? it is difficult to get Plutonium (even explosives-grade) is not difficult to get. All one needs is a uranium-fueled research reactor. http://www.phyast.pitt.edu/~blc/book/chapter13.html#4 http://www.phyast.pitt.edu/~blc/book/chapter13.html#4 Another alternative would be to use a research reactor, designed to provide radiation for research applications rather than to generate electricity. At least 45 nations now have research reactors, and in at least 25 of these there is a capability of producing enough plutonium to make one or more bombs every 2 years. Research reactors are usually designed with lots of flexibility and space, so it would not be difficult to use them for plutonium production. A plant for generating nuclear electricity is by necessity large and highly complex, with most of the size and complexity due to reactor operation at a very high temperature and pressure, the production and handling of steam, and the equipment for generation and distribution of electricity. It would be impossible to keep construction or operation of such a plant secret. Moreover, only a very few of the most technologically advanced nations are capable of constructing one. No nation with this capability would provide one for a foreign country without requiring elaborate international inspection to assure that its plutonium is not misused. A production or research reactor, on the other hand, can be small and unobtrusive. It has no high pressure or temperature, no steam, and no electricity generation or distribution equipment. Almost any nation has, or could easily acquire, the capability of constructing one, and it probably could carry out the entire project in secret. There would be no compulsion to submit to outside inspection. However, making a plutonium-based explosive is difficult (from the same link): The fabrication requires a wide degree of expertise and experience in technical areas. It requires people capable of carrying out complex physics and engineering computations, handling hazardous materials, arranging electronically for a hundred or so triggers to fire simultaneously within much less than a millionth of a second, accurately shaping explosive charges, attaching them precisely and connecting the triggers to them, and so on. Where would terrorists find this expertise? Experienced and talented scientists and technicians generally enjoy well-paid and comfortable positions in our society and hence are not likely to be inclined toward antisocial activity. Recruiting would have to be done under strictest secrecy, which would have to be maintained over the development period of many weeks. Even one unsuccessful recruiting attempt could blow their operation. Moreover, a participant would face a high risk of being killed in this work. And if the plot were discovered he would face imprisonment, not to mention an end to a promising career. Terrorists would surely face severe difficulty in obtaining the needed expertise.

staunch 18y ago

The entire point of this story is that you don't have to be Einstein to build a nuke. Even in the 60's there was enough publicly available information that anyone with an advanced knowledge of Physics could do it. Imagine how much easier it must be now. On the other hand, we should be worried that someone will kidnap some Plutonium. That it is difficult to get is the only thing saving us. Not very comforting.

DabAsteroid 18y ago
we should be worried that someone will kidnap some Plutonium. Why steal it, when it is so easy to make? it is difficult to get Plutonium (even explosives-grade) is not difficult to get. All one needs is a uranium-fueled research reactor. http://www.phyast.pitt.edu/~blc/book/chapter13.html#4 http://www.phyast.pitt.edu/~blc/book/chapter13.html#4 Another alternative would be to use a research reactor, designed to provide radiation for research applications rather than to generate electricity. At least 45 nations now have research reactors, and in at least 25 of these there is a capability of producing enough plutonium to make one or more bombs every 2 years. Research reactors are usually designed with lots of flexibility and space, so it would not be difficult to use them for plutonium production. A plant for generating nuclear electricity is by necessity large and highly complex, with most of the size and complexity due to reactor operation at a very high temperature and pressure, the production and handling of steam, and the equipment for generation and distribution of electricity. It would be impossible to keep construction or operation of such a plant secret. Moreover, only a very few of the most technologically advanced nations are capable of constructing one. No nation with this capability would provide one for a foreign country without requiring elaborate international inspection to assure that its plutonium is not misused. A production or research reactor, on the other hand, can be small and unobtrusive. It has no high pressure or temperature, no steam, and no electricity generation or distribution equipment. Almost any nation has, or could easily acquire, the capability of constructing one, and it probably could carry out the entire project in secret. There would be no compulsion to submit to outside inspection. However, making a plutonium-based explosive is difficult (from the same link): The fabrication requires a wide degree of expertise and experience in technical areas. It requires people capable of carrying out complex physics and engineering computations, handling hazardous materials, arranging electronically for a hundred or so triggers to fire simultaneously within much less than a millionth of a second, accurately shaping explosive charges, attaching them precisely and connecting the triggers to them, and so on. Where would terrorists find this expertise? Experienced and talented scientists and technicians generally enjoy well-paid and comfortable positions in our society and hence are not likely to be inclined toward antisocial activity. Recruiting would have to be done under strictest secrecy, which would have to be maintained over the development period of many weeks. Even one unsuccessful recruiting attempt could blow their operation. Moreover, a participant would face a high risk of being killed in this work. And if the plot were discovered he would face imprisonment, not to mention an end to a promising career. Terrorists would surely face severe difficulty in obtaining the needed expertise.