S. Korea calls for 'strongest possible' response to N. Korea hydrogen bomb test
Source: The Hill
BY KYLE BALLUCK - 09/03/17 07:14 AM EDT
South Korea's president is calling for the "strongest possible" response North Koreas latest nuclear test.
Moon Jae-in also said on Sunday that he wants United Nations Security Council sanctions to "completely isolate" Pyongyang, according to multiple reports.
North Korean state television said earlier that a test of a miniaturized hydrogen bomb that could fit on an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) was a perfect success. The South Korean president had earlier called for an emergency meeting of his security council after an artificial earthquake was detected in northern North Korea.
The U.S. Geological Survey on Sunday recorded a 6.3-magnitude earthquake that it described as a "possible explosion" near North Korea's known nuclear test site in the northeast.
Read more: http://thehill.com/policy/international/349023-s-korea-calls-for-strongest-possible-response-to-n-korea-hydrogen-bomb
longship
(40,416 posts)But here's the deal. It was discovered by seismic data. Seismologists can tell the difference between an earthquake and a fission bomb explosion because a fission bomb's seismic signature is unique. Likewise a fusion bomb, which by the way is triggered by a fission bomb. It too has a unique seismic signature, different than a pure fission bomb.
So why aren't these numbskull journalists interviewing seismologists to find out just what the fuck we have here? That's their expertease!
Here's what I know.
First, from reports, the yield of the bomb was on the order of 100 Ktons, that of a moderately high yield fission bomb. The USA tested devices of that size well before they developed the H Bomb.
Second, it seems that the DPRK has solved their initiator problem. Earlier tests had the characteristics of fizzled devices, too small of a yield to be characterized as nuclear. Test five had about 10 Ktons, putatively in the range of a small nuke, but possibly a partial fizzle. Remember, Hiroshima (a U235 gun device) was about the same order, but Trinity and Nagasaki (a Pu implosion device) was about twice that. Radiation from the test will tell whether that test was U235 or Pu. The USA will already know this.
Third, this latest test yield has been reported as on the order of 100 Ktons. If true, this puts it beyond doubt that the DPRK has solved the initiator problem. This is a moderately high yield fission weapon, or a fizzled fusion weapon, likely the former since fusion weapons are rather difficult for a program with arguably only one successful fission test. I would say practically impossible that this was an H Bomb.
Fourth, report on the seismology. That will inform. Somebody call Cal Tech.
Fifth, blowing up a weapon that you simply bury in the ground is not the same thing as loading it on a rocket and launching into a sub-orbital (ICBM) trajectory. DPRK's claim that they have a weaponized miniature weapon, let alone one that is a fucking H Bomb, is utterly laughable. They have not even tested components of such weapons on their oft failing missile tests. And even if they did, none of the reentry vehicles were recovered by the DPRK to find out how such components faired, and only a foolish nation would allow them to get near to said crashed into the ocean payloads for recovery. In other words, they have no data on any ICBM launchable devices.
Last, if Kim Jong Un said he was ready to deploy a Star Wars Death Star, would you believe him? Of course not. That's what I believe about his so-called H Bomb.
Igel
(35,300 posts)There's a third, and it was discussed during a previous event in which Kim's chi needed to be restored to normal flow by some dick wagging.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boosted_fission_weapon
No clue if you can distinguish that from a one-stage fission bomb or two-stage H-bomb. Perhaps seismographs in S. Korea can or some nifty analysis by the CalTech folk. (But it's Labor Day weekend.)
rock
(13,218 posts)Would that be to leave NK flat and glassy?
chelsea0011
(10,115 posts)It would just antagonize an already unstable lunatic. Added to our already unstable government leader can only lead to worse results. I can't see anything but diplomacy being any choice here.