Kolmas Riik ja tema tuumaprogramm

Tagantjärele tarkus on täppisteadus. Või kui tädil oleks rattad...
Vasta
Kasutaja avatar
Fucs
Liige
Postitusi: 16610
Liitunud: 12 Dets, 2006 21:43
Asukoht: retired
Kontakt:

Re: Kolmas Riik ja tema tuumaprogramm

Postitus Postitas Fucs »

:D
Eks ta veidi segane asi ole.
We now have an extra twist to the tale with new documents that were recently discovered in Russian archives, including papers from the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute of Physics in Berlin. There are four particularly notable items among this material: an official report written by von Weizsäcker after a visit to Copenhagen in March 1941; a draft patent application written by von Weizsäcker sometime in 1941; a revised patent application in November of that year; and the text of a popular lecture given by Heisenberg in June 1942.

One of us (RK) has used these documents – as well as many other sources – as the basis of a new book Hitlers Bombe. The book, which was published in March, prompted a heated debate about how close Germany was to acquiring nuclear weapons and how significant these weapons were (see Physics World April 2005 p7). Working with the journalist Heiko Petermann, RK discovered that a group of German scientists had carried out a hitherto-unknown nuclear-reactor experiment and tested some sort of a nuclear device in Thüringia, eastern Germany, in March 1945. According to eyewitness accounts given at the end of that month and two decades later, the test killed several hundred prisoners of war and concentration-camp inmates. Although it is not clear if the device (figure 1) worked as intended, it was designed to use nuclear fission and fusion reactions. It was, therefore, a nuclear weapon.

Following the publication of Hitlers Bombe, another document has turned up from a private archive. Written immediately after the end of the war in Europe, the undated document contains the only known German drawing of a nuclear weapon (figure 2).
GER Uranbombe type 2.jpg
Whereas the experiments under Heisenberg used alternating layers of uranium and moderator, Diebner’s team developed a superior 3D lattice of uranium cubes embedded in moderator. Heisenberg never gave Diebner and the scientists working under him the credit they were due, but the Nobel laureate did take up Diebner’s design for the last experiment carried out in Haigerloch in south-west Germany. RK now reveals that Diebner managed to carry out one last experiment in the last months of the war. The exact details of the experiment are unclear. After a series of measurements had been taken, Diebner wrote a short letter to Heisenberg on 10 November 1944 that informed him of the experiment and hinted that there had been problems with the reactor. Unfortunately, no more written sources have been found relating to this final reactor experiment in Gottow. Industrial archaeology done at the site during 2002 and 2003 suggests that this reactor sustained a chain reaction – if only for a short period of time – and may have ended in an accident....

...More surprising, if not shocking, is another revelation in RK’s book: a group of scientists under Diebner built and tested a nuclear weapon with the strong support of both Walther Gerlach – an experimental nuclear physicist who by 1944 was in charge of the uranium project for the Reich Research Council. (Hahn, Heisenberg, von Weizsäcker and most of the better-known scientists in the uranium project apparently were not informed about this weapon.) This device was designed to use fission reactions, but it was not an “atomic” bomb like the weapons used against Nagasaki and Hiroshima (figures 1a and b). And although it was also designed to exploit fusion reactions, it was nothing like the “hydrogen” bombs tested by the US and the Soviet Union in the 1950s.

Instead, conventional high explosives were formed into a hollow shape, rather than a solid mass, to focus the energy and heat from the explosion to one point inside the shell (figure 1c). Small amounts of enriched uranium, as well as a source of neutrons, were combined with a deuterium-lithium mixture inside the shell. This weapon would have been more of a tactical than a strategic weapon, and could not have won the war for Hitler in any case. It is not clear how successful this design was and whether fission and fusion reactions were provoked. But what is important is the revelation that a small group of scientists working in the last desperate months of the war were trying to do this....

...It would be rash indeed to believe that this is the last word on the matter. The German atomic bomb is like a zombie: just when we think we know what happened, how and why, it rises again from the dead....
https://physicsworld.com/a/new-light-on-hitlers-bomb/
https://www.researchgate.net/publicatio ... r%27s_bomb

https://www.h-net.org/reviews/showpdf.php?id=19998

*

Niisama huvitavat lisalugemist
The Secret World War II Mission to Kidnap Hitler’s A-Bomb Scientists
Anticipating the Allied arrival, German researchers hid their files inside a watertight drum and sunk it into a cesspool.
https://www.history.com/news/wwii-nazi- ... heisenberg
kalvis
Liige
Postitusi: 1443
Liitunud: 03 Aug, 2014 9:49
Kontakt:

Re: Kolmas Riik ja tema tuumaprogramm

Postitus Postitas kalvis »

Kirs kirjutas: 10 Dets, 2023 15:10 Ja ka väidad ikka veel, et Rügeni saart praegu külastades saad kiiritada?
Jah, sest külastati Rügeni saart oletatavas katsetuse kohas ja näitas radioaktiivsust täna!
Lemet
Liige
Postitusi: 20795
Liitunud: 12 Apr, 2006 15:49
Kontakt:

Re: Kolmas Riik ja tema tuumaprogramm

Postitus Postitas Lemet »

kalvis kirjutas: 11 Dets, 2023 7:25
Kirs kirjutas: 10 Dets, 2023 15:10 Ja ka väidad ikka veel, et Rügeni saart praegu külastades saad kiiritada?
Jah, sest külastati Rügeni saart oletatavas katsetuse kohas ja näitas radioaktiivsust täna!
Saare maksimaalne läbimõõt on põhjast lõunasse 51,4 km (31,9 miili) ja idast läände 42,8 km (26,6 miili). Maismaast asub saar kahe kilomeetri kaugusel
In a flash of blinding light and thunderous sound, a mushroom cloud 38,000 feet (11,582 m) tall consumed the sky. This nuclear explosion was visible over 280 miles (450 km) away.

]https://www.nps.gov/mapr/learn/historyc ... rinity.htm
Aga mitte keegi ei kuulnud- näinud ja mälestusi pole.
Errare humanum est-aga veel inimlikum on selle teise kraesse väänamine...
Kasutaja avatar
Kriku
Moderaator
Postitusi: 42780
Liitunud: 10 Aug, 2010 18:55
Asukoht: Viljandimaa
Kontakt:

Re: Kolmas Riik ja tema tuumaprogramm

Postitus Postitas Kriku »

Euroopa taustakiirguse kaart: https://remap.jrc.ec.europa.eu/Atlas.aspx . Rügen ei eristu millegagi. Ja purustusi ju ka pole.
Kasutaja avatar
Kilo Tango
Liige
Postitusi: 10213
Liitunud: 14 Aug, 2008 15:40
Kontakt:

Re: Kolmas Riik ja tema tuumaprogramm

Postitus Postitas Kilo Tango »

Fucs kirjutas: 10 Dets, 2023 17:17 :D
Eks ta veidi segane asi ole.
...
Ei ole. Pildil toodud "gun-type" tuumapomm ei tööta plutoonimi kasutamise korral, kuna plutoonium (just isotoop 240, mida vältida toonase tehnoloogiaga ei õnnestu) läheb suure spontaanse neutronkiirguse tõttu kriitiliseks niivõrd kiiresti, et relvarauas liikumise kiirusest ei piisa tuumamaterjali kokku viimiseks kriitilise massini. Tulemuseks on küll enneaegne plahvatus, aga mitu suurusjärku väiksem. Selle pärast pididki ameeriklased katsetama kahte tüüpi pommi:
1. Gun-type - uraaniga. Seda lahendust peeti nii lihtsaks ja lollikindlaks, et seda pommi kasutati ilma katsetamata kohe Hiroshima pommitamiseks.
2. Plutooniumipomm, kus kriitiline mass saavutatakse tiheduse suurendamisega. Selle jaoks olid vajalikud need lõhkeaineläätsed jms. udupeen värk. Suur osa Oppenheimeri filmist rääkis sellest, kuidas plutooniumi plahvatama panemist üritati lahendada ja kui keeruline see oli.
Initially the Manhattan Project gun-type effort was directed at making a gun weapon that used plutonium as its source of fissile material, known as the "Thin Man" because of its extreme length. It was thought that if a plutonium gun-type bomb could be created, then the uranium gun-type bomb would be very easy to make by comparison. However, it was discovered in April 1944 that reactor-bred plutonium (Pu-239) is contaminated with another isotope of plutonium, Pu-240, which increases the material's spontaneous neutron-release rate, making pre-detonation inevitable. For this reason, a gun-type bomb is thought to only be usable with enriched-uranium fuel. It is unknown though possible to make a composite design using high grade plutonium in the bullet only.
Pole absoluutselt mitte ühtegi põhjust arvata, et sakslased oleksid oma üliprimitiivses reaktorinatukeses suutnud toota ülipuhast Pu-239-t. See on isegi tänapäeval keeruline.

Põhiline, miks ma seda sakslaste tuumarelva juttu ei usu, on see, et UK-s kuulati sakslaste teadmata pealt vangi võetud tuumateadlaste omavahaelisi vestlusi ja sellest tehti järeldus, et sakslastel polnud tegelikult aimu ka, kuidas tulemuseni jõuda ja nad lihtsalt uskusid mingeid asju, millel ei olnud tegelikkusega suuremat pistmist.

Kogu see jutt sakslaste salajasest tuumakatsetusest on pehmelt öeldes haiglane fantaasia, mis läheb samasse kategooriasse sakslaste lendavate taldrikutega, millega Hitler olevat Antarktikasse põgenenud (jah, olen ka selliseid heietusi lugenud). Kategooria nimi on "sakslased oleks sõja võitnud, kui nad poleks seda enneaegselt kaotanud". Kui inimestele sellised sakslaste võidu fantaasiad erutust pakuvad, soovitan vaadata sarja "The Man in the High Castle" Amazon Prime pealt. Aga ajada seda reaalse eluga sassi näitab kriitilise mõtlemise täielikku puudumist.
Lõppeks: kui sakslastel oleks olnud tuumarelv, ei oleks nad seda mitte mingil juhul katsetanud oma okupeerimata territooriumil. Juba selline mõte on sõge ja näitab, et inimesed ei ole aru saanud sellest, kuidas Hitler ja tema kamp sõja lõpus mõtles.
Kirs
Liige
Postitusi: 1101
Liitunud: 21 Jaan, 2009 10:50
Kontakt:

Re: Kolmas Riik ja tema tuumaprogramm

Postitus Postitas Kirs »

Kriku kirjutas: 11 Dets, 2023 9:02 Euroopa taustakiirguse kaart: https://remap.jrc.ec.europa.eu/Atlas.aspx . Rügen ei eristu millegagi. Ja purustusi ju ka pole.
Just! Varasemalt just selle viite kodanikule nina alla panin, aga tema seda EI usu. Isegi meie naabri Soome numbrid on "koledamad" kui Rügenis.
Kasutaja avatar
Kilo Tango
Liige
Postitusi: 10213
Liitunud: 14 Aug, 2008 15:40
Kontakt:

Re: Kolmas Riik ja tema tuumaprogramm

Postitus Postitas Kilo Tango »

Kirs kirjutas: 11 Dets, 2023 15:12
Kriku kirjutas: 11 Dets, 2023 9:02 Euroopa taustakiirguse kaart: https://remap.jrc.ec.europa.eu/Atlas.aspx . Rügen ei eristu millegagi. Ja purustusi ju ka pole.
Just! Varasemalt just selle viite kodanikule nina alla panin, aga tema seda EI usu. Isegi meie naabri Soome numbrid on "koledamad" kui Rügenis.
No tegelikult on see Rügeri saare kiirguskolde jutt üleüldse möga, sest näiteks Jaapani kiirguskaardi pealt ei paista ei Hiroshima ega Nagasaki kohe kuidagi välja.: https://jciv.iidj.net/map/
Selle aja peale on kogu kiirgustase normaliseerunud. Isegi Tšernobõl on suht-koht ok, kui seal just kaevama ei hakka (nagu venelased oma otsatus tarkures eelmine aasta tegid).
Viimati muutis Kilo Tango, 11 Dets, 2023 19:38, muudetud 1 kord kokku.
klaasmees
Liige
Postitusi: 144
Liitunud: 15 Sept, 2022 4:48
Kontakt:

Re: Kolmas Riik ja tema tuumaprogramm

Postitus Postitas klaasmees »

Kirs kirjutas: 11 Dets, 2023 15:12
Kriku kirjutas: 11 Dets, 2023 9:02 Euroopa taustakiirguse kaart: https://remap.jrc.ec.europa.eu/Atlas.aspx . Rügen ei eristu millegagi. Ja purustusi ju ka pole.
Just! Varasemalt just selle viite kodanikule nina alla panin, aga tema seda EI usu. Isegi meie naabri Soome numbrid on "koledamad" kui Rügenis.
No, milles siis kühvel. Tuleb asjaomasel kodanikul teha tähelepanuväärne ajalooline avastus, et Rugeni asemel toimus katsetamine hoopis Soomes, näiteks Ruka nimelises kohas, kenasti väljaspool Saksamaad, looduslik kiirgus ja puha, Vene rünnakute eest kaitstud, põhjas, keegi ei näinud ega kuulnud. Ja kui küsite, kuidas kõik vajalik kraam ja inimesed Soome jõudis, siis igaüks ju teab, et Saksamaa kaevas Läänemere alt tunneli Soome. See Soome lahe sügavikus uitav objekt on, kõik mõistlikud inimesed teavad sellest, sinna uputatud kaevamismasin. Mis puutub pommi sihtmärgini toimetamisse, siis Saksamaa oli alustanud juba maaaluse tunneli kaevamist Moskvasse, Moskva metroo on tegelikult Saksa spioonide kätetöö, mis pidi kiirendama tuumapommi sihtmärgini toimetamist. Need spioonid-mõjuagendid said selle eest Hitlerilt punaristi ordeni ja Stalinilt metroo ehitamise eest raudlipu oma . Kõige selle kohta on olemas ümberlükkamatud tõendid ühes väga salajases hoidlas, mille asukohta teavad vaid kolm inimest, neist üks on sügavalt dementne, kuid need tõendid on raudkindlad. . Nüüd tulge ja lükake ümber. :p
Kasutaja avatar
Sho
Liige
Postitusi: 3359
Liitunud: 26 Jaan, 2009 18:45
Asukoht: Viljandi
Kontakt:

Re: Kolmas Riik ja tema tuumaprogramm

Postitus Postitas Sho »

Seda on võimatu ümber lükata.
Sa avasid mu silmad, ma tean nüüd Tõde.
Võtke teed ja tulge homme jälle..
Kasutaja avatar
Fucs
Liige
Postitusi: 16610
Liitunud: 12 Dets, 2006 21:43
Asukoht: retired
Kontakt:

Re: Kolmas Riik ja tema tuumaprogramm

Postitus Postitas Fucs »

https://www.academia.edu/52283012 on saadaval

Hitler's Bomb Part I: The Peculiarity (unpublished extended version)
By Matthew F. Brown B.A., M.A., M.Litt., Grad DipEd., Grad Cert (Intel Analysis)
September 2021

Kuna tahab regamist siis panen huvilistele ka upload.ee -sse üles.
https://www.upload.ee/files/16041502/Hi ... u.pdf.html
Sealt kustub mingi aja möödudes see fail ise ära.
That peculiarity observed by R.D Jones’ fictional character in his 1981 novel The Fenris Option, echoes the same observation grappled by historians from late 1945 until today- the strange, yet apparent failure of Nazi German science to produce the atomic bomb. Indeed, even the eminent German physicist Manfred Popp in his rather caustic analysis of past historians’ research concerning the Uranverein2, was left asking ‘But why did they not study the physics of the bomb out of sheer curiosity, the strongest driving force of all searching physicists?’

Certainly, how could the scientific powerhouse that produced Planck’s constant, Hahn’s fission, Einstein’s photoelectric effect and relativity theorem, Rontgen’s x-rays and Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle, simply not produce a functioning critical atomic pile-let alone an atomic bomb?

This peculiarity has driven historians of Science and Nazi Germany to endlessly debate the various political, scientific and ideological contexts to explain this conundrum. These speculations have fashioned competing and entrenched historiographical paradigms, myths and trends that have framed how scholarship has viewed any explanation of the German nuclear ‘failure’.

Each ‘doctrine’ of interpretation has in turn been a product of the political, scientific and ideological influences of its respective time. Historian of science Philip Ball, has most recently enunciated the difficulty faced by researchers curious to examine the peculiarity considering these historiographical movements:
‘One can in consequence tell pretty much whatever story one chooses, and people have done so. With the collection of conflicting accounts, one has no option but to fall back on subjective assessments, searching for consistencies and contradictions of character’.

Research has further been hampered by the difficult nature of the evidence. German forces (like any in retreat) destroyed sensitive documentation5. Still other material was spirited away by the Allies (one need only think of the 1554 tonnes of secret files stored at Wright Patterson Field in the U. S.6). Even more material remains classified in the labyrinthine Russia archives.

Pavel Oleynikov has frustratingly remarked in light of this difficulty that ‘the puzzle remains unsolved’ vis-à-vis what Soviet physicists believed concerning the development of a Nazi A-weapon. For Polish Wunderwaffe researcher Igor Witkowski, the porous nature of archival material caused him to lament: ‘We do not know the full picture of German work, and certainly will never do so. There are simply too many of these “blank spots”....
Peatükid:
The Apologetic myth: The Germans wouldn’t build a bomb
“No dissenting opinions?” asked McLennand.
“A couple…nobody much wanted to rock the boat. So the dissenters were outweighed. A note of the meeting will be submitted, that’s all.”

From this milieu, three powerful historiographical ‘myths’ have influenced scholarly and public discourse concerning the German atomic endeavour since 1945. Two of those myths hold firmly that no German nuclear success was achieved. Mark Walker, perhaps the world’s leading authority on wartime German nuclear ambitions has identified a ‘German’ or ‘apologetic’myth “… in the sense of ‘apologia’, not apology. It is an apologia neither for building a bomb nor for not building one, rather an apologia for being willing to work on the economic and military applications of nuclear fission for the National Socialist government during World War II.....


The Polemic myth: The Germans couldn’t build the bomb.

Contrary to apologetic myth and quantified by Walker was the ‘polemic’ view held primarily outside of Germany. In 1947, Dutch Jewish physicist Samuel Goudsmit released Alsos.

The Failure in German Science, an account of mission he led to ascertain the extent of the Nazi nuclear programme during the last phase of the war. Goudsmit, who had lost family during the Shoah and having an axe to grind with German scientists, argued that German science failed because it was incompetent as a result of being positioned with totalitarianism......


The Stasis myth: The Germans never tried to build a bomb.

‘The scientists, cautious men, were not much help. They would prefer not to act until all evidence was in. Eventually Darlington tapped on the table for silence.

“It’s nearly five o’clock. Can we come to some conclusion by five, or at least agree to come to none?” ‘ As гла́сность and перестро́йка were taking hold and the Berlin wall was coming down, the most influential scholar for the next 30 years released his new thesis on the peculiarity.

Mark Walker’s 1989 work German National Socialism and the Quest for Nuclear Power, 1939-49, based on his earlier Doctoral work, argued the ‘myth’ of the German bomb meant different things to different people. For Walker “…the myth of the German Atomic Bomb can be summed up in a single question: Would
German scientists have made atomic bombs for Adolf Hitler?”
Walker identified that there was a ‘German’ myth centred on the premise that the German scientists didn’t want to build the bomb, they were good enough but were hindered by politics and military/industrial forces beyond their control. Even if they had the means, they would have denied Hitler....


The Occulted myth: The Germans built a different nuclear ‘something’.

With collapsing information ‘oligarchies’ and the rise of digital information ‘democracies’, a litany of obscure source material has surfaced over the past 20 years regarding a highly secret SS ‘occulted’ nuclear weapons programme. Within the material lies a vast, untapped treasure trove of declassified documents connected with underground complexes yet to be archaeologically investigated due to German prohibitions.

Following the trail of this emergent narrative has significant challenges. The credible evidence is often published independently rather than in peer reviewed journals and is difficult to acquire. Often the sound source material is found within recently declassified and untranslated Russia, Polish and German technical papers. Various leads are known to be classified and inaccessible to researchers....
Esimene osa lõppeb:
To fully comprehend the nature of this new peculiarity, its evidence and the debate that surrounds it is, our investigation will continue in Hitler’s Bomb Part II: ‘Challenging the Cold War Allied Legend.
Kahjuks II osa pole saadaval. Seal võetakse pulkadeks ka see Rainer Karlsch 2005a raamat
Ignored by researchers for over 40 years and buried beneath Irving’s fall from grace, this line of research would become significant in 2005 with Rainer Karlsch’s Hitler’s Bombe discovery of a far more advanced and successful extension of this programme within Russian archives. This vein of research would become important as we shall see in Part II
*

Ja siis selle Rainer Karlsch 2005a raamatu järelloona...
Für und Wider "Hitlers Bombe"
Studien zur Atomforschung in Deutschland
by Rainer Karlsch

"Fuer und Wider Hitlers Bombe", i.e. "The pros and cons on >>Hitler's bomb<<", is a successor to Rainer Karlsch's "Hitlers Bombe", which in 2005 kindled a hitherto smouldering debate on the dimensions of Nazi Germany's WW2 nuclear weapons program.

"Hitler's Bombe" culminated in the assumption that small-scale nuclear devices were tested under the auspices of the SS in October 1944 and in March 1945. Many physicists around the world would disagree, since the Germans were short of enriched uranium and obviously did not operate any nuclear reactors to breed plutonium-239. In 2006 PTB, the German National Bureau of Standards, was unable to find conclusive evidence of a nuclear excursion in soil samples taken from the Ohrdruf (Thuringia) military training area - one of the alleged test sites.

Now the dispute is revived. In a dozen articles and backed by historians, journalists, engineers, physicists, geophysicists and even designers of Soviet nuclear weapons, editors Rainer Karlsch and Heiko Petermann have addressed a few unresolved or mistaken issues.

"Fuer und Wider Hitlers Bombe" consists of two parts - the first one more physically, the second one more historically oriented. Several contributions deal with various aspects of the Ohrdruf explosion. The approximate yield of that event is estimated. Rarely known Polish post-war attempts to reduce the critical mass, probably based on German knowledge, are mentioned - an issue of utmost importance for today's nuclear nonproliferation activities. A comparison of aerial photographs both from the Trinity site and the Ohrdruf military training area reveals why it is so difficult to detect any visible traces of the German near-surface explosion 60 years later on. Seismograms of near-by observatories, which may have registered the Ohrdruf event, were "borrowed" by the Soviets in the Sixties and never reappeared. In a U.S. interrogation report dating one day (!) after the Trinity test a witness of a German test explosion gave a more precise description of the bomb's effects than William Laurence, the famous reporter, who accompanied the Nagasaki air raid and was allowed to publish his notes in the New York Times on September 9, 1945.

In the second part the beginnings of German fusion research are reviewed. The role of Erich Schumann, then Army coordinator of nuclear weapons research, is evaluated. Another article investigates the possibility of a nuclear attack of the American east coast with the futuristic German "Saenger" bomber. Was German actinides research really constricted by Otto Hahn after Kurt Starke's independent discovery of element 93 (neptunium)? Some protagonists continued their weapons-related work in the post-war Federal Republic of Germany, as several patent applications of "mini-nukes" reveal.

The most compelling result of this book is that Karlsch's proposal of a crude implosive test device utilising the coupling of fission and fusion processes is judged to have been in reach for German physicists like Walter Gerlach and Kurt Diebner. Always lacking the fissile material for pure fission bombs Gerlach concluded in May 1944 that "the release of nuclear energy is to be performed not only by fission but by alternative means." Vladimir Mineev and Alexander Funtikov, designers of nuclear weapons in the former Soviet Union, suggest the Germans might have been fully aware of the "boosting" principle. If a small quantity of thermonuclear fuel - a 1:1 mixture of deuterium and tritium gas or lithium hydrides - is placed appropriately into the pit of the device, the fissile material is much more efficiently consumed by high-energy fusion neutrons; that is, a much higher fission yield from a given quantity of U-235 or Pu-239 may be obtained. The fusion process itself adds negligibly to the total yield. It is important in this context that boosting reduces the critical mass substantially. Conventional wisdom tells us the boosting principle was first mentioned for military purposes in November 1945, when it was included in a patent application filed at Los Alamos.

After reading "Fuer und Wider Hitlers Bombe" it becomes quite obvious that outside of Heisenberg's "Uranium Club" several groups were willing to give Hitler the ultimate vengeance weapon. From mid-1944 onwards both the Army and Navy, the Reich's Postal Office and last but not least the SS worked feverishly on the construction of a nuclear weapon.

So did Hitler really own a nuclear weapon in the waning days of WW2? As expected, "Fuer und Wider Hitlers Bombe" does not show any blueprints of the mysterious German devices. And again it does not offer any first-hand proof of nuclear weapons tests in wartime Germany.

But this book leaves more pros than cons. Karlsch and Petermann have made a great point in intensifying an urgently needed discussion on these issues. If they are right they have changed a historical paradigm.

Is it a must-read? Of course "Fuer und Wider Hitlers Bombe" will not be all things to all readers. The community of professional nuclear weapon scientists will likely find parts of the book simplistic, but should also find parts that offer significant insight. A lot of nonspecialists and interested laymen, too, may appreciate and greatly enjoy this opportunity to delve more deeply into the history of the atomic era.

"Fuer und Wider Hitlers Bombe" contains a few annoying misprints and insignificant errors. The meaning of some figures is unclear (e.g., of some U.S. nuclear weapons tests). On the whole, technical and historical contributions are balanced quite well.

To promote the discussion on a more international level it would be advantageous if an English edition of both "Hitlers Bombe" and "Fuer und Wider Hitlers Bombe" was at hand soon.

Strangely enough, corroborating evidence of an SS-dominated nuclear weapons program comes from the Near East: In his memoir (Damascus 1999, p. 127, p. 162ff) Muhammad Amin Al-Husayni, the former Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, a fanatic anti-semite and multiple visitor to Nazi Germany, focusses on a meeting with Himmler in July 1943. Himmler would have passed confidential information on to him - "known to only ten persons in the whole Reich ... Germany about to build an atomic weapon." The Reichsfuehrer further told Al-Husayni Great Britain and the U.S. were striving hard to catch up with their own nuclear weapons programs, "but we are still ahead. We will possess atomic weapons three years earlier than our
enemies. This irresistible weapon will turn the tides." Actually, letters by Al-Husayni on "German vengeance weapons" written to his Arabian collaborator Shakib Arslan were intercepted by allied services in 1944.

https://openlibrary.org/books/OL2183114 ... lers_Bombe
kalvis
Liige
Postitusi: 1443
Liitunud: 03 Aug, 2014 9:49
Kontakt:

Re: Kolmas Riik ja tema tuumaprogramm

Postitus Postitas kalvis »

Lemet kirjutas: 11 Dets, 2023 8:53 Aga mitte keegi ei kuulnud- näinud ja mälestusi pole.
Kirjalikud mälestusi pandi koos nimede ja kes mida nägi. Tänaseks on need tegelased kõik surnud. Inimene võis valetada... Samas tuumaseene nägemine on sedavõrd eriline asi, et sell rääkis kõigile ja eks pandi kirja kuidas osati.
Rügeni saare asukoht otsiti arhiivipiltide alusel ülesse - enne kuupäeva oli saarel mets, pärast katsetust kena suur sõõr. Mindi pildil mainitud kohta ja dosimeetrid hakkasid kiirgust näitama (seda demoti 20xx aastal tehtud dokfilmis). Kui tahad, süüdista dok.filmi tegijaid, et nad püüdsid valetada - tegelikult võtsid kiirgusnäitu kuskil mujal, mitte Rügeni saarel. Aga miks nad peaksid petma?
Kasutaja avatar
Kapten Trumm
Liige
Postitusi: 43807
Liitunud: 28 Juul, 2005 15:35
Kontakt:

Re: Kolmas Riik ja tema tuumaprogramm

Postitus Postitas Kapten Trumm »

Kilo Tango kirjutas: 11 Dets, 2023 15:37 No tegelikult on see Rügeri saare kiirguskolde jutt üleüldse möga, sest näiteks Jaapani kiirguskaardi pealt ei paista ei Hiroshima ega Nagasaki kohe kuidagi välja.: https://jciv.iidj.net/map/
Selle aja peale on kogu kiirgustase normaliseerunud. Isegi Tšernobõl on suht-koht ok, kui seal just kaevama ei hakka (nagu venelased oma otsatus tarkures eelmine aasta tegid).
Tuumaplahvatusel tekkivad radioaktiivsed isotoobid on enamasti üsna lühikese "põlemisajaga". On ka pikemaga, aga nende osakaal on kogusummas nii väike, et üldist tausta mõjutavad vähe. Seepärast jutud, kuidas pea 80 aasta tagused plahvatuskohad on mingi odava käsiloenduriga tuvastatav, selge jama.

Seejuures tasub veel silmas pidada, et Hiroshima oli puhas õhuplahvatus (600 m kõrgusel), kuid katseplahvatused tornide otsas võib lugeda maapealseteks (kui torni kõrgus on oluliselt väiksem tulekera raadiusest). See tähendab, et Hiroshima puhul lendas saast laiali suurele alale ja linn ise saastus suhteliselt vähe, tornide otsas toimunud katseplahvatuste koht ja selle allatuuleala pidi saastuma palju kõvemini, sest tulekera sulatas suuremas koguses pinnast ja see miksiti kokku radioaktiivse saastaga, mils pärast alla vajus.

Õhuplahvatuse idee on selles, et tulekerast horisondi suunas ja tulekerast maapinna suunas lähtuv (ja sealt tagasi peegelduv) lööklainefront ühineks ja muutuks seetõttu eriti purustavaks. Mitte relvaomanike humaansus vähem saastada. Kasutatakse pehmete sihtmärkide puhul (linn, tööstusobjekt).
Isegi Tšernobõl on suht-koht ok, kui seal just kaevama ei hakka (nagu venelased oma otsatus tarkures eelmine aasta tegid).
Tuumaõnnetusel reaktorist lendu minev saast sisaldab palju rohkemaid ja kauem "põlevaid" isotoope. Tsernobõlis on saast praeguseks läinud loodusringi, näiteks sammaldunud äärekivide peale pidi loendur lausa huilgama hakkama (sammal imeb endasse). Seal lähimad 30 aastat elutegevust vaevalt lubatakse, sest laiali lendas asju, mille poolestusaega mõõdetakse sajandites.
Viimati muutis Kapten Trumm, 13 Dets, 2023 9:40, muudetud 1 kord kokku.
/Veelgi hullem on see, et koos kohustusliku patriootliku riigioptimismi kehtestamisega nõrgeneks paratamatult ka meie ohutaju, mis on enesealalhoiuks vältimatult vajalik instinkt/ S. Mikser 2014.
Kasutaja avatar
Kapten Trumm
Liige
Postitusi: 43807
Liitunud: 28 Juul, 2005 15:35
Kontakt:

Re: Kolmas Riik ja tema tuumaprogramm

Postitus Postitas Kapten Trumm »

kalvis kirjutas: 13 Dets, 2023 8:53
Lemet kirjutas: 11 Dets, 2023 8:53 Aga mitte keegi ei kuulnud- näinud ja mälestusi pole.
Kirjalikud mälestusi pandi koos nimede ja kes mida nägi. Tänaseks on need tegelased kõik surnud. Inimene võis valetada... Samas tuumaseene nägemine on sedavõrd eriline asi, et sell rääkis kõigile ja eks pandi kirja kuidas osati.
Rügeni saare asukoht otsiti arhiivipiltide alusel ülesse - enne kuupäeva oli saarel mets, pärast katsetust kena suur sõõr. Mindi pildil mainitud kohta ja dosimeetrid hakkasid kiirgust näitama (seda demoti 20xx aastal tehtud dokfilmis). Kui tahad, süüdista dok.filmi tegijaid, et nad püüdsid valetada - tegelikult võtsid kiirgusnäitu kuskil mujal, mitte Rügeni saarel. Aga miks nad peaksid petma?
On ka olemas filmid, mis tõestavad, et inimesed Kuul ei käinudki, sest lipp lehvis tuules.
Miks peaks petma? Aga seepärast, et oma teooriat "tõestada", näiteks müüa oma raamatut "Natside salajane pomm" (või mis iganes pealkirjaga).
Umbes nagu meil koroona-William üritas müüa raamatut "Kuidas saada meheks ja saada *****- :D

Taolist jampsi on internet täis ja kui vähe puuduliku haridusega tegelased loevad, tundubki usutav.
/Veelgi hullem on see, et koos kohustusliku patriootliku riigioptimismi kehtestamisega nõrgeneks paratamatult ka meie ohutaju, mis on enesealalhoiuks vältimatult vajalik instinkt/ S. Mikser 2014.
teeline35
Liige
Postitusi: 1838
Liitunud: 11 Apr, 2010 9:21
Asukoht: LÄÄNEMAA
Kontakt:

Re: Kolmas Riik ja tema tuumaprogramm

Postitus Postitas teeline35 »

kalvis kirjutas: 13 Dets, 2023 8:53
Lemet kirjutas: 11 Dets, 2023 8:53 Aga mitte keegi ei kuulnud- näinud ja mälestusi pole.
Kirjalikud mälestusi pandi koos nimede ja kes mida nägi. Tänaseks on need tegelased kõik surnud. Inimene võis valetada... Samas tuumaseene nägemine on sedavõrd eriline asi, et sell rääkis kõigile ja eks pandi kirja kuidas osati.
Rügeni saare asukoht otsiti arhiivipiltide alusel ülesse - enne kuupäeva oli saarel mets, pärast katsetust kena suur sõõr. Mindi pildil mainitud kohta ja dosimeetrid hakkasid kiirgust näitama (seda demoti 20xx aastal tehtud dokfilmis). Kui tahad, süüdista dok.filmi tegijaid, et nad püüdsid valetada - tegelikult võtsid kiirgusnäitu kuskil mujal, mitte Rügeni saarel. Aga miks nad peaksid petma?
Inimesed enda elatamiseks teevad igasugu asju. Kui keegi kirjeldatud nüüdseks juba surnud inimesi otsima hakkab, siis võib vabalt selguda, et sellise nimega inimesi polnud olemas või pole nad kunagi midagi sellist rääkinud. Teiseks ei saa kunagi välistada ka mõne vanadekodus igavleva vanainimese tähelepanu vajadust. Nii näiteks lõi 30.ndatel saksamaal laineid üks vana meremees kes rääkis kõigile ja isegi avaldas mälestusi oma teenistusest ja pääsemisest Titanicul. Hiljem kontrollides selgus, et kõik puha vuhvel ja härrasmehe fantaasia!

Lisaksin ega keegi ometi tõesti usu, et kõik mida filmis näidatakse ka tõsi on?! :shock: Sellisel juhul peaksid Star Wars ja paljud teisedki sarnased ulmefilmid tähtedevahelises ruumis filmitud olema. :wink:
Viimati muutis teeline35, 13 Dets, 2023 9:57, muudetud 1 kord kokku.
(Üli)koolitamata,aga lugeda kirjutada mõistan.
Qwerty226
Liige
Postitusi: 765
Liitunud: 31 Mai, 2022 11:37
Kontakt:

Re: Kolmas Riik ja tema tuumaprogramm

Postitus Postitas Qwerty226 »

kalvis kirjutas: 04 Dets, 2023 11:36 Kim esimest tuumapommi ei pidanud USA üldse tuumapommiks. Sama jutt - fission pomm.
Siiski filmis nähtud materjalid ikkagi kinnitavad - mingil tasemel tuumalõhustumine toimis.
Kuidas "fission" pomm ei ole tuumapomm?
Või palun seleta kuidas "fission" pomm tuumapommist erineb?
Vasta

Kes on foorumil

Kasutajad foorumit lugemas: Registreeritud kasutajaid pole ja 1 külaline