Images from How To Photograph an Atomic Bomb

[johnastovall]

How To Photograph an Atomic Bomb

[ChristopherCoy]

I dont know if I should be disturbed that you are looking at how to photograph atomic bombs, or intrigued by the fact that you are looking at how to photograph atomic bombs..... Where do you find this stuff? And are you planning on setting off an atomic bomb to photograph? If so, please let me know well in advance.

[djroga]

Originally Posted by ChristopherCoy

I dont know if I should be disturbed that you are looking at how to photograph atomic bombs, or intrigued by the fact that you are looking at how to photograph atomic bombs..... Where do you find this stuff? And are you planning on setting off an atomic bomb to photograph? If so, please let me know well in advance.

Look out your front window.


10. 9, 8, 7............

[Daniel W.]

It is the new strobist... a few crashing and colliding atoms are MUCH easier to carry than two or three of those ridiculously sized speedlights! But just like your AA batteries, they're a pain in the butt to get through the airport.

[johnastovall]

In another life, I was involved in the computation modeling of their effect. Very neat math and hardware. Now for a person really into nuclear weapons check out the archive of Carey Sublette.

Nuclear bombs also make for very good propulsion for spacecraft. See Project Orion...

[RKEnnis]

You think the guys in the first photo got a "sunburn"?

[texkam]

...and the Government assures us that the swine flu vaccine will be safe. :)

[johnastovall]

Originally Posted by texkam

...and the Government assures us that the swine flu vaccine will be safe. :)

Nuclear weapons are safe on in the sense they only go off where you want them to. They have keep the world from large scale since 1945. I would say that's safe.

[Truckman]

Forty years ago I was loading these on F-105's for their daily tour of the East/West German border...I wouldn't be skittish about photographing the devices themselves, it's the resulting explosions I'll leave to the pros......Ben

Truckman added 2 Minutes and 32 Seconds later...Double Post Merged Below

Originally Posted by johnastovall

Nuclear weapons are safe on in the sense they only go off where you want them to. They have keep the world from large scale since 1945. I would say that's safe.

Extremely safe, John...When I went to school on them, the part that goes "bang" cost the government $96.00...The part that kept it from going "bang" ran the cost up over a million bucks......Ben

[Imagebuffet]

Originally Posted by johnastovall

Nuclear bombs also make for very good propulsion for spacecraft. See Project Orion...

Orion engines are crude, inefficient and jarring. They would use less than 1% of the energy of the detonation to propel the spacecraft, and the jolt each detonation (there would have to be several) would likely be at least double-digit gee forces.

Much better is anti-matter-assisted fission.

Antimatter Catalyzed Micro Fission/Fusion (ACMF)

[ChristopherCoy]

Originally Posted by Imagebuffet

Orion engines are crude, inefficient and jarring. They would use less than 1% of the energy of the detonation to propel the spacecraft, and the jolt each detonation (there would have to be several) would likely be at least double-digit gee forces.

Much better is anti-matter-assisted fission.

WHAT? When you're in America.... SPEAK ENGLISH!!!

[texkam]

Nuclear weapons are safe on in the sense they only go off where you want them to. They have keep the world from large scale since 1945. I would say that's safe.

I'm talking about the way they were just exposing all these guys to the radioactive fallout. Similar to when they would dust soldiers head to toe in DDT. Nothing malicious here, they just didn't know.

[alamoshutterbug]

I often will out of the blue think of edgerton's work in this area and how scary and eerie some of the images were. The ones of the fireball just starting out measurable in feet are so interesting.

linky