0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
OK, so now we know that you can't even count.104.372 has 6 digits (and 3 places of decimals)."When you release 7,600,000 BTU's in a fraction of a second, you get a blast, like the one at Hiroshima. "Nope, you get about ^ J or about 2 tons of TNT equivalent.It would make roughly as much mess as a V2 rocket did (That was 1 ton so 7,600,000 BTU would give a slightly bigger crater if it was released suddenly enough).It would take out a few buildings, but it wouldn't demolish a good chunk of a city.Hiroshima was not a ton of oil catching fire.This is the effect of 300 tonnes of petrol , largely premixed with air catching fire and progressing from a deflagration to a detonation.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005_Hertfordshire_Oil_Storage_Terminal_fireDeath toll nil.To say that the bomb dropped on Hiroshima was 300 times less mass of a fuel which doesn't explode readily is not only absurd, but an insult to those who died there .I'm happy to excuse the typos, but I find it very hard to excuse your delusional ramblings.
And create a lens or, volume of explosive area, or volume of high voltage area. The size and or density, and time, the area is kept at extreme abundance, of particles of electricity/heat, create the severity of the blast. That is because the blast is not from the matter itself. Rather the lens that the matter, creates for ambient radiation. It is the structure, of the bomb material that, alters ambient radiation to create the bomb blast.
When I throw the switch to this particular bomb, before it detonates, I am pushed towards the bomb from behind. It is pretty wild.
umm, yes William7 gram of acetylene, whether you "mix it just right with oxygen" and detonate it, or whether you burn it in a slow fire, will always produce 350 kJ of energy. That is about 330 BTU for those who are still working in the past.QuoteAnd create a lens or, volume of explosive area, or volume of high voltage area. The size and or density, and time, the area is kept at extreme abundance, of particles of electricity/heat, create the severity of the blast. That is because the blast is not from the matter itself. Rather the lens that the matter, creates for ambient radiation. It is the structure, of the bomb material that, alters ambient radiation to create the bomb blast. This is largely pseudo-scientific nonsense. The yield, or total energy output of an explosion is entirely due to the chemical energy of the material involved in the corresponding chemical reaction (or relativistic energy equivalent of the mass lost in a nuclear explosion). The peak power, or blast of an explosion depends on the duration of the explosion, and geometric effects like reflection and focussing. There is no external input from "particles of electricity/heat".If the energy from 7 gram of acetylene is released over the space of about 1 minute, the peak power will probably be around 10 kW; the average power will be just under 6 kW.If on the other hand it is (all) released in a shockwave over around 1 ms, the peak power will be in the order of 1GW. That is a significant blast.However, the yield of the Hiroshima bomb was about 60 TJ, so that even if the shock was evenly spread over a full second (most implausible), the peak power would be at least 60 TW, or 60,000 times greater.A yield of 7.6 million BTU corresponds to a yield of 8.0 million kJ, or 8.0 GJ. It would take 7500 such blasts to equal the yield of the Hiroshima bomb.The peak power or blast of an explosion is a very complicated function of geometry, focussing, and similar factors that is not easy to estimate. And the peak power available at any particular place is also a complicated matter. The basic function goes as the inverse cube of the distance from the actual explosion if the explosion is spherically symmetric and takes place in empty space (double the distance, one eighth of the blast), but in practice is somewhere between inverse cube and an inverse square relationship (double distance quarter blast) because the shock wave does not spread evenly in all directions, and especially not in vertical directions. Even that is modified by factors like absorption/dissipation of power between source and reference point (decreases the blast), and any reflection and/or focussing, whether accidental or pre-arranged (may increase or decrease the blast).Explosions are extremely difficult to compare scientifically, though blast effects can readily be measured and monitored. But when the yield of one explosion (which can be very accurately predicted and determined, unlike the blast) is several thousand times that of another, there is no question about the severity of the effects.And I am sorry if it is ruled not to be "science" for the purposes of this forum, but there are numerous scientific (medical) studies about the unthinkably cruel effects of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki blasts on the immediate victims and the survivors.QuoteWhen I throw the switch to this particular bomb, before it detonates, I am pushed towards the bomb from behind. It is pretty wild.The "scientific" explanation of this is that it is the devil pushing on your shoulders, encouraging you to go ahead with such an idiotic experiment. []
That was seven grams, if I had 365 pounds of acetylene then I would have something 23,000 times more powerful.
But the oil bomb I mentioned, has another principle at play, time. It holds the core so hot, so abundant with particles of electricity, that it cannot explode until each and every atom has unbounded from one another. That alone causes the missing BTU's.
Try putting hydrogen through an ARC, the heat released is amazing, it reaches temperatures of the sun.
That is the secret of the pure ammonium nitrate core. It reaches temperatures of the sun, because of the ARC that is created by the initiating explosives. Imagine a building sized sun for a few seconds. That is what it was.
When you add helium or hydrogen to a plasma cutter, it suddenly without extra power added, becomes able to slice through two inch stainless steel. It is the breaking of the Siamese bonds of the helium and or hydrogen. That creates the heat. You really will not find much about it today. It just highlights another very obvious error for modern science.
As George Washington said with much conviction.
The "scientific" explanation of this is that it is the devil pushing on your shoulders, encouraging you to go ahead with such an idiotic experiment. []
From William McCormickQuoteThat was seven grams, if I had 365 pounds of acetylene then I would have something 23,000 times more powerful. In terms of yield, yes, but in terms of peak power if you were to use the same design and scale up, then less than 1000 times, because your linear dimension would have to increase by a factor of 30, leading to a 30-fold reduction in peak power.QuoteBut the oil bomb I mentioned, has another principle at play, time. It holds the core so hot, so abundant with particles of electricity, that it cannot explode until each and every atom has unbounded from one another. That alone causes the missing BTU's. This is complete and utter nonsense. Nothing like this happens in the operation of any bomb powered by chemical energy. Chemical explosions are thoroughly investigated and very well understood.Also, it is not at all clear what is meant by "missing BTU's". The usual reason for missing BTUs these days is that scientists and engineers have replaced them with kilojoule.Quote Try putting hydrogen through an ARC, the heat released is amazing, it reaches temperatures of the sun. The temperature of the visible surface of the sun (photosphere) is around 10,000°C. It is not particularly difficult to achieve higher temperatures than this on Earth. The temperature of the sun's interior ranges very much higher -- millions of degrees and more.QuoteThat is the secret of the pure ammonium nitrate core. It reaches temperatures of the sun, because of the ARC that is created by the initiating explosives. Imagine a building sized sun for a few seconds. That is what it was.Pure ammonium nitrate is not an explosive. It is unlikely that much of an explosion will be initiated even with fulminate initiator, because the explosive action of ammonium nitrate is bound up in its ability to act as an oxidant in the explosive combustion of a hydrocarbon fuel. ANFO means ammonium nitrate plus fuel oil. Pure ammonium nitrate simply cannot reach the temperature of the sun; it will decompose to water and laughing gas in a fairly gentle reaction at around 250°C. ANFO is a very effective and cost efficient explosive because it is quite safe if the two components are stored separately, it can be safely mixed into a slurry and put in place, and it requires a detonator to set off an explosion. The particular mechanism of ammonium nitrate oxidation involves a particularly efficient branching in its detailed radical chain mechanism, so that a shock wave will rapidly produce very large numbers of reactive free radicals to achieve a very fast reaction and propagate an increasing shock.But this will not and cannot happen in the absence of a fuel or of an initiating shock, and the mechanism certainly does not involve total atomization or ionization of the materials involved in the reaction.QuoteWhen you add helium or hydrogen to a plasma cutter, it suddenly without extra power added, becomes able to slice through two inch stainless steel. It is the breaking of the Siamese bonds of the helium and or hydrogen. That creates the heat. You really will not find much about it today. It just highlights another very obvious error for modern science. No, hydrogen does not have "siamese bonds", and helium has no bonds whatever of any sort. The reason for these two materials having this sort of effect is that they are gases with very light molecules, which therefore move very much faster than molecules of any other gas at the same temperature, and therefore conduct heat a lot better.Quote As George Washington said with much conviction. They threw me off the forum for a while. That gentleman was only ever convicted by the British, and he never had to serve his sentence.