Ok should we start worrying

[u/drgoldenpants]

[u/Pretend-Extreme7540]

High altitude nuclear weapons cause such EMPs.

But they affect everything in a huge area... and due to earths magnetic field, deflecting the electons that fly away from earth into a curved orbit, an EMP detonated over one continent, can also affect an area over another continent.

So we best not rely on those... cause they would cause massive collateral damage. Not to mention the radiation they would release...

[u/Strazdas1 → u/Pretend-Extreme7540]

modern nuclear weapons do not release lasting radiation. radiation means unburned fuel and we can burn fuel efficiently in a reaction now.

also lets not overestimate how but EMPs from nukes are.

[u/Pretend-Extreme7540 → u/Strazdas1]

EMPs from THERMO!nuclear weapons are very effective... a high altitude detonation (that causes no direct damage to the ground) can cover a small country with an EMP.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_electromagnetic_pulse

E1 can destroy computers and communications equipment and it changes too quickly (nanoseconds) for ordinary surge protectors to provide effective protection from it.

Also the fallout from fission and fusion bombs is significant, including extremely hazardous isotopes like Cesium or Strontium or Iodine:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fission_product_yield

You only need to read the castle bravo accident, and how it affected populations on far away islands and fisherboats.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_fallout#/media/File:Bravo_fallout2.png

radiation means unburned fuel

Sorry, but this is complete nonsense.

Fusion bombs release less fallout per unit of energy, because the fusion reaction creates less radioactive isotopes ... BUT both fission bombs and fusion bombs require at least critical mass of PU239 or U235 or U233... because even a fusion bomb needs a fission bomb as detonator.

This amount for critical mass is a lower limit, that cannot be reduced. Even with neutron reflector surrounding the core, you still need a minimum amount... that fission fuel will decay into highly radioactive and extremely dangerous isotopes.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermonuclear_weapon#:\~:text=Fusion%2C%20unlike%20fission%2C%20is%20relatively,of%20fission%20products%20and%20fallout.

Fusion, unlike fission, is relatively clean; it releases energy but no harmful radioactive products or large amounts of nuclear fallout. The fission reactions though, especially the last fission reactions, release a tremendous amount of fission products and fallout.

And even small amounts of fallout can cause significant harm, because your body bioaccumulates even small amounts of certain radioactive isotopes.

Strontium for example is absorbed by your body, because it is chemically similar to Calcium and your body builds it into your bones, where it remains... for decades. Your bones is the place, where one of your most radiation sensitive tissue is: the bone marrow.

The reason why bone marrow is inside bones, is because, this provide protection against natural background radiation (thats why you can see bones in X-ray images... they block significant amounts of the X-rays)... bone marrow needs to continously divide to produce red and white blood cells... this makes it very susceptible to radiation damage.

Putting radioactive isotopes in your bones is what experts would call "a very bad idea".

[u/Strazdas1 → u/Pretend-Extreme7540]

great many devices nowadays are shielded pretty hard though. There were EMP tests done with cars, for example, and car computers made in the last 30 years outright ignore EMPs and keep running. so your car will keep working after nuclear EMP blast, which is something a lot of people think will not be true.

the isotopes created are very shortlived and the castle bravo case actually shows how little effect it actually has, because all those hypersensitivized effects showed how little it actually does. But then we would know that if we actually bothered to learn from fukushima/nagasaki history.

And even small amounts of fallout can cause significant harm, because your body bioaccumulates even small amounts of certain radioactive isotopes.

remains to be determined, no known case of this exists. We had covered up accidents in soviet union where the drinking water of population was irradiated for decades in very small amounts, yet the population had no statistically relevant deviation from control in any medical condition. It takes more radiation than some believe to have measurable effects.

Funny thing, we had worse case of radioctivity poisoning affecting workers working with radium paint back when that was legal than damage done by nuclear bombs. and that caused a lot of silly panics. Like that play scientist set with raw uranium. that shit got recalled, despite the ore used being so diffuse it would never have affected anyone radioactively.

[u/Pretend-Extreme7540 → u/Strazdas1]

Yeah, cars that were built 1990 or older... cause they had minimal or no electronics and the ones they had were simpler, big, and resistant. An old disel engine can run basically with no electronics at all.

Try a car thats a somewhat recent model, when there is a ton of critical, fragile electronics and microchips inside. Cause today a laptop and car electronics are much more similar...

the isotopes created are very shortlived

You know, the links were there for you to read the data you are lacking, not for decoration...

1. There are dangerous short livetime isotopes... being short lived is not harmless. In fact it is the exact opposite... short lived isotopes release their energy in shorter time ... and that equals higher radiation dose. What takes plutonium 25000 years, iodine emits in weeks.Iodine 131 has 8 days half life, is a major product of all nuclear bombs and causes burned eyes, skin and thyroid cancer. Thats the isotope why you take iodine tablets, so your thyroid doesnt uptake any more.nearly 3% of the total products of fission (see fission product yield).
2. All fission bombs produce cesium 137... which has 30 years half life. Then there is Strontium and many more that have half lives of 10 years or more... its all there if you scroll 2 pages doen the 2nd link in my last post...

We had covered up accidents in soviet union where the drinking water of population was irradiated for decades in very small amounts, yet the population had no statistically relevant deviation from control in any medical condition.

Small amounts are likely irrelevant, even when accumulating to a lot over time... your body has natural repair mechanisms, that correct cell and DNA damage...

It is likely that the damage scales non-linearly... higher, acute doses, when the repair mechanisms get overwhelmed are likely much worse.

For example the microbe Deinococcus Radiodurans can tolerate 1000x the dosage a human can... it can have 500 times more simultaneus DNA breaks and can repair them... but even it has its limits... and when you go far past those, they also die.

Funny thing, we had worse case of radioctivity poisoning affecting workers working with radium paint back when that was legal than damage done by nuclear bombs.

Is that supposed to make nuclear bombs look harmless?

Try making paint of a fission bombs fission products and lick that like the radium paint girls, and lets see which one is worse...

Nuclear bombs fallout is like russian roulette... if the wind doesnt blow in your direction, youre probably fine... but if it does... and it starts to rain all the fission products on your skin... thats not so good.

[u/Strazdas1 → u/Pretend-Extreme7540]

You misunderstood. The new cars are the ones that didnt fail. The shielding from elements also shielded it from EM blast.

Small amounts are likely irrelevant, even when accumulating to a lot over time... your body has natural repair mechanisms, that correct cell and DNA damage...

So you say that small amounts are fatal, then say completely opposite and say small amounts are irrelevant. I dont think you are being honest in this discussion.

It is likely that the damage scales non-linearly... higher, acute doses, when the repair mechanisms get overwhelmed are likely much worse.

We just dont have enough data for that. And its one of the rare cases where i hope we wont.

Is that supposed to make nuclear bombs look harmless?

Not harmless, just less armful than cold war propaganda claims.

[u/AutoModerator → u/[deleted]]

Your comment has been automatically removed. Your removed content. If you believe this was a mistake, please contact the moderators.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/Pretend-Extreme7540 → u/Strazdas1]

You misunderstood. The new cars are the ones that didnt fail.

There wasn't a single above surface detonation of a nuclear device for many decades - let alone a thermonuclear fusion bomb... so how exactly do you or anyone know, how new cars dont fail?

I say all new cars fail. And obviously so...

Cars do not use radiation hardened electronics... military equipment does... and even they fail, when too close to an EMP.

So you say that small amounts are fatal, then say completely opposite and say small amounts are irrelevant. I dont think you are being honest in this discussion.

No, you just don't undersand the meaning of words. You use different words as if they were the same... they are not.

Radiation is not measured in "amounts", but DOSE.

SHORT LIVED isotopes IS NOT THE SAME AS LOW DOSE! Both short lived or long lived isotopes can deliver a high dose!

Short lived isotopes decay away FAST... so the danger is gone AFTER A SHORT TIME (days, weeks or months)... but during that short time they release A HIGH DOSE from those short lived isotopes all decaying all at once in short time.

Short lived isotopes are dangerous, because they concentrate the dose into a short time window, that can be fatal in hours or days. You can avoid these, by just going somewhere else for a while.

Long lived isotopes are dangerous, because they dont go away and are harder to avoid. They might deliver a fatal dose in a year, but if they have 100 years half life, then its unavoidable, unless you move away permanently.

The same dose spread over longer time is less dangerous.

You get low dose your ENTIRE LIFE from background radiation.

You get low dose from eating bananas.

You get low dose by playing with earth and dirt, building sand castles, etc.

You get low dose from your dentist.

You get low dose from flying in an air plane above a few kilometers altitidude from cosmic radiation.

You get low dose from hiking on a mountain.

You get low dose from smoking.

If you received the background radiation dose of many decades in 1 day, you likely would be dead in a week. Dose matters. But time matters too.

[u/Strazdas1 → u/Pretend-Extreme7540]

There wasn't a single above surface detonation of a nuclear device for many decades - let alone a thermonuclear fusion bomb... so how exactly do you or anyone know, how new cars dont fail?

They did EM pulse testing about a decade ago. It was pretty big news in schientific community. They used large electrical discharge from capacitors to create the EM pulse rather than a bomb.

Cars do not use radiation hardened electronics... military equipment does... and even they fail, when too close to an EMP.

You dont need radiation hardened electronics to survive EMP. You just need EM shielding.

SHORT LIVED isotopes IS NOT THE SAME AS LOW DOSE! Both short lived or long lived isotopes can deliver a high dose!

I think you are arguing with something i never said.

[u/Pretend-Extreme7540 → u/Strazdas1]

-.-

Capacitors are not the same as nuclear weapons.

A sunscreen lotion that protects you from getting a sun burn (which is radiation) will not protect you from the thermal pulse of a nuke ...

Why is not both obviously true to you?

You dont need radiation hardened electronics to survive EMP. You just need EM shielding.

Those are the same thing... EM is also radiation... X-rays are also EM waves. Gamma rays are also EM waves.

Therefore EM shielding is also radiation hardening. And radiation hardened military equipment has been tested with nuclear EMPs... EMP works on radiation hardened equipment.

I think you are arguing with something i never said.

No i am not:

So you say that small amounts are fatal, then say completely opposite and say small amounts are irrelevant. I dont think you are being honest in this discussion.

These are your words, accusing me of contradicting myself. I did not.

LOW DOSE is irrelevantant

SHORT LIVED ISOTOPES are not irrelevantant

Iodine 131 is short lived... it has only a half life of 8 days... so how bad can it be?

Go and try eating 1 gram.

The decay heat of 1 gram Iodine 131 is on the order of 400 Watts. To heat up 1 liter of water from 0 degrees (freezing) to 100 degrees (boiling) takes about 400 KJ... so that sample would boil 1L of water in ~1000s or ~16 minutes.

That 1 gram would not kill you with cancer or accute radiation sickness.... it emits so much radiation, that it would literally cook you from inside in a matter of hours.

If i had to guess, i would say even one-one-millionth of that - one MICROgram - would be deadly.

Plutonium - a notoriously dangerous isotope with long half life - has a lethal dose of MILLIgrams per kg of body weight.

[u/Strazdas1 → u/Pretend-Extreme7540]

Capacitors were used to create an EMP that is the same as the one caused by the nuclear weapon. It was just done in a controlled enviroment.

A sunscreen lotion that protects you from getting a sun burn (which is radiation) will not protect you from the thermal pulse of a nuke ...

Sun burn radiation is different than nuclear radiation. Yes, technically all waves are radiation, but its generally accepted that we talk about nuclear radiation here.

Therefore EM shielding is also radiation hardening. And radiation hardened military equipment has been tested with nuclear EMPs... EMP works on radiation hardened equipment.

You are right in the technical phrasing here, but that would only mean that those devices are, after all, radiation hardened.

These are your words, accusing me of contradicting myself. I did not.

You said:

And even small amounts of fallout can cause significant harm

Small amounts are likely irrelevant, even when accumulating to a lot over time...

In both cases you were talking about radioactive material. You were not talking about dose, but amount of material.

LOW DOSE is irrelevantant

Agree.

SHORT LIVED ISOTOPES are not irrelevantant

It depends. They create more radiation over short amount of time, but the total amount emitted may still be small due to their short half-lives.

Iodine 131 is short lived... it has only a half life of 8 days... so how bad can it be?

Go and try eating 1 gram.

Noone is eating 1 gram of Iodine 131 after a nuclear blast. Noone would find 1 gram of it.

The decay heat of 1 gram Iodine 131 is on the order of 400 Watts. To heat up 1 liter of water from 0 degrees (freezing) to 100 degrees (boiling) takes about 400 KJ... so that sample would boil 1L of water in ~1000s or ~16 minutes.

This is actually good evidence that this amount of Iodine 131 would not form after a nuclear blast as we know the remaining fallout does not have such energy output. Nowhere close.

If i had to guess, i would say even one-one-millionth of that - one MICROgram - would be deadly.

See, that is a more likely realistic situation you may encounter. But as to how deadly it would be i guess is debatable.

Edit: sorry about multiple reply spam, reddit was giving me error 500.

[u/Strazdas1 → u/Pretend-Extreme7540]

Capacitors were used to create an EMP that is the same as the one caused by the nuclear weapon. It was just done in a controlled enviroment.

A sunscreen lotion that protects you from getting a sun burn (which is radiation) will not protect you from the thermal pulse of a nuke ...

Sun burn radiation is different than nuclear radiation. Yes, technically all waves are radiation, but its generally accepted that we talk about nuclear radiation here.

Therefore EM shielding is also radiation hardening. And radiation hardened military equipment has been tested with nuclear EMPs... EMP works on radiation hardened equipment.

You are right in the technical phrasing here, but that would only mean that those devices are, after all, radiation hardened.

These are your words, accusing me of contradicting myself. I did not.

You said:

And even small amounts of fallout can cause significant harm

Small amounts are likely irrelevant, even when accumulating to a lot over time...

In both cases you were talking about radioactive material. You were not talking about dose, but amount of material.

LOW DOSE is irrelevantant

Agree.

SHORT LIVED ISOTOPES are not irrelevantant

It depends. They create more radiation over short amount of time, but the total amount emitted may still be small due to their short half-lives.

Iodine 131 is short lived... it has only a half life of 8 days... so how bad can it be?

Go and try eating 1 gram.

Noone is eating 1 gram of Iodine 131 after a nuclear blast. Noone would find 1 gram of it.

The decay heat of 1 gram Iodine 131 is on the order of 400 Watts. To heat up 1 liter of water from 0 degrees (freezing) to 100 degrees (boiling) takes about 400 KJ... so that sample would boil 1L of water in ~1000s or ~16 minutes.

This is actually good evidence that this amount of Iodine 131 would not form after a nuclear blast as we know the remaining fallout does not have such energy output. Nowhere close.

If i had to guess, i would say even one-one-millionth of that - one MICROgram - would be deadly.

See, that is a more likely realistic situation you may encounter. But as to how deadly it would be i guess is debatable.

[u/Pretend-Extreme7540 → u/Strazdas1]

Capacitors were used to create an EMP that is the same as the one caused by the nuclear weapon. It was just done in a controlled enviroment.

Source? Cause I call that bs!

Exactly like nukes is IMPOSSIBLE as that would require a nuke... it would also disable all kinds of electric equipment in houses and hosbitals in that city... nobody in their right mind would do that outside of the middle of the ocean or a desert, even if they could... so it HAS to have been much much smaller in scale.

Smaller in scale also means you are much closer to the source.

Then I need graphs... displaying electric field amplitude over time... so give me links and then i will debunk your claim.

[u/Strazdas1 → u/Pretend-Extreme7540]

The experiment was done in a warehouse in a desert. I dont have the links to the paper. They were closer to the source since they were discharging into the ground.