Are you still living in Oak Ridge?

Nuclear Physics Third Reich

unread,
Jan 16, 2004, 9:43:01 PM1 / 16/04
Sign in to reply to author
You do not have permission to delete messages in this group
Sign in to report message as abuse
Either email addresses are anonymous for this group or you need the view member email addresses permission to view the original message
Hello

I have a question, maybe someone has an explanation. In
a publication that Diebner also contributed to is in response to
the announcement that an A-bomb had been dropped in Japan triggered the reaction
described by the German physicists:

Quote:

"The English radio knows that there is an atomic bomb ... Japan ...
was thrown off ... "

Heisenberg (literally!) Then definitely represents the
View: "Maybe they have a new atomic explosive
Hydrogen or oxygen "...

whereupon Harteck immediately calculates how much higher the explosiveness (in
In contrast to conventional) would be the highest, namely 10 times.

What kind of explosive is that supposed to be?

Harry

unread,
Jan 16, 2004 at 10:03:29 PM1 / 16/04
Sign in to reply to author
You do not have permission to delete messages in this group
Sign in to report message as abuse
Either email addresses are anonymous for this group or you need the view member email addresses permission to view the original message
On Fri, Jan 16 2004 19:43:01 +0100, Harry
wrote:

A purely speculative explosive.
The maximum possible chemical energy turnover
can't deliver much more .....
(Chemistry is the physics of the electron shell)

w.

unread,
Jan 17, 2004, 1:13:31 PM1 / 17/04
Sign in to reply to author
You do not have permission to delete messages in this group
Sign in to report message as abuse
Either email addresses are anonymous for this group or you need the view member email addresses permission to view the original message
The atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were released in early August 1945
thrown off when there was no longer a 'Third Reich'.

Winfried Büchsenschütz

unread,
Jan 17, 2004, 7:34:57 PM1 / 17/04
Sign in to reply to author
You do not have permission to delete messages in this group
Sign in to report message as abuse
Either email addresses are anonymous for this group or you need the view member email addresses permission to view the original message
w-buechs ... @ web.de (Winfried Buechsenschuetz) wrote:

> discarded when there was no longer a 'Third Reich'.

Um, where do I scrub the opposite?

What I don't understand is; If you take it to be one
speculative explosives traded, how can I be explosive
calculate if I don't know how it works?

That is not understandable what was said there, and SO from that
hollow belly out that will not have been spoken either.
Strange.

unread,
Jan 17, 2004 at 8:01:35 PM 1/17/04
Sign in to reply to author
You do not have permission to delete messages in this group
Sign in to report message as abuse
Either email addresses are anonymous for this group or you need the view member email addresses permission to view the original message
Harry wrote:
>
> w-buechs ... @ web.de (Winfried Buechsenschuetz) wrote:
> >
>> discarded when there was no longer a 'Third Reich'.
>
> Um, where do I scrub the opposite?

Implicit in the subject. If you post with your full name,
is more likely to be discussed meaningfully with you. Do you read your email address?

Michael Dahms

unread,
Jan 17, 2004 at 8:19:41 PM1 / 17/04
Sign in to reply to author
You do not have permission to delete messages in this group
Sign in to report message as abuse
Either email addresses are anonymous for this group or you need the view member email addresses permission to view the original message
Hello,

Harry wrote:

>> thrown off when there was no longer a 'Third Reich'.
>
> Um, where do I scrub the opposite?

I think I understand At the time the A-bomb was dropped
some German scientists were in England
'housed' (she was held captive, but
nevertheless they lived in very nice circumstances). One wanted
know what they know, so read them under and
stuffed the booth full of eavesdropping devices. From this like this
Statement originate. And the statement is particularly relevant
regarding the question of whether the Germans had an A-bomb
can build or not. Precisely this statement shows that the
Germans probably assumed that an atomic bomb was technical
not possible. That's the interesting thing about the story.

> What I don't understand is; If you take it to be one
> Traded speculative explosives, how can I get explosive
> calculate if I don't know how it works?

Just take hydrogen and oxygen and imagine you
the two things could suddenly turn into a reaction
bring. That is the speculative, because it is unclear how to do it
that should technically realize. But the thing is: at
Any explosives are supplied with the energy before the reaction
First of all, molecules are broken open and that costs energy. Now
one can very well calculate what explosive power one has
H2 / O2 reaction would have if one could do it and
has also separated the molecules beforehand,
thus making free atoms react. This results in a
released energy and from it a maximum explosive force per
Kilograms of material. Why do you do that with hydrogen?
and oxygen calculates, I don't know. I could imagine
that there are other reactions that produce even more energy per mass
deliver, I am thinking of fluorine, for example. But at least you can
so the maximum explosive force of a chemical reaction
probably determine without worrying about the technical
To make realization.

CU roller blind
--
A new Sig presence will be created here shortly.

unread,
Jan 17, 2004 at 10:36:07 PM 1/17/04
Sign in to reply to author
You do not have permission to delete messages in this group
Sign in to report message as abuse
Either email addresses are anonymous for this group or you need the view member email addresses permission to view the original message
Harry wrote:

My email address ... the problem is that it's not just you
but also every stupid porn spam bot.

Of course we knew that an A bomb was feasible. Amongst other things
in said publication by bagge / iebner there is, for example, the
Reproduction of a discussion regarding atomic technology:

"... that makes a clear decision about it under all circumstances
must be whether energy generation on a technical scale
is actually possible or not. Also be a negative answer
of the utmost importance and would mean at least as much that it
then even the enemies are not possible for us with new types of weapons
surprise ... ". And also the one awakened by the Farm Hall protocols
Impression that the Germans had nothing about them at the beginning of the war
Feasibility of an atomic bomb is known in this publication,
to which Diebner also contributed in an almost angry manner:

Novel weapons should be clear ...

unread,
Jan 17, 2004 10:55:50 PM 1/17/04
Sign in to reply to author
You do not have permission to delete messages in this group
Sign in to report message as abuse
Either email addresses are anonymous for this group or you need the view member email addresses permission to view the original message
Ralf Kusmierz wrote:
>
>
> I don't know this story well enough to know if it's that
> actually shows. It would also depend very precisely on which terms
> were used, or when the word 'atomic bomb' came into use - that can
> only after 1945, because the Manhattan Project, at least for the
> The public has been successfully kept secret.


http://www.einbeck1.de/JONASTAL/98_Fracht/98_fragen.html

There are sources that are a high-tech forge in the Jonastal
suspect, including cyclotron, etc., which would cover all myths (
Tesla, Philadelphia Experimant, flying disks, ICBM, etc.)

Matthias

unread,
Jan 18, 2004 1:31:10 AM1 / 18/04