North Korea: Nukes or No Nukes?
Yesterday, the North Koreans claimed to have tested an underground nuclear device. Maybe they did, and maybe they didn't. I have some very serious doubts about their claim.
Who am I to doubt? Let me explain. For fourteen years I worked with the Air Force agency whose primary mission was to detect nuclear explosions underground, underwater, in space, in the atmosphere, basically--anywhere. We employed a great many techniques and sensors to do this, and while nothing is foolproof, I think we had a pretty good handle on things. My speciality was space-borne sensors for atmostpheric and space detection, but in my last four years in the AF, I came to work with a wide variety of technicians from all the different disciplines, and so became uniquely and intimately familiar with all of the different processes by which nuclear explosions can be detected. I also consulted with many scientists from Los Alamos National Laboratories (where the first bomb was built), Sandia National Laboratories (where most of the rest of our nuclear arsensal was built), and a wide variety of prominent national and international scientists and experts. I tell you all this not out of pride or ego, but to assure you, I know what I'm talking about.
Initial seismic data reported earth tremors in North Korea that could only come from a rather large underground explosion. This is based on the magnitude of the tremor, arrival times at varying distances and waveform of the seismogram. The waveform of an underground explosion looks quite different from that of an earthquake (which are constant and usuallly miniscule).
So we have an underground explosion of quite a large size, yet how do we know if the explosion were nuclear in nature vs. conventional (i.e. TNT or some other chemical explosives)? The best way would be to take some kind of radiation reading. Nuclear explosions give off very distinctive, charachteristic gases, effluents and particles. But the explosion was underground in a country almost no outsiders have access to, least of all U.S Military personnel, so what's left to us?
Answer: not a whole lot. So we must judge by the data we have (or have yet to collect). The report on the magnitude of the earth tremor is the most telling in this case. Yeild estimates based on ground movement (honed through years of experience with underground testing done in the US and USSR) suggest that the North Korean explosion yeilded less than a kiloton of explosive power. (A kiloton is the equivalent explosive power of 1000 tons of TNT).
This is extremely odd. For it is a curious fact that it is much easier (taking less technology, effort, money, design expertise) to build a weapon yeilding between 10 and 30 kilotons of energy than one in the subkiloton range. When the US, USSR, Great Britain and France each tested their first nuclear weapons, all fell into the 10-30 kiloton range. Yet we are told by the North Koreans they (with all their financial and technical shortcomings and problems) were able to build their VERY FIRST working device identical to one that took the US more than a decade to build after the Manhattan Project. I must say it is NOT impossible for them to have done so, only highly unlikely.
It could be another way. They dug a hole in the ground and set off 500 tons (.5 kilotons) of TNT or other chemical explosives, in order to frighten the international community, to make them believe they have nuclear weapons, and to improve their internation stature and strengthen their position in future negotiations. Does the idea of so much TNT put you off? Before the US detonated their first device in Almogordo, New Mexico in 1945, they first set off 100 tons of TNT in one explosion to set a benchmark to be used to measure the explosive power of the upcoming nuclear test. So the idea is not a new one, nor is the figure of 500 tons of TNT terrifically out of the question (500 tons=One million pounds=approximately 650,000-750,000 sticks of dynamite), even for North Korea.
So tell me, which is more likely, that the cash starved North Koreans built a moderately advanced nuclear weapon and succeded in testing it on their first attempt? Or that by ruse, they are using the tension and wariness of the world community to increase their own regional and/or world influence?
I know what I think.
Who am I to doubt? Let me explain. For fourteen years I worked with the Air Force agency whose primary mission was to detect nuclear explosions underground, underwater, in space, in the atmosphere, basically--anywhere. We employed a great many techniques and sensors to do this, and while nothing is foolproof, I think we had a pretty good handle on things. My speciality was space-borne sensors for atmostpheric and space detection, but in my last four years in the AF, I came to work with a wide variety of technicians from all the different disciplines, and so became uniquely and intimately familiar with all of the different processes by which nuclear explosions can be detected. I also consulted with many scientists from Los Alamos National Laboratories (where the first bomb was built), Sandia National Laboratories (where most of the rest of our nuclear arsensal was built), and a wide variety of prominent national and international scientists and experts. I tell you all this not out of pride or ego, but to assure you, I know what I'm talking about.
Initial seismic data reported earth tremors in North Korea that could only come from a rather large underground explosion. This is based on the magnitude of the tremor, arrival times at varying distances and waveform of the seismogram. The waveform of an underground explosion looks quite different from that of an earthquake (which are constant and usuallly miniscule).
So we have an underground explosion of quite a large size, yet how do we know if the explosion were nuclear in nature vs. conventional (i.e. TNT or some other chemical explosives)? The best way would be to take some kind of radiation reading. Nuclear explosions give off very distinctive, charachteristic gases, effluents and particles. But the explosion was underground in a country almost no outsiders have access to, least of all U.S Military personnel, so what's left to us?
Answer: not a whole lot. So we must judge by the data we have (or have yet to collect). The report on the magnitude of the earth tremor is the most telling in this case. Yeild estimates based on ground movement (honed through years of experience with underground testing done in the US and USSR) suggest that the North Korean explosion yeilded less than a kiloton of explosive power. (A kiloton is the equivalent explosive power of 1000 tons of TNT).
This is extremely odd. For it is a curious fact that it is much easier (taking less technology, effort, money, design expertise) to build a weapon yeilding between 10 and 30 kilotons of energy than one in the subkiloton range. When the US, USSR, Great Britain and France each tested their first nuclear weapons, all fell into the 10-30 kiloton range. Yet we are told by the North Koreans they (with all their financial and technical shortcomings and problems) were able to build their VERY FIRST working device identical to one that took the US more than a decade to build after the Manhattan Project. I must say it is NOT impossible for them to have done so, only highly unlikely.
It could be another way. They dug a hole in the ground and set off 500 tons (.5 kilotons) of TNT or other chemical explosives, in order to frighten the international community, to make them believe they have nuclear weapons, and to improve their internation stature and strengthen their position in future negotiations. Does the idea of so much TNT put you off? Before the US detonated their first device in Almogordo, New Mexico in 1945, they first set off 100 tons of TNT in one explosion to set a benchmark to be used to measure the explosive power of the upcoming nuclear test. So the idea is not a new one, nor is the figure of 500 tons of TNT terrifically out of the question (500 tons=One million pounds=approximately 650,000-750,000 sticks of dynamite), even for North Korea.
So tell me, which is more likely, that the cash starved North Koreans built a moderately advanced nuclear weapon and succeded in testing it on their first attempt? Or that by ruse, they are using the tension and wariness of the world community to increase their own regional and/or world influence?
I know what I think.
1 Comments:
I'm impressed. I'll take your word for it that there is considerable doubt.
However, I find it very, very interesting how different the white house treats N. Korea from Iraq.
Post a Comment
<< Home