Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Hardware Technology

Wikileaks Releases Early Atomic Bomb Diagram 429

An anonymous reader writes "Wikileaks has released a diagram of the first atomic weapon, as used in the Trinity test and subsequently exploded over the Japanese city of Nagasaki, together with an extremely interesting scientific analysis. Wikileaks has not been able to fault the document or find reference to it elsewhere. Given the high quality of other Wikileaks submissions, the document may be what it purports to be, or it may be a sophisticated intelligence agency fraud, designed to mislead the atomic weapons development programs of countries like Iran. The neutron initiator is particularly novel. 'When polonium is crushed onto beryllium by explosion, reaction occurs between polonium alpha emissions and beryllium leading to Carbon-12 & 1 neutron. This, in practice, would lead to a predictable neutron flux, sufficient to set off device.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Wikileaks Releases Early Atomic Bomb Diagram

Comments Filter:
  • by Lonewolf666 ( 259450 ) on Sunday March 16, 2008 @10:59AM (#22765264)
    "When polonium is crushed onto beryllium by explosion, reaction occurs between polonium alpha emissions and beryllium leading to Carbon-12 & 1 neutron. This, in practice, would lead to a predictable neutron flux, sufficient to set off device."
    Wikipedia gives the half-life of the most commonly used Polonium isotope with about 138 days:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polonium [wikipedia.org]
    This may be fine for a bomb that is to be used shortly after manufacture, but not for a warhead that is supposed to sit in a missile silo for years. Of course, the USA wanted to use the bomb on Japan, so long-term storagewas not an issue ;-)
  • Novel? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by deglr6328 ( 150198 ) on Sunday March 16, 2008 @11:00AM (#22765270)
    What exactly is so "novel" about the description of the neutron initiator? This design of the "urchin" has been known for decades and hasn't been novel since the 50's. No one even uses them anymore due to unpredictability, all implosion weapons use pulsed neutron generators based on fusion of deuterium with tritium. If anything, the document merely serves to confirm that we've been right about our ideas on how the thing originally worked.
  • by OzPeter ( 195038 ) on Sunday March 16, 2008 @11:01AM (#22765272)
    Back in the mid 70's, Electronics Australia (hobbyist HAM radio and electronics magazine - now defunct) did a mock project that showed you how to make a non-portable atomic bomb. The design was based on firing a large uranium bullet at a uranium target. The target was encased with several tonnes of concrete in order to contain the critical mass long enough for an explosion to occur. In the article they talked about how construction of the bomb would basically kill the workers, which at the time seemed stupid, but in these days of suicide bombers seems reasonable.
  • by gnick ( 1211984 ) on Sunday March 16, 2008 @11:03AM (#22765286) Homepage

    Yeah, and you'd think a country like Iran would have other ways to get this kind of information. Like, I dunno, stealing it from Pakistan.
    Yes, most of the information is public domain [nuclearweaponarchive.org] at this point. Although, I've never seen a sketch with specific weights in the wild before. Those you would need to "steal" from Dr. Khan [wikipedia.org].
  • Re:Novel? (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 16, 2008 @11:18AM (#22765382)
    Mod up. This poster is right. Alphas + beryllium = neutrons is about the most basic thing in nuclear physics. It is why neutron radiation used to be called "beryllium radiation". There is nothing particularly novel about it.
  • by Animats ( 122034 ) on Sunday March 16, 2008 @11:23AM (#22765426) Homepage

    This isn't complete. It omits an important detail that has never appeared in US open publications but has appeared in some materials from the former USSR.

    What this looks like is close to what Klaus Fuchs gave to the Russians when he was spying at Los Alamos. A similar rough sketch was published decades ago, but not one with dimensions.

  • by mi ( 197448 ) <slashdot-2017q4@virtual-estates.net> on Sunday March 16, 2008 @11:24AM (#22765436) Homepage Journal

    Wikileaks has released a diagram of the first atomic weapon, as used in the Trinity test and subsequently exploded over the Japanese city of Nagasaki, together with an extremely interesting scientific analysis.

    Thank you for contributing to nuclear weapons proliferation... Looks like you did...

    Wikileaks has not been able to fault the document or find reference to it elsewhere.

    Hopefully, there is, indeed, a fault in there somewhere, which Wikileaks were either sincerely unable to find or are simply lying about having missed.

    These — along with their recent run-in with the judge — raises important questions, however. Are there secret documents in existence, that WikiLeaks would refuse to make available if given?

    I mean, if it is not an ancient (though just as deadly) nuclear bomb design, but something more recent? How about plans for America's invasion of Iran or North Korea? What about the plans for our defense of Taiwan — there must be some uncomfortable answers to ugly questions in there...

    What about civil government? A police-department's plans for riot-prevention, or a coordinated anti-drug raid?

    What about "personal" secrets? How about a politician's diary? How about that of a CEO of a big corporation — he may have recorded private thoughts in there, such as whether his secretary is genuinely more affectionate to him, than his wife?

    When does "strong transparency" turn into treason, obstructing justice, or invasion of privacy?

  • Re:Oooookay then.... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by mi ( 197448 ) <slashdot-2017q4@virtual-estates.net> on Sunday March 16, 2008 @11:33AM (#22765480) Homepage Journal

    You're going to have trouble sneaking this monstrosity, say, through the Holland tunnel into NYC.

    I don't need to transport it anywhere. A "Fat Man" exploding in a house bought for the purpose years ago anywhere in Brooklyn or Jersey City will still be devastating to New York... Especially, if you scale the project and blow up several of these in different locales.

  • Re:No, I agree. (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Mr. Slippery ( 47854 ) <tms&infamous,net> on Sunday March 16, 2008 @11:40AM (#22765512) Homepage

    I understand that "information wants to be free" and that "censorship is bad", but I think we need to recognize that there is a limit to the healthy release of this sort of information.

    How can we have any meaningful discussion on arms control if we don't know how difficult or easy it is to build nuclear weapons?

    Iran and North Korea already know this stuff. It's to our benefit to stop pretending that engineering knowledge can be kept away from the "bad guys", and get everything out in the open.

  • by peterxyz ( 315132 ) on Sunday March 16, 2008 @11:48AM (#22765554) Homepage
    for all of those complaining about the publication of this, you're about 30 years behind the times.
    In a high-profile First Ammendment case Howard Morland and the Progressive tried to publish Fusion-bomb (aka "Hydrogen bomb") design details in 1979. The government eventually dropped its case

    Here's the book; http://www.amazon.com/Secret-That-Exploded-Howard-Morland/dp/0394512979 [amazon.com]
    and a background artcile by Howard on his deductions and something of the legal case http://www.fas.org/sgp/eprint/cardozo.html [fas.org]

    oh yeah - even Greenpeace seem to have pretty pictures - wouldn't trust those guys to assemble one though http://archive.greenpeace.org/comms/nukes/fig05.gif [greenpeace.org]

    peter xyz

  • by TheHawke ( 237817 ) <rchapin.stx@rr@com> on Sunday March 16, 2008 @12:10PM (#22765676)
    Penny's design was a copycat from the Teller/Oppenheimer implosion design. In reality there was no way possible to improve upon perfection with the materials they had at the time. When the 50's rolled around, they simply took the basic sphere design and added more heavy metals and "tampers", added a cyclotron called the "zipper" and turned it into a 3 stage Hydrogen or "Super" device. It took awhile though.
  • by multisync ( 218450 ) on Sunday March 16, 2008 @12:19PM (#22765742) Journal

    an international agreement that any government to engage in first use of WMD becomes the enemy of the world and loses its sovereignty.


    How would you ensure no one country becomes sufficiently powerful to be able to dominate all competitors combined, as happens in the corporate world?
  • by gnurfed ( 1051140 ) on Sunday March 16, 2008 @12:36PM (#22765838)

    When does "strong transparency" turn into treason, obstructing justice, or invasion of privacy?

    That would depend on (1) the primary source of the information and (2) who publishes it. I don't think most 'patriotic' Chinese citizens would consider publishing the U.S. defence plans for Taiwan 'treason'. When it comes to classified material related to national security, the primary source is in most circumstances committing an illegal act. If it's treason... Well that probably depends on what is uncovered - if it shows that a government is breaking national laws it can be argued that NOT trying to make it known would amount to 'treason'.

    Making an, relatively speaking, ancient design for an atomic bomb public is hardly something worth getting upset about, especially since any modern (and reasonably skilled) nuclear physicist could make a far better job.

  • Re:Oooookay then.... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by itsdapead ( 734413 ) on Sunday March 16, 2008 @12:54PM (#22765932)

    A "Fat Man" exploding in a house bought for the purpose years ago anywhere in Brooklyn or Jersey City will still be devastating to New York...

    ...and all that needs is a single waffer-thin mint :-)

    Seriously, though - methinks that a terrorist with the brains and resources to acquire or build a nuke would also have the brains to work out that mailing packets of green-dyed talcum powder to minor government officials (or leaving some black boxes with flashing LEDs scattered around) was a far more effective way of causing panic, disruption and economic damage.

    Even for a country, posessing one bomb is simply going to give the USA an excuse to go mediaeval on your ass (and those guys can make a big mess of your capital city without splitting a single nucleus). The serious issue with "rogue states" is if/when they start building the infrastructure to mass produce enough efficient, modern weapons to play hardball.

  • by mentaldrano ( 674767 ) on Sunday March 16, 2008 @12:59PM (#22765972)
    There were problems with more than just storage - after WWII was over, nearly all the nuclear physicists and engineers who had built these bombs (BY HAND) left to return to universities. This left the US nuclear stockpile at a surprising level: ZERO. We literally had no reserve and no capacity to build any more - the huge fear was that the Russians would find out about this and invade western Europe before we could build any more bombs.

    The Manhattan project gets all the press for producing the first bombs, but far more important for long term stability was the engineering / manufacturability effort that came later. Notably, the next generation of bombs did not use polonium detonators, due to the short half-life.
  • by Toonol ( 1057698 ) on Sunday March 16, 2008 @01:52PM (#22766368)
    The Truman administration's refusal to abandon nuclear weapons was what started the Cold War. They instead choose to keep the weapons to threaten Russia. In short, United States foreign and nuclear policy has been immature and shortsighted, driven by domestic politics.

    Truman starting the cold war was the price to pay for avoiding a hot war. The cold war was the best choice, when the alternative was another major war in Europe.

    And, strangely, our "immature and shortsighted" foreign policy pretty much worked. We won the cold war with Russia.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 16, 2008 @01:53PM (#22766380)
    It is well known that the polonium initiators were manufactured in Dayton, OH at a little known branch of the Manhattan Project run by Monsanto.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dayton_Project [wikipedia.org]
  • by perlchild ( 582235 ) on Sunday March 16, 2008 @02:12PM (#22766502)
    I think the US should work on getting rid of the bomb, if they think the weapons are so destabilising, I don't see the current US regime as particulaly stability-inducing either. Letting just the biggest, most dangerous fish have the bigger weapons might be good for their capacity to beat the little fish into submission, but does not mean the fish as a whole are necessarily better off, quite the opposite. If anything, how destabilising and dangerous the weapons are is that even if you hit the largest countries in the world, you can't guarantee you'll control the fallout enough to keep it from hitting other countries. Otherwise, it would be a great weapon to get some of those big bullies off your back.
  • Re:Oooookay then.... (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Wulfstan ( 180404 ) on Sunday March 16, 2008 @05:47PM (#22767830)
    Not trying to write a new Godwin's law - my point is that we as a society have decided that child pornography is so distastefully abhorrent that it is worth suspending free speech/expression in order to stamp it out. I don't believe that this is the only example of information which ought to be kept locked away, I do believe that we should be extremely (extraordinarily!) careful in what we decide to suppress, but I would have thought that design details for nuclear weaponry would fit into this category.

    It's not information I don't like - hey, who isn't interested in design details for a powerful piece of technology - but maybe, just maybe, I shouldn't be given the opportunity to scratch this particular itch.

    Hope that make sense.
  • by shaitand ( 626655 ) on Sunday March 16, 2008 @05:53PM (#22767870) Journal
    Give me a break, the US does every dirty trick in the book. Just because our cruelty is more subtle and hidden behind flowery prose does not make the US 'the good guys'.

    The US violates virtually every treaty established for the good of mankind. They violate the geneva convention, they continue to build and maintain a nuclear arsenal, they are developing and deploying space weapons, they are developing and utilizing chemical weapons, they ignore unfavorable WTO rulings, they are committing wars of aggression throughout the world in response to a simple police matter.

    Further the US has rounded up its own people during world war II, forced them into concentration camps and imposed forced sterilization. The US employs a public education system that creates a fabricated version of US history to teach to its youth to instill a false sense of patriotism. Those same impressionable young minds are forced to swear allegiance to their central government.

    Lets see, spying on citizens. Requiring 'permits' to openly protest. A well established youth 'education' program. Centralized power. Incarceration without trial. The great atrocities of Nazi Germany really had nothing to do with Jews you know.

    Notice I do not include myself as part of the US. I may have been born within its borders and I certainly consider myself part of the PEOPLE but I want no part in the festering evil that is the government in this nation. I do not claim it, I do not recognize its right to exert authority over me by force of arms, and I don't want it.

  • by epine ( 68316 ) on Sunday March 16, 2008 @11:42PM (#22770046)

    The nuclear cat is out of the bag, and as long as the US has a single nuke, they have no place to lecture others about non-proliferation.

    This is dangerous reasoning.

    Reasoning? LMAO! Hey buddy, pass me that copy there of Sun Tsu's "The Art of Unilateral Disarmament".

    Seriously, how does a person make it into their adult years spouting this kind of sentiment?

    The cat is out of the bag. Polarizing, fatalistic, and brinkmanship rolled into a pithy pronouncement of life's harsh realities for the benefit of a gaggle of children crying over spilled milk. Yes, daddy, you know best.

    What exactly does that expression mean, anyway? There are dozens of performance parameters on the construction and maintenance of a nuclear stockpile, a base of knowledge where the Americans retain many profound advantages, obtained at staggering costs. I'd be surprised if "the bag" doesn't have a hundred cats, each with a billion dollar pedigree.

    One could equally argue that three-headed human fetuses are also "out of the bag" concerning recent advanced in genomics. No point trying to stop the proliferation of human embryo experimentation. It's "out of the bag, dude."

    as long as the US has a single nuke

    Sounds best in the voice of the bratty kid who has been water bombing the girls from a second story school window when the rest of his balloons are confiscated. "But Bobby still has balloons! You didn't take his balloons away!" Yeah, we're hoping Bobby doesn't prove to be quite as stupid in the choices he makes, but if it comes to that, he'll soon suffer the same fate.

    The aspect of human nature that I've become most interested in lately is how the taunts and provocations of the grade-two school yard continue to echo in the corridors of power and public opinion in adult society.

    It's amazing to me the level of discourse from the creationists that holds sway in many quarters. Few people go "haha, that's what I used to think and how I used to behave back when I was nine years old". The more one invokes school yard tauntings, the more implicitly powerful it seems to become. We somehow grow out of the "baby under the cabbage leaf", but don't grow out of equally infantile schoolyard rhetoric.

    Why not? "Cat out of the bag" in a discussion of international nuclear non-proliferation is about as useful as "babies come from storks" in a discussion of global population growth.

    In practical terms, I don't think the Americans can walk away from their existing nuclear stockpile any easier than a twenty-five year old woman can tell her ten year old daughter "You know what, I've realized it was a mistake to get pregnant out of wedlock at age 15. Please step into the vaporizer booth so I can clean the slate."

    It would hardly be hypocrisy for such a woman to say "I made a choice that put me on this path through life and I've managed to live with it, but it's not easy, and I think the world would soon go to hell in a hand-basket if everyone went down the same path I've followed, with much help from everyone around who made better life choices."

    I've often heard the statement made that no one should become president who hasn't suffered a major life setback. It's never been established that the best leadership comes from the untarnished.

    Unfortunately, the Americans made a catastrophic blunder in positioning themselves as a sober steward of a dangerous and difficult responsibility: they started a major war over a false cause, and then lied about the fact that it matters.

    The message seems to have been lost among the majority of the American electorate that democracy is a responsibility and a burden, not an entitlement. I take the perspective that America's consumerist culture is responsible for undermining what was once America's great political achievement.

    It is possible that being bombarded with 10,000 ad impressions per year from the age where our wrinkly little thumb f

It is easier to write an incorrect program than understand a correct one.

Working...