Ken wrote in message <371BA51F.F832DB7C@pacbell.net>...
>
>  I don't know about that but it seems to me that as an American tax
>payer I am sure that at least some portion of my earnings have gone
>towards the development and deployment of nuclear weaponry. I hate to
>see my hard earned money go to waste and think we should go nuke the
>_ell out of something just so they don't go to waste. You know
>something like the dark side of the moon or one of the lesser planets
>would do it for me. I'm easily pleased an this would impress the _ell
>out of me. Maybe a year 2000 multi national super nuclear fireworks
>extravaganza compliments of the US military in cooperation with, and
>aided by, the former Soviet Union, India, France and China's nuclear
>weapons arsonals.
>


Maybe the Y2K bug will initiate something interesting ;)

>
> I am very impressed with the improvements you have made to the source
>I posted. About the only thing I believe you missed is a circular shock
>wave at ground level similar to the aerial version you have depicted.
>I seem to recall that the shock wave is much flatter than the one above
>and it's lateral travel is well in advance of the terrestrial debris
>cloud at the base of the detonation. I have seen a similar effect when
>one of the 2000lb bombs, dropped from a B-52 on Iraq during the gulf war,
>detonates. The shock wave is quite visible and you can clearly see a
>visible atmospheric distortion as it spreads laterally out from the
>point of impact.
>


Not that I'm a bomb expert or anything, but I think the shock wave should be
roughly spherical. A thin-walled sphere with a slightly higher IOR might do
the trick...

Margus

Post a reply to this message