Mushroom cloud, or whatever...

Pardalis said:
Here's a thread where Truthseeker1234 can discuss his wild theory.
Click to expand...
Was the other tower still standing and burning? TS37 is challenged in research. He was talking about temp, and density. I wonder if the air at 1300 feet was less dense then the air at 50 feet.

Some one tell TS the last 500 feet down is a one of the biggest changes in pressure/density for any other 500 feet you can compare in the atmosphere.
 
Okay, repeating my question, is there anywhere else in the world a mushroom cloud that goes DOWN instead of UP?
 
boloboffin said:
Okay, repeating my question, is there anywhere else in the world a mushroom cloud that goes DOWN instead of UP?
Click to expand...

Depends on your definition.

A classical, A-bomb type mushroom cloud is due to heating effects creating a density gradient in the fluid, and does so through Rayleigh-Taylor instability. This specific mechanism requires a density difference between fluids, and is thus driven by gravity. Therefore you cannot have one that grows "down," unless you have a very strange heating profile, one that could not be created by a single explosion.

However, you can get similar shapes through simple mechanical motion. If, for instance, your explosion pushed a giant piston, moving a volume of air with the same density as the ambient air, you can get a similar shape. In this case, vortex rollup occurs through a different process called Kelvin-Helmholtz instability. In this case, you get a vortex ring because of drag on your jet of air, and not because of density or gravity at all.

The latter case is valid if you consider the defining feature of a "mushroom cloud" to be the vortex ring. There are many processes that create a vortex ring, and thus such a cloud could travel in any direction. But if you insist on the Rayleigh-Taylor mechanism, then I'm afraid it can only go up.
 
Now... I'm not an expert, but if an atomic bomb went off, even a small one, would it make a loud sound?

We'll need a scientist to answer that one.
 
David Wong said:
Now... I'm not an expert, but if an atomic bomb went off, even a small one, would it make a loud sound?
Click to expand...
The brightest of Pottsylvania's scientists have toiled untold hours to develop the next generation of silent weaponry: the Hush-A-Nuke.
 
David Wong said:
Now... I'm not an expert, but if an atomic bomb went off, even a small one, would it make a loud sound?

We'll need a scientist to answer that one.
Click to expand...
Not entirely. As others have remarked, it takes no extraordinary scientific understanding to answer in the affirmative.

However, it is correct to say that you need a scientist to answer the question with such mind-numbing detail that you wish you had never asked. That's where I come in.

Sound is a pressure wave carried in the atmosphere. Atomic explosions are among those phenomena that create an unusual kind of pressure wave, namely a shock wave. The leading edge of the blast is a shock wave, or a sudden jump in the air pressure. Shock waves can be heard after many kinds of explosions (detonations, but not deflagrations) or as sonic booms created by supersonic aircraft. I've heard numerous shock waves, both at airshows and caused by the Space Shuttle re-entering the atmosphere. They exhibit a distinctively sharp sound, one that carries over long distances, and are "loud" even from many miles away.

An atomic bomb, by virtue of its extremely powerful shockwave, creates a very loud sound indeed.

Here you will see a chart describing just how big of a pressure shock one would experience if nearby a small atomic explosion, one of 1 kiloton TNT equivalent, for various ranges of horizontal distance and explosion altitude. As you can see for yourself, a 1 kT explosion would create a shock of 1 PSI at roughly 1400 meters distance, and 7 PSI at a distance of over 400 meters.

In other words, the answer is yes. A 1 kT device would create a sound loud enough to be lethal to anyone within nearly half a klick who wasn't inside a specially prepared bunker. This should satisy virtually anyone's definition of "loud."

"No, you can't play with it, you won't enjoy it on as many levels as I do!"
 
Tell that to these guys. (You may have to speak up a bit.)

For those of you who don't like the unit PSI, but also don't like Pa, a 1 kiloton atomic blast at 400m is approximately 192 dB SPL. Pretty loud.
 
defaultdotxbe said:
beachnut said:
About Australia - down under the mushroom cloud goes down!
Click to expand...

and they spin the other way, lol
Click to expand...

Nope! :)

250px-Op_hurricane.jpg

http://content.answers.com/main/content/wp/en/thumb/6/6d/250px-Op_hurricane.jpg

Operation Hurricane, Monte Bello Islands
 
R.Mackey said:
Not entirely. As others have remarked, it takes no extraordinary scientific understanding to answer in the affirmative.

However, it is correct to say that you need a scientist to answer the question with such mind-numbing detail that you wish you had never asked. That's where I come in.
Click to expand...

Hey hey hey! I like the mind-numbing detail. However, it serves to remind me that I would rather be enrolled in a science degree...:(
 
IIRC, the Special Atomic Demolition Munition could be configured to give a yield as low as 0.05kt. This is minute compared to the city-busting warheads on an ICBM and is the smallest nuke you can get, but it's still 50 tons of TNT. By comparison, I've seen film of 10 tons of TNT being detonated for data before Trinity, and it created a giant fireball visible from miles away.
So - any nuke used would indeed be LOUD and very visible - as long as you were beyond minimum safe distance.
 
Nuclear weapons are responsible for the loudest man-made noise ever produced :)

Not to mention severe seismic activity... but who cares, nothing like that matters in Woo-Land©
 
The Doc said:
Nuclear weapons are responsible for the loudest man-made noise ever produced :)

Not to mention severe seismic activity... but who cares, nothing like that matters in Woo-Land©
Click to expand...

But remember, they're "mini-nukes." So they only make an invisible, silent explosion.
 
Unfit4Command said:
Nope, they basically don't exist other than in the imagination.
Click to expand...

Lol true.

I once had an argument with a truther about this on another forum. The evidence he provided for these "Mini-Nukes" was a picture of a Russian Suitcase nuke. I think it was around 5 Kilo tonnes lol. More than enough to decimate a rather large portion of NYC.
 
I have the perfect solution...

On 9/11 the WTC was craftily enclosed in a vacuum. This not only prevented us form hearing the sounds of explosions (as sound does not travel in a vacuum) but also explains how the buildings managed to fall at freefall speeds. It all makes sense.

-Gumboot
 
The Twin Towers were the headquarters for the Guide. They merely relocated to another planet.
 
It wasn't a mushroom cloud. It was a cauliflower cloud. Wrong food group.

(I suspect that by summer, we'll be seeing ice-cream-cone-clouds.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom