German science progress before and during the 2nd world war

Discussion in 'Alternative Theories' started by river, Jul 22, 2014.

  1. river

    Messages:
    15,157
    sure

    but joseph is saying is that it was highly enriched uranium U235 , hence the gold lined cylinders
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,894
    Confess I cannot immediately see why gold lining would be indicative of what isotope of uranium was enclosed.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Dywyddyr Penguinaciously duckalicious. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,953
    Yeah?
    According to you he said and further in 1945 the U-234 had 560kilograms of Uranium Oxide ,in gold lined cylinders , thus implying highly enriched uraniumU235 and was captured by the U.S. (post #24).
    And that's supported by the cargo manifest he quotes on page 61.

    He does, admittedly, go on to state "Thus, the uranium oxide on board the U-234 was highly enriched uranium, and most likely, highly enriched U235" (page 61) but that's an unwarranted (and completely incorrect) assumption of his own.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. river

    Messages:
    15,157
    to your last statement , perhaps true

    BUT he ties the submarine uranium to the shortage by Oak Ridges of enriched uranium , then within a week , the output of enriched uranium by Oak Ridge , doubles ( pg. 62 )
     
  8. Dywyddyr Penguinaciously duckalicious. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,953
    Largely irrelevant.
    For one thing it was, as stated by Farrell own sources uranium oxide not enriched uranium, and for another he appears to be ignoring that by June ALL the plants were into full production (as opposed to some of the plants - it wasn't just one plant at Oak Ridge - ramping up and working bugs out).
    In other words "tying it to Oak Ridge" is very likely yet another unwarranted assumption on his part.
     
  9. river

    Messages:
    15,157
    disagree

    yet he says , pg. 58 , that ,

    " If the stocks of weapons grade uranium ca. late 1944 - early 1945 were about half of what they needed to be after 2yrs. of research and production , and if this in turn was the cause of Senator Brynes' concern , how then did the Manhattan Project acquire the large remaining amount or uranium 235 needed in the few months from March to the dropping of Little Boy bomb on Hiroshima in August , only five months away ? "
     
  10. Dywyddyr Penguinaciously duckalicious. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,953
    Of course you do.
    Because you, like him, are ignoring what I stated in the post you just quoted.
    And you are simply accepting HIS assertions (which says much about your repeated comments to others to "think for themselves and not just accept what they've read").
     
  11. river

    Messages:
    15,157
    yet your making assertions as well

    what other plants ? , to just say so means nothing
     
  12. Dywyddyr Penguinaciously duckalicious. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,953
    Beside the point.
    The actual point is that you are uncritically accepting what HE claims and disputing what everyone else says.

    Yeah because looking for yourself would mean doing something other than just reading what's handed on a plate to you in a book, wouldn't it?
    Y-12.
    S-50.
    K-25 & X-10.
     
  13. river

    Messages:
    15,157
    yeah well you had to look it up as well

    X-10 , didn't come across this plant

    but how would the Y-12 plant work , its electromagnetic , meaning it would use an enormous amount of electricity ,and they don't describe the mechanism for getting the uranium to be positive hence , operational problems and K-25 , Gaseous diffusion is very inefficient

    https://www.osti.gov/manhattan-project-history/Events/1942-1945/come_through.htm
     
  14. Dywyddyr Penguinaciously duckalicious. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,953
    And you're still missing the point: that being - I do look stuff up instead of just taking one nutcase's word for things.

    What?

    Your point being?
    There was more than plant involved in producing the stuff - that's it.
    As for "gaseous diffusion being very inefficient"... In 2008, gaseous diffusion plants in the United States and France still generated 33% of the world's enriched uranium. So, certainly not "inefficient" enough to be replaced by something else for little while, eh?
     
  15. river

    Messages:
    15,157
    sure

    electromagnetic plant is laser based , doubt they had that then

    we are discussing the year 1945 remember
     
  16. Read-Only Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,296
    Silly river (as usual), it was Japan, not Germany, that was close behind the US in developing the atomic bomb.
     
  17. river

    Messages:
    15,157
    Silly read-only

    It was the Germans that gave the Japan the tech.
     
  18. Read-Only Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,296
    Yeah, yeah - silly River as ever! Can you even spell your name without help?
     
  19. river

    Messages:
    15,157
    Anyway

    The Japanese were behind in the atomic bomb tech.
     

Share This Page