#153549 - 08/09/1102:56 PMRe: Swede Tries to Build Nuke Reactor at Home.
[Re: billstephenson]
Trailrunner
member
Registered: 01/05/02
Posts: 1835
Loc: Los Angeles
I'm working on a nuclear powered camp stove at the moment but the portable concrete containment vessel is too bulky. I also built a GPS powered by a modified lawnmower engine but it was too heavy. Perhaps my treadmill powered flashlight will be a hit.
_________________________ If you only travel on sunny days you will never reach your destination.*
* May not apply at certain latitudes in Canada and elsewhere.
#153551 - 08/09/1103:16 PMRe: Swede Tries to Build Nuke Reactor at Home.
[Re: Trailrunner]
billstephenson Moderator
Registered: 02/07/07
Posts: 3917
Loc: Ozark Mountains in SW Missouri
Are you a Swede?
I grew up with Swedes. You couldn't spit without hitting at least one Anderson, Larson, Carlson, etc. There were lingonberry syrup pancakes and Jugs of Grogg everywhere
#153824 - 08/18/1106:59 PMRe: Swede Tries to Build Nuke Reactor at Home.
[Re: billstephenson]
TomD Moderator
Registered: 10/30/03
Posts: 4963
Loc: Marina del Rey,CA
Not as far-fetched an idea as you might think. I saw a story last night on The Rachel Maddow Show about a guy who built a replica of Little Boy, the bomb dropped on Hiroshima. Apparently there is a documentary about him called "Atomic Trucker," since that's what this guy does. One of the men who worked on the actual bomb was amazed at what the guy had done, since its design is still a secret.
One thing the US tries hard to do is keep nuclear material out of the hands of terrorists, although the Tea Party members in Congress are trying to cut most of the funding for the agency that does this. It's called the National Nuclear Security Agency. http://nnsa.energy.gov/
Cutting this agency's budget is another really stupid right wing idea.
_________________________
Don't get me started, you know how I get.
#153906 - 08/21/1109:53 PMRe: Swede Tries to Build Nuke Reactor at Home.
[Re: TomD]
billstephenson Moderator
Registered: 02/07/07
Posts: 3917
Loc: Ozark Mountains in SW Missouri
I love to tinker with stuff, but I don't see the attraction of building a homemade nuke reactor. I've always been more attracted to steam engines, must be hereditary
I suspect the guy that was trying to build the replica of Little Boy might have had friends in Russia
Scary stuff though, I just read this today and I don't really trust GE to keep the lid on it. They'd license the rights to anyone with a billion bucks, and since they are now a "Global Corporation" they have no good reason to worry about how or where it's used, that's not really their concern since it has nothing to do with profits.
#153978 - 08/24/1103:20 PMRe: Swede Tries to Build Nuke Reactor at Home.
[Re: TomD]
billstephenson Moderator
Registered: 02/07/07
Posts: 3917
Loc: Ozark Mountains in SW Missouri
Well, long ago I read up on it a bit, and the theory and simple plans are not that hard to understand, and even building one, the mechanics don't look so difficult. The hard part would be getting the last several stages of fuel. Especially that last one. I don't think I'd want to mess with that stuff no matter how much they paid me. Their ain't no suit thick enough for that
But I have to read up on that story. Could have been another Swede, you've really piqued my interest now!
#154071 - 08/27/1104:13 PMRe: Swede Tries to Build Nuke Reactor at Home.
[Re: Trailrunner]
Jimshaw
member
Registered: 10/22/03
Posts: 3983
Loc: Bend, Oregon
What a whuss live life - skip the containment vessel
When I was a kid I built a nuclear reactor at home, trouble, or maybe an advantage thinking back on it, was that it used paper towel tubes for fuel rods...
Of course we did have a real linear accelerator buried in my friends back yard... times were 1966 Jim
_________________________
These are my own opinions based on wisdom earned through many wrong decisions. Your mileage may vary.
#154788 - 09/18/1112:13 AMRe: Swede Tries to Build Nuke Reactor at Home.
[Re: midnightsun03]
Jimshaw
member
Registered: 10/22/03
Posts: 3983
Loc: Bend, Oregon
I've known some navy engine guys. They sleep next to the nuke. Oh sure theres shielding, but nukes are transmuting matter and energy and often as pure energy "appears", it is in an "exotic form" that lasts but an instant - just long enough to go through a guy sleeping next to the nuke, before it changes into something more normal. Anyway those guys are a bit more toasted than the average "bubble head". No I imagine he wasn't allowed near any material, but he may have guarded it. Its hard to imagine that he did what he did and survived very long. However imagine if he had the intent of creating a "fission device" and instead of making a small beam of neutrons, he had put the material in the middle of a cleverly layered "onion", he could have a much larger "hotter" operation than he did, by maybe a hundred or thousand fold. His intent was to make a breader reactor, and he did - he had uranium absorbing slow neutrons and radiating light and other things and transmuting into other isotopes and elements, perhaps some plutonium and he was about to cross a line with refined radiun when caught, but the point is that he had home enriched fissionable material. It sounds pretty easy to me, however I am skipping all details so the homeland security guys don't come speak at me. The critical point (ha ha pun intended) is that a simple home made breader reactor could work at all. Obtaining raw materials and changing their form into weapons grade material is a daunting process, but then there is a tremendous amount of engineering involved in making a nuke of any kind from that material, but and this is a very big butt we can only wonder what the super computers simulating nuke designs have to say about how the laws of physics change near the "edges" like at 10 million atmospheres of pressure and a billion degrees. Perhaps a pin head sized material or even smaller, perhaps very small bits of material could "fuse" under enough pressure. I mean if you get one electron and one proton to collapse into a netron and a neutrino and a burst of energy, then you are transmuting matter into energy, and one gram of matter transmuted into energy could put the empire state building in orbit. Jim
_________________________
These are my own opinions based on wisdom earned through many wrong decisions. Your mileage may vary.
"Various experiments are being carried out in deep mines in Yorkshire, on the Fermi Space Telescope, and in the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) in Switzerland to try and detect these elusive particles, or indirect evidence of their effects.
So far, none of these experiments has conclusively spotted them.
Scientists working on the problem have recently expressed dismay at the universally negative results coming from the LHC, and this has led some to consider that the standard model may be wrong. ...
... The LHC is designed to recreate the conditions one millionth of a second after the Big Bang. If WDM is the dominant dark matter, however, the facility will not see a trace of the particles."
"Dang! Looks like we built the wrong kind of machine."
#154899 - 09/20/1106:00 PMRe: Swede Tries to Build Nuke Reactor at Home.
[Re: billstephenson]
Jimshaw
member
Registered: 10/22/03
Posts: 3983
Loc: Bend, Oregon
lots of problems with the dark matter idea. Along with the multiple universe concept, these ideas are sort of like religion - ways to fill in the unknowns that sound more reasonable and sellable than "DUH". Problem is we have only the materials that we can detect and work with, that we call "real", to use to build a machine to detect something that we cannot detect and may not exist, or may be unmeasurable for some other reason, like the problems in the Michaelson Morely experiment. That is - the dimensionality of the Universe contracts in the direction of motion. ho hum how about warm left over particles? Do you know the biggest question of all? Why are all of each kind of particle absolutely identical. I mean the rules of universal distribution say that when the fertilizer hits the fan, 1) it is never evenly distributed, and 2) the pieces are never the same size. So if everything did suddenly pop out as they say "void of form" and condensed, why did they all condense into identical pieces? Whay do all electrons and protons weigh the same (have the same mass), the same spin, etc etc as every other trillion trillion trillion of them no matter how old they are or how far they've traveled? Why aren't some chunks larger? Jim
_________________________
These are my own opinions based on wisdom earned through many wrong decisions. Your mileage may vary.
Our long-time Sponsor, BackcountryGear.com - The leading source for ultralite/lightweight outdoor gear:
Affiliate Disclaimer: This forum is an affiliate of BackcountryGear.com, Amazon.com, R.E.I. and others. The product links herein are linked to their sites. If you follow these links to make a purchase, we may get a small commission. This is our only source of support for these forums. Thanks.!