Yes, and you've written some wonderful information that will help me do a productive search. Thank you. I'm not proficient in physics nor do I care to learn it at this point in my life. But with the information you gave me, I can continue gathering facts and then let others decide.
Even with my limited knowledge of physics, everything you said makes perfect sense to me. Can you tell me why Sam Cohen thinks otherwise? If what you said is so obvious, as you seem to think, then why doesn't Mr. Cohen -- the creator of the neutron bomb -- understand basic physics? Why do he and other esteemed physicists believe there are "pure fusion" weapons small enough to fit in a lunch box and lethal enough to kill everyone within 500 or 600 yards?
Fox News is reporting that the NYPD will be using radiation sensors at the New Year's Day celebrations. Someone must be taking all this seriously, as I doubt NYPD would include this in their budget if they thought it was hogwash.
Anyway, back to Cohen...
Thank you kindly.
Can you tell me why Sam Cohen thinks otherwise? If what you said is so obvious, as you seem to think, then why doesn't Mr. Cohen -- the creator of the neutron bomb -- understand basic physics?
And there, my dear Nita, is the really big question. Sam Cohen knows enough nuclear fizzies to understand these issues. If red mercury exists and performs as advertised, then it has a wee side effect--you have to completely rewrite most areas of physics to explain this. He doesn't even begin to try and explain these issues--not even a brief thumbnail sketch of how this stuff works so differently from everything else.
Why do he and other esteemed physicists believe there are "pure fusion" weapons small enough to fit in a lunch box and lethal enough to kill everyone within 500 or 600 yards?
Again, I don't know. But when I don't get any explanation of HOW this amazing substance is able to completely upend modern physics, or even a brief acknowledgement that it DOES completely upend modern physics and that further discussion is not possible due to security concerns, and the speaker is a nuclear physicist of some renown, I get VERY suspicious about the whole thing. There is something very amiss here.
Regarding the radiological detectors: my guess is a "dirty bomb." Based on my own study, I'd prefer a REAL nuke (you get a much bigger BANG! for the same amount of detection risk), but Osama may not be bright enough to realize that this is an issue, or may not have access to a nuke.