What is Digg?Sponsored by HTC
51 Comments
- CLIFFosakaJAPAN, on 10/12/2007, -16/+25I submitted a similar story that made the front page....Dugg 5237 times
http://digg.com/science/Photos_of_an_Atomic_Blast_taken_at_1_1000,000,000_of-a-second - Petrarch1603, on 10/12/2007, -4/+13I saw your post Cliff. I think that this post is a good follow up for those wanting to learn more.
- CLIFFosakaJAPAN, on 10/12/2007, -6/+14Yeah, I wasn't saying the story was a Dupe, just that if anyone was interested, my story just adds another angle to it...
- Berkana, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7The "rope trick effect" is not plasma shooting down the cables: it's the cables absorbing the intense light from a moment before, and vaporizing due to the light absorption. The link from wikipedia on the "rope trick effect" explains that the scientists noticed that effect, and on subsequent tests, they painted some ropes black, and some of them they painted with reflective paint or wrapped with aluminum foil. The ropes that were painted black exhibited a stronger rope trick effect than unpainted ropes, and the ones covered in foil or reflective paint didn't exhibit this effect at all.
(in other words, the speed of light was not breached by the stuff on the cables.) - unclejesse0, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6I've never seen a comment with that many negative diggs before. Congratulations.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7If you want to see a ton of intersesting pics check out this site. http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Usa/Tests/index.html They have a detailed descrition of where and when the bombs were tested and the power of them.
- afbase, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3if i read it correctly the kerr cell's voltage modulator was the "shutter". besides if your math is right, that would just prove that a shutter that fast would only help scientists notice the changes and effects of a nuclear blast.
I have to say this article it's links were awesome. I never knew optic technology was that advanced back in the day! - joshuamcqueen, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I've noticed that Atomic Bomb subjects appear on dig quite frequently. They usually get a lot of attention, thus the high digg count. For that reason I am posting this comment:
If you have any interest AT ALL about nuclear bombs, or want to understand them better, all you have to do is watch the movie Trinity and Beyond: Atomic Bomb (1995). People always talk about this movie in reference to atomic testing, and it's for good reason. This movie is a true eye opener. It's very hard to believe so many tests were conducted, filmed, and studied. Especially interesting were the underwater and atmospheric tests conducted at Bikini Atoll. There is a good 1/2 hour of the movie dedicated to showing these tests. Really amazing stuff. Like I said, if you have any interest in Atomic testing (read: two hours of mindless nuclear explosions) you really owe it to yourself to watch this outstanding film. Not only will you learn more about the subject, you be absolutely blown away by the visuals. (edit: no pun intended, really)
(PS. I also want to note here how much of an eye opener this from an environmental standpoint. Seriously, after watching hundreds of explosions just from USA testing (never mind the thousands more from China, Soviets....etc) you will say "Holy F! We totally raped planet earth. No wonder so many people have cancer" or something along those lines. )
Link to movie:
http://www.netflix.com/MovieDisplay?movieid=20767131&trkid=189530&strkid=20998963_2_0
"This amazing film chronicles the history of the design, production and testing of the atomic and hydrogen bombs by the United States. Narrated by William Shatner."
Good article on the Rapatronic_camera:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rapatronic_camera
here is a gallery of images taken in the fist moments of a nuclear explosion:
http://simplethinking.com/home/rapatronic_2.shtml
If any of you have seen Trinity and Beyond, please comment. Thanks!
-Josh - Melr00k, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2omg the comments to this story have less than -5 diggs at least on average. I know, I know you're gonna bury me. I just thought it was interesting.
- flashinfected, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5If anyone is curious I found this online via the Make Store:
http://makezine.com/flashkit/
And for $99 bucks it is pretty tempting. Just thought i'd share since it does have some relation to the actual article. - Buelldozer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2One ten millionth of a second was the shutter speed, not the trigger time.
- volz0r, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Wasn't this on digg 3 months ago?
- djwk1928, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1wow they don't look that special considering what they do
- http://www.AlexsWebcamWorld.com - krum, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Interesting.
Expanded to 100 ft in diameter in 10ns. If you do the calculations, that would seem to indicate that initial expansion occurs, on average over the first 10ns, at half the speed of light!!! That's incredible. It would seem to me that the plama shooting down those wires is approximately twice the distance as the fireball, which suggests that it is traveling near c. I wonder how that could be! - zoltan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1so how did the kerr cell get an electrical charge when the bpmb went off
- chillypepper, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4Another Damninteresting? Just link up Damninteresting as "great site with crazy damn interesting articles" and be done with it!
- mauibay, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3One ten-millionth of a second after the detonation the light would have traveled 0.0186 miles. (1/10,000,000 * ~186,000 mi/sec) I'm not sure how a camera 7 miles away captured the image when the light hadn't reached it yet. Something about how the shutter was triggered is obviously missing from the article, or somebody misplaced several decimal places somewhere.
- Mongoose, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3Very cool. The story with the pics from this camera was awesome too.
- mauibay, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0oops. When I said 10 microseconds, I should have stuck to 1/10,000,000 seconds as I originally did. That's not 10 microseconds, it's 1/10 microseconds, or 0.1 microseconds. This doesn't affect the original math, that the time between detonation and exposure isn't nearly long enough for light to travel from event to camera.
- mauibay, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0afbase, I wasn't talking about shutter speed, although that's even more impressive at 10 nanoseconds, which is way faster than 10 microseconds. I'm simply pointing out that the article says the time between detonation and exposure is 10 microseconds, which means the detonation happens and 10 microseconds later the shutter opens for 10 nanoseconds. If the camera is 7 miles away, the light hasn't has time to travel that distance in 10 microseconds, so there must either be something incorrect with the numbers or the description of the delay time.
- mauibay, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Buelldozer, no. The article clearly says the delay after detonation before exposure (trigger time) was 1 ten-millionth of a second, and the exposure time (shutter speed) was 10 nanoseconds. Read it again.
- longman2g, on 10/12/2007, -5/+5very nice pics on that page, except for that stupid photoshopped one at the end
- thewise1, on 10/12/2007, -4/+3History could have been so radically different from the relatively peaceful way it turned out. Wow.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0That's damn interesting!
- JPhilipson, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2very interesting
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -5/+2this might be a dupe, but i guessi missed it first time or something... i don't remember reading that edgerton was involved, or the specifics of the polarizing phaze change shutter...
- longman2g, on 10/12/2007, -11/+6"Digg is a technology news website that employs non-hierarchical editorial control. With digg, users submit stories for review, but rather than allowing an editor to decide which stories go on the homepage, the users do." This is not up for debate, the statement is the rules for this website no matter how many people say otherwise. Even in a democratic government, there are some rules which most people do not like, but they are in place to protect the minorities. Just because some stories are interesting, and people want to read them, it does not mean that they conform to the rules of this website.
- Petrarch1603, on 10/12/2007, -12/+7You are wrong because you are making rules about Digg. Digg is democratic, not fascist.
- SoCalDissident, on 10/12/2007, -9/+4So why not just add the original link instead of the other Dugg link?
http://www.nevadasurveyor.com/atomicbomb/
Does anyone else find any irony in 6 people posting 'this is a dupe'? - longman2g, on 10/12/2007, -10/+5ok, how's this idea?: every user on digg must read over the rules to it, how it is meant to work. Then if people post articles which have already been submitted, or are not technology related, or are not news, people can minus digg that person, and if enough people minus digg it, the story will be removed. Then if a person gets too many minus diggs, he is no longer allowed to submit stories. Editing by democracy.
- Chongo, on 10/12/2007, -10/+4I got an idea....move on.....
Fatal flaw? how then is digg getting more and more traffic? - alej744, on 10/12/2007, -8/+2no you're a gay liar, you did that on purpose to be funny
- choosenick, on 10/12/2007, -10/+2Seems like we need some kind of editor to stop this sort of thing from happening . . . Oh no! My brain is freaking out, editor, what, arrgh!
- Petrarch1603, on 10/12/2007, -11/+3Longman, your last post makes no sense at all.
- Matteos, on 10/12/2007, -12/+3this is gay ur a fag
- Matteos, on 10/12/2007, -13/+3^^Damn that kid moves quick he got me too!
- longman2g, on 10/12/2007, -17/+5instead of minus digging me because you don't agree with me, why don't you reply to my comments and tell me why I am wrong.
- dclowd9901, on 10/12/2007, -14/+1^^ Holy *****! I think that same kid just ***** me up!
- longman2g, on 10/12/2007, -18/+5this will forever be the fatal flaw of Digg, the mindset of, "If you haven't seen it, its news to you". Very interesting things will keep being posted over and over; they are cool, but they aren't news. Digg is a technology news web page. For a thing to be dug it should both be technology related AND news. Too many times have I seen an article which is only one of these.
- tgraham, on 10/12/2007, -17/+4What is it, every 3 weeks these things front page digg?! Sure, its great, but it was great the last 4 times i looked at that website!
- dstart, on 10/12/2007, -41/+27err, it's called 'the edit button'.
- dclowd9901, on 10/12/2007, -15/+1this is gay ur a fag
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -42/+16It's a shame your comment is just as puerile as his
- alej744, on 10/12/2007, -36/+8ROFL that kid... aaa hhahahahaa
- nrbelex, on 10/12/2007, -32/+3We have to get off this nuclear bomb and Damn Interesting article fad we're in... there's more to the net...
- scott1, on 10/12/2007, -43/+11Did you just say your coment is gay?
- vhtrading, on 10/12/2007, -35/+2Yet Another Dupe.
- TheGooseyOne, on 10/12/2007, -55/+4haha yeah after he typed in the comment he turned the computer off so i couldnt edit it...then when it was starting up agian he turned it off again to make sure the 3 minutes would be up....
- dirtyfratboy, on 10/12/2007, -81/+7no spring break yet?
- TheGooseyOne, on 10/12/2007, -126/+12^^that wasn't me, im in computer class and a retarded gay kid ran up and typed that in
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is