digg

Join DiggAbout

The Digg Crew wants to hear your thoughts!
Please take our short survey about Digg and potential feature ideas.

Nuclear Explosion Photographed Less Than One Millisecond After Detonation

upload.wikimedia.org — Just have to see it

show profanity settings
expand all
  • degron, on 10/10/2007, -5/+136That's the coolest thing I've seen today...
    • mydigga, on 10/10/2007, -7/+116Yes, it's da bomb.
    • enivid, on 10/10/2007, -27/+5Don't you mean coolest thing you've see this millisecond?
      • RedS0x, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Keep your day job.
      • WernerCD, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Thats what your GF said....
        ZING!
        Although... considering your on digg... it was probably your mom.
    • bluezinc, on 10/10/2007, -0/+9Picture taken with one of Harold Edgerton's cameras, he pioneered ultra slow motion photography AND his cameras were used in the expedition that found the Titanic. He has a number of books out that are all awesome pics like this one.
    • masamunecyrus, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6Damn Interesting has a...damn interesting article on these, with some links to learn more/see more about them -- they're called "Rapatronic" photographs.
      http://www.damninteresting.com/?p=456
    • krizhere, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Actually I'd expect it to be the *hottest*
    • joegibes, on 10/10/2007, -9/+1This is the coolest thing I saw 4 months ago (old).
    • hmunkey, on 10/10/2007, -4/+5I don't understand why people aren't digging him up. What could possibly be cooler than a nuclear explosion pic taken 1 ms after?

      Please don't say iPhone...
      • WaltDismal, on 10/10/2007, -2/+30An iPhone IN a nuclear explosion.
      • diggimator, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3Sheesh, it seems like all the non-iPhone front page stories has someone saying "why aren't people digging this up to the front page, seriously?" or "oh man, why aren't you digging this up instead of iPhone?". It's like anytime there's bad press for Microsoft, all the Microsoft fanboys jump on and say "Oh, but if this was about Apple or Linux, you'd be all full of praise and wonder." Or someone says "I, for one, welcome our new marklar overlords." Something about predictable responses being lame.
  • blorc, on 10/10/2007, -8/+189All that energy from tiny 'ol atom. Always impressive.
    • rspeed, on 10/10/2007, -1/+92It's quite a few tiny ol' atoms.
      • blorc, on 10/10/2007, -2/+12Sorry, I meant to make it plural (as you might be able to tell from the way "from tiny 'ol atom" sounds when you say it). I just missed my "s" key ;)
    • samgab, on 11/07/2007, -15/+12Yep, good old "E=MC2". Ginormous amount of energy in a tiny amount of mass.
      • TomRemixed, on 10/10/2007, -17/+4I love how people say e=mc^2 and believe they said something smart.
        • Phatt138, on 10/10/2007, -0/+45The fact that he understood that it has to do with the conversion of mass to energy puts him ahead of 99% of the people who drop it.
        • Pritchard, on 10/10/2007, -13/+1Energy = Mass*Constant^2

          All energy can be converted to mass, and all mass to energy. This formula tells us how much energy can be converted from any given amount of mass.
          • Renton, on 10/10/2007, -0/+24The C stands for the speed of light.
          • Renton, on 10/10/2007, -17/+3The C stands for the speed of light.
          • Netrilix, on 10/10/2007, -1/+16... in a vacuum. If you're gonna be an ass, at least go all the way.
          • Syphon8, on 10/10/2007, -1/+9And that's a constant.
          • Jugalator, on 10/10/2007, -3/+3Actually, the C stands for "celeritas", latin for "swiftness".
          • stklaw, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4You fail grade 5 science.
      • EmileVictor, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2LOL BINDING ENERGY
      • TenebrousX, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2the most impressive thing is that nuclear reactions only release .007 of the matter's rest energy
    • bentrinh, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1It's in fact like a handful of atoms....
    • Jemulov, on 10/10/2007, -1/+13"Some copypasta from a site about nuclear materials says otherwise:"
      Critical masses in spherical geometry for weapon-grade materials are as follows:
      Bare sphere: (Uranium-235) 56 kg (Plutonium-239) 11 kg
      Thick Tamper: (Uranium-235) 15 kg (Plutonium-239) 5 kg

      So, working with the bare minimum amount of nuclear material 20kg you can calculate the number of atoms.
      First let's work with U235.
      1) Convert kilograms into grams (kg x 1000)
      2) Divide grams by the molar mass of U235 (which would be 235g/mol)
      3) Multiply the moles by Avagadro's Number (moles of U235 x 6.022x10^23)

      If you followed directions right there should be 1.2813x10^25 atoms in a measly 5 kg sample of U235. That's 12,813,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 atoms
      Do the same equation with 15kg of Plutonium 239 and the atoms in that should be around 3.7795x10^25.

      So add them together and you should get 5.0608x10^25 atoms.
      A grand total of approximately 50,608,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 atoms.

      Yea, a lot more than a handful if you ask me.
      • Almadiel, on 10/10/2007, -0/+24Well, a handful is a pretty big number when you are counting atoms.
    • Funkomoto, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Well I'm no Nuclear Physicist, but I don't think that all of those atoms are bombarded by protons initially, only a few are actually stuck which produce the chain reaction. So really it should be a LOT less then that.
    • Nerys, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Well how BIG is 16kg of these materials. I am betting (ignoring that it would burn your hand and kill you) that physically it WOULD be about a "hand full" of atoms.
  • imkrazy182, on 10/10/2007, -12/+2awesome
  • Otto, on 10/10/2007, -1/+81More info about this photo:
    http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Tumbler_Snapper_rope_tricks.jpg
    • kylewriter, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7Here's the link to a color version too: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Tumbler_Snapper_rope_tricks_Edit1.jpg
      • ceallaighgirl, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3The colour is much more interesting!
    • CounterConToo, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Thank you otto and kylewriter for the leads to the background of this photo and the others in the series that were taken around 1962. I knew I had seen this particular shot in a physics book sometime in the past. We should definitely never forget what these things are about and do everything possible to get rid of them.
  • SuperOmegaSlack, on 10/10/2007, -4/+5Looks like that is a screen shot from the movie "Trinity and beyond".
    • smb3d, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2That documentary has some of the most incredible footage I've ever seen of atomic bomb detonations. I would recommenced you check it out if you've not seen it.
  • fluidfoundation, on 11/07/2007, -13/+224Thats not a nuclear explosion, thats Peter Petrelli.
  • dogmaan, on 10/10/2007, -40/+4When I read Nuclear Explosion my heart went up a notch, but then I read photographed and felt a bit silly
    • Sharky35, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1So Digg is your only source of news?
  • mavedatthews85, on 10/10/2007, -15/+4That's ***** wicked... very creepy, too.

    And yes, it definitely looks like a Metroid, haha!
  • j3utton, on 10/10/2007, -10/+1thats pretty sweet
  • cygnus2112, on 10/10/2007, -19/+3Pretty evil image. If you use your imagination, you can see a crucified man and a big skull on the right side of the cloud.. spooooky.
  • 80hd, on 10/10/2007, -2/+55I find those things in my closet all the time
    • fluidfoundation, on 10/10/2007, -2/+9Spend a lot of time in there? ;)
    • drizzlelicious, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0That's how I wake up every morning.
  • dustinpoplin, on 10/10/2007, -24/+2I know a good place I wish that was over...
    • rougepanther, on 10/10/2007, -3/+4The White House, or Crawford TX?
    • Frnnkdlxx, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3I prefer the White House... That's what you're referring to right?
    • terminal157, on 10/10/2007, -2/+9So you wish a whole bunch of people were indiscriminately killed? You are a bad person.
      • Jebral, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1How do you know he's not talking about the desert?
  • wendelgee2, on 10/10/2007, -1/+79So, what exactly is that that we're seeing? Shockwave? Plasma? Just plain fire? What is the substance of the explosion?
    • andrewsmith1986, on 10/10/2007, -16/+1its the expansion of the explosion, which is the most dangerous part.
      • tian2992, on 10/10/2007, -10/+0Air...
      • x00x, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7Yeah, that's it. That explains it. That really clears things up. Thanks. (rolling my eyes in derision.)
      • zspade, on 10/10/2007, -4/+1the expansion in a nuclear explosion is not at all it's most dangerous part. The expansion doesn't just melt people half a mile off, no that would be something we call massive radiation.
        • Nerys, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1you have any idea how LARGE the expansion of a nuke is ? ever see one of the japanese cities? notice how far the BUILDING damage extends ? thats expansion not radiation.

          The Vaccuum is almost more damaging. The expansion weakens if not destroying things the "suck" afterwards from the pressure hole it creates knocks anything left standing over. Radiation usually does not kill people on the spot. Your either FRIED/Vaporized or die a slow very painful death of radiation poisoning.
    • _skin_, on 10/10/2007, -11/+5A reaction to an action.
    • BradMW, on 10/10/2007, -3/+37I think it's Phazon.
      • zengonzo, on 10/10/2007, -0/+9Looks like Metroid is the reference king for the time being ..
    • HyperJack, on 10/10/2007, -10/+5The substance is basically just a shed load of Ka Boom!
    • sriel, on 10/10/2007, -5/+3Plasma.
    • tommyredcoat, on 10/10/2007, -7/+1Death and destruction.
    • samgab, on 10/10/2007, -7/+1I think perhaps it's a red quazaar...
    • DNAspark99, on 10/10/2007, -0/+63from the wiki:
      The photograph specifically shows two unusual phenomena: bright spikes projecting from the bottom of the fireball, and the peculiar mottling of the expanding fireball surface. The surface of the fireball is at over 20,000 kelvin and emits huge amounts of visible light radiation (more than 100 times the intensity of sunlight) to which the atmosphere is transparent. Anything solid in the area absorbs the light and rapidly heats. The "rope tricks" which protrude from the bottom of the fireball are caused by the heating, rapid vaporization and then expansion of mooring cables (or specialized rope trick test cables) which extend from the shot cab (the housing at the top of the tower that contains the explosive device) to the ground. Malik observed that when the rope was painted black, spike formation was enhanced, and if it were painted with reflective paint or wrapped in aluminum foil, no spikes were observed – thus confirming the hypothesis that it is heating and vaporization of the rope, induced by exposure to high-intensity visible light radiation, which causes the effect. Because of the lack of mooring ropes, no "rope trick" effects were observed in surface-detonation tests, free-flying weapons tests, or, obviously, in underground tests.
      • fluidfoundation, on 10/10/2007, -13/+8This guys talking out of his ass, its actually made of Cheetos and sugar packets. ;)
    • Hoobam, on 10/10/2007, -3/+2Just tons and tons of gooey caramel.
    • stevefl209, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2A whole bunch of whoop-ass
  • BradMW, on 10/10/2007, -16/+6Look like a Metroid.

    edit: whoops, that was the very first post of the story. I guess I have a ways to go before being the alpha nerd.
  • Klarth, on 10/10/2007, -1/+45Tumbler Snapper rope tricks...?

    I thought it was a pretty nonsensical kind of image name, but I looked it up - to clear things up for anyone else perplexed: Tumbler-Snapper was the name of the series of nuclear tests, and "rope tricks" are the interesting lines at the base of the blast.
  • _skin_, on 10/10/2007, -13/+1Cool while at the same time saddening.
  • teknic111, on 10/10/2007, -6/+0Plasma.
  • Adaniel28, on 10/10/2007, -11/+3I flushed somethng that looked very similar to that this morning.
  • chriscantu, on 10/10/2007, -3/+117This picture is refered to the Tumbler-Snapper test "Rope Trick" on what you're seeing:

    "Rope Tricks"
    The image below shows the growing fireball, taken about one millisecond after detonation, for one of the Snapper tower shots (I haven't been able to find out which one yet). There are two striking features about this picture - the spikes projecting from the bottom of the fireball, and the ghostly mottling of the fireball surface.

    The peculiar spikes are extensions of the fireball surface along ropes or cables that stretch from the shot cab (the housing for the test device at the top of the tower) to the ground. This novel phenomenon was named a "rope trick" by Dr. John Malik who investigated it. The effect had been observed in earlier tests when spikes were seen extending along cables that moored the shot towers to the ground. During Snapper Malik conducted experiments using different kinds of cables and ropes, and with different surface treatments. Consequently the spikes in this picture may be due to either mooring cables, or Malik's own test ropes.

    The cause of the "rope trick" is the absorption of thermal radiation from the fireball by the rope. The fireball is still extremely hot (surface temperature around 20,000 degrees K at this point, some three and a half times hotter than the surface of the sun; at the center it may be more than ten times hotter) and radiates a tremendous amount of energy as visible light (intensity over 100 times greater than the sun) to which air is (surprise!) completely transparent. The rope is not transparent however, and the section of rope extending from the fireball surface gets rapidly heated to very high temperatures. The luminous vaporized rope rapidly expands and forms a spike-shaped extension of the fireball. Malik observed that if the rope was painted black spike formation was enhanced, and if it was painted with reflective paint or wrapped in aluminum foil no spikes were observed.

    Cause of the surface mottling. At this point in the explosion, a true hydrodynamic shock front has just formed. Prior to this moment the growth of the fireball was due to radiative transport, i.e. thermal x-rays outran the expanding bomb debris. Now however the fireball expansion is caused by the shock front driven by hydrodynamic pressure (as in a conventional explosion, only far more intense). The glowing surface of the fireball is due to shock compression heating of the air. This means that the fireball is now growing far more slowly than before. The bomb (and shot cab) vapors were initially accelerated to very high velocities (several tens of kilometers/sec) and clumps of this material are now splashing against the back of the shock front in an irregular pattern (due to initial variations in mass distribution around the bomb core), creating the curious mottled appearance.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rope_trick_effect
    • Terr01, on 10/10/2007, -13/+3The link is fine, thanks. No need to copy-paste large tracts of wikipedia.
      • shark615, on 10/10/2007, -1/+7WHy a good read and a link if I want to read more..
    • MikeWanDo, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6Some time between when you copied that and now someone edited that entry to correct the "degrees K" since it's incorrect to say degrees Kalvin.
      • dopplerdog, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Especially since it's "Kelvin" and not "Kalvin".
    • Insuperabilis, on 10/10/2007, -2/+0can you explain in lay man's terms?
    • jhaks, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Wow... very cool, especially the explanation of the mottled explosion surface. I would love to see the evolution of the explosion. Some one should have filmed this with a high speed camera. Do they go that fast? Maybe a super computer simulation?
  • fliguy84, on 10/10/2007, -8/+31How can something so destructive be so beautiful?
    • rblancarte, on 10/10/2007, -2/+98Allow me to introduce you to the females of the human race ...
      • domeyerj, on 10/10/2007, -12/+1Which is worse?
        2 year old with a box of crayons.
        Teenager in a car.
        Woman going through menopause with an ice pick.
        • fluidfoundation, on 10/10/2007, -0/+25Your comment. Definitely your comment.
        • zengonzo, on 10/10/2007, -3/+12You with a comment form.
  • Lyanto, on 10/10/2007, -10/+2I'd say displaced air and possibly fire from the massive shockwave, with the protrusions being fragments of the bomb.
    • boacons, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Actually u can see the air shockwave on the ground.. that little dust cloud in the bottom right side. if the protrusions were fragments ... wouldnt they be going in every direction??? the "rope trick" is true and very interesting
      • domeyerj, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0The air shock wave is contained inside of the ball of fire until after the it loses a bit more energy. Then the heat shock wave starts to dissipate and the air shock wave (which is invisible) overtakes it and proceeds to do it's merry function of destroying things.
    • Terr01, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Fragments? Already vaporized.

      The lower protrusions are the cables that were used to secure the tower the bomb was on, being burned off as they absorb some of the the initial light.
    • Lyanto, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Damn you buggy digg comment's system, I was replying to someone >_
  • arichard, on 10/10/2007, -14/+1This was front paged yesterday.
  • turbopro, on 10/10/2007, -8/+99another millisecond and it would have looked like the Spaghetti Monster.

    Ramen.
    • DangerCollie, on 10/10/2007, -2/+29Ramen.
    • billyfalconer, on 10/10/2007, -5/+0Whaddya mean another second? It is FSM!
    • tafdc, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4All priase the mighty FSM - may you be touched by his noodly appendage!
    • taintedzodiac, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3That sounds like a claim to have seen the great noodler yourself. Herecy!
      May the FSM have mercy on you.
  • dtilford, on 10/10/2007, -2/+40colored version of the photo here
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Tumbler_Snapper_rope_tricks_Edit1.jpg
  • suriyou, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4That's awesome and scary at the same time.
  • megatron, on 10/10/2007, -3/+20That's clearly Krang from dimension X.
  • auricomnet, on 10/10/2007, -12/+1I wish it formed a satanic looking face or fetus.
  • coldwarstrokes, on 10/10/2007, -5/+0awesome
  • slapded, on 10/10/2007, -3/+6finally a cool pic on digg
  • Notyavgkat, on 10/10/2007, -36/+1how in the hell did this make it to the front page.....seriously ???? BURIED
    • Klarth, on 10/10/2007, -1/+20Why is there always one person who finds fault with absolutely ***** anything?

      It was frontpaged because enough people enjoyed it. If your tastes are at odds with those of other people, then take it up the ass and deal with it like a man.
  • hadak, on 10/10/2007, -6/+1Neat.
  • geoman2k, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3there are a few more pics in this series too... i think i have em somewhere but i'm too lazy to post them.

    that's a big ol' ball of death that is.
    • terminal157, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2"this thing that you're all so interested in, I have more pictures of it but I'm too lazy to get them."
      Result: People digg him up.
  • 1Bit, on 10/10/2007, -0/+17Here are similar pictures of another atomic blast:
    http://www.nevadasurveyor.com/atomicbomb/
    taken from this much older submission:
    http://digg.com/general_sciences/Photos_of_an_Atomic_Blast_taken_at_1_1000,000,000_of-a-second
  • jimsf, on 10/10/2007, -1/+12This is a Harold Edgerton photo. Whats equally impressive is how far away he was when he took this. I believe the camera was 7 miles away. The lens was 10 feet long. Absolutely incredible work.
    I wrote up a short blurb about him on my blog a while back.
    http://www.jmg-galleries.com/blog/2007/07/07/amazing-photographer-harold-edgerton/
    you can also learn more about him and these photos on the following site:
    http://www.anomalies-unlimited.com/Bomb.html
    • hokieaudi, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Forums are colliding!
      • jimsf, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Is the universe imploding now that Digg Hokie and Audi Hokie are in the same place?
  • JinnRikki, on 10/10/2007, -18/+1That's just ugly. Anyone finding beauty in that is one sick person.
    • HyperJack, on 10/10/2007, -0/+10Its not ugly. The consequences of it are ugly. The same thing happens in space to stars (including our Sun) daily. But because its so far away we think its beautiful.
    • enforcerpsu, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7I find beauty in the science. So...uh....***** you.
  • Talphin, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2wow... that is so cool
  • skwashy, on 10/10/2007, -13/+6Tagline: "Happy Birthday, Iran!"
    (please don't flame me, i just had to say it)
    • sohosid, on 10/10/2007, -6/+3"please don't flame me, i just had to say it"....why? Are you retarded?
    • NonLeftistDiggr, on 10/10/2007, -1/+7don't ask for forgiveness ahead of time from digg douchebags. You are only allowed one viewpoint here.
  • mikolby, on 10/10/2007, -3/+5I see a devil fetus about to be hatched
  • nissekonge, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1It is remarkebly spooky - just looking at it scares me.
    • zeromancer, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3so haunted houses aren't really your thing i guess?
    • 2oonhed, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1it does have skull like features........almost, but not quite.....maybe alien skeletal in nature.
  • robertml1, on 10/10/2007, -6/+0Just like we'll see in Iran next year when Bush has his way. :(
    • digggggggggggg, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1When did bush say he wants to nuke iran? Or do people just not bother making up believeable slander anymore?
  • mentor972, on 10/10/2007, -0/+25Ummm... what's the scale here?

    • gordonp, on 10/10/2007, -0/+12Wikipedia says it's 20meters across.
    • yayster, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3You can see the tower...still existing.
  • redthumb, on 10/10/2007, -7/+5How did they save the camera? If it was a nuclear blast, wouldn't the camera and film be vaporized? ;)
    • Dotmeister, on 10/10/2007, -0/+18The camera was 7 miles away and the lens were 10 feet long.
    • FlyCO, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4moreover, this is a test explosion
      might not be a full-powered one
  • superfusion, on 10/10/2007, -12/+7the last thing millions of kids in iran will see in about six months.

    well, hopefully not.
    • digggggggggggg, on 10/10/2007, -3/+3you're an idiot
      • taintedzodiac, on 10/10/2007, -3/+1Why's he the idiot? For pointing out an obvious possibility, or for pointing out what you don't want to believe is an obvious possiblity?
        • digggggggggggg, on 10/10/2007, -2/+0yep america is going to start a nuclear war that's a definite possibility
    • mos6507, on 10/10/2007, -5/+2Better them than us if it comes down to it.
  • ebob9, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Here's another site with more short exposure pics:

    http://simplethinking.com/home/rapatronic_photographs.htm
  • acosta814, on 10/10/2007, -3/+3Color Version: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Tumbler_Snapper_rope_tricks_Edit1.jpg
    • woozlewuzzle, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2I believe that is the "colorized" version.
    • taintedzodiac, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Yep, as above, it's not the color version. It's an edited version where color is added.
      • bsolidgold, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I only see one color... like someone put a red filter on the lens.
  • Rizin, on 10/10/2007, -3/+3So thats where Nintendo got the Metroid idea from......
  • diggSJaustin, on 10/10/2007, -3/+6Is it possible that this has gone 74 comments with no one bitching about the lack of a [PICS] section?
  • kmlixey87, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1now all we need is some evangelist to see the face of jesus in the fireball and start some movement to finally nuke the "infidel/terrorist/iran" enemy.
  • bleonard, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Here is more information about that nuclear test other others like it: http://www.radiochemistry.org/history/nuke_tests/tumbler_snapper/
  • gordonp, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Here's what the camera looks like:
    http://simplethinking.com/home/rapatronic_photographs.htm
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 100 of 102 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.