Japanese says NK test was 160kt based on M-6.1 https://asia.nikkei.com/Politics-Economy/International-Relations/North-Korea-nuclear-yield-estimate-upgraded-to-160-kilotons-Japan … NORSAR initially said 120kt based on M-5.8https://www.norsar.no/press/press-releases/ …
-
No mermaids, just facts. Yield doesnt prove H-bomb; dont know if picture shows tested. IC says "advanced design." So perhaps, but why rush?
And if that's the case, then the practical effect is same. I worry that doubt is used by people (not you) who want to avoid accepting this.
-
-
See my thread. Possible they don't have a compact warhead but a larger boosted/TN device.https://twitter.com/CherylRofer/status/905060149395521536 …
-
It's possible, but the simpler explanation is that the have a H-bomb. New graph from
@ctbto_alerts shows range up to 1MTpic.twitter.com/740PDHsc4X
-
What I'm saying is that what they tested may not fit in the case they showed.
-
Omg none of you disagree. As a matter of policy, we have to assume it's thermonuclear. As a matter of analysis, we look for evidence.
-
I've now said that three ways.
-
Unless we get a sniff it could be either. Yield is inconclusive alone. Remember Ivy King? 500kT of pure unadulterated fission.
-
And a pretty good sniff at that.
-
I simply don't understand on the insistence for extraordinary evidence to prove an ordinary claim.
- 9 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.