Chronology Current Month Current Thread Current Date
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [Date Next]

[Phys-L] Re: Stories from Harpers: Radioactive Boyscout



This is where the story is correct as reported (indirectly) by M. E.

Then I found ME's post.

I had the impression reactor was used in the sense of, e.g., chemical
reactor *, not self sustained reactor. but then I don't read very carefully.

I've attempted to find the article I read several months ago, I thought
in the New Yorker, with no luck. It was obviously the same story as the
Harper's, but very much longer. When I read it I didn't catch the
errors in the Harper's' article. We (GK and I) have just ordered the
DVD New Yorker *, and, thereby, may find it using its internal search
engine.

* which he certainly made, note the resultant much increased radioactivity.
** bc agreed to toss the > fifteen years (20 cubic feet?) of them.
Anyone want them for the postage?
Late,

bc, now has the opportunity for the paper to go in the opposite direction.

Marc "Zeke" Kossover wrote:

--- Michael Edmiston <edmiston@BLUFFTON.EDU> wrote:



That's where the nuclear physics is "way off."
(Plus the story of the
geiger counter.) Indeed, the Harpers story never
gets as far as
actually making any fissionable material and then
trying to build a
reactor with it.



Thank you, that's exactly the analysis I was looking
for.

Marc "Zeke" Kossover

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com




_______________________________________________
Phys-L mailing list
Phys-L@electron.physics.buffalo.edu
https://www.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l