Slashdot Mirror


"Nuclear Archaeology" Inspires Replica of Hiroshima's Little Boy

James Cho writes "Through a decade of painstaking reverse engineering, trucker John Coster-Mullen built the first accurate replica of the Hiroshima bomb. His work yielded a new history of the first nukes, 'Atom Bombs: The Top Secret Inside Story of Little Boy and Fat Man,' with historian Robert Norris saying, 'Nothing else in the Manhattan Project literature comes close.' Philip Morrison, one of the physicists who helped invent the bomb, deemed it 'a remarkable job.'"

11 of 298 comments (clear)

  1. How soon until... by www.sorehands.com · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How soon until homeland security shows up accusing him of terrorism?

    1. Re:How soon until... by philspear · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If he's built a WORKING replica, I would hope VERY soon!

    2. Re:How soon until... by sidb · · Score: 5, Insightful

      A working replica would be dangerous and surely illegal. It would not be terrorism unless he used it deliberately to terrorize a group of people. Just because something is bad doesn't make it terrorism.

    3. Re:How soon until... by PopeRatzo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      insert lame joke about all of us being really, really lucky that Germany didn't have any nukes during WW2.

      I'm not sure that's a joke.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    4. Re:How soon until... by PopeRatzo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      with war torn, terrorist lead countries on the verge of being able to design model and acquire materials for even small nuclear weapons I am not sure that is a good idea.

      Yeah, I don't like Israel or Pakistan having the bomb, either.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
  2. NOT "Reverse Engineering" by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 4, Insightful

    FR1ST PEDANTIC POST

    The guy went through declassified government documents to gather all the information he could find (including design information), and went from there. I don't think this is anything like reverse engineering.

    If he "reverse engineered" the bomb, wouldn't it mean he put the design together based on blast data from known explosions of this particular device?

    --
    #DeleteChrome
  3. FUD, censorship, and freedom. by B5_geek · · Score: 3, Insightful

    While many people may exclaim that this information is 'dangerous' to be released in the public domain let me remind you of a few small details.

    1) ANY high-school/college student should be able to tell you what the critical mass of U235/238 is.
    2) Most handymen should be able to make atleast ONE method of creating a critical mass pile.
    3) It takes a GOVERNMENT to build multiple copies and revisions and tests to make it bigger/better.

    This information does not mean "the terrorists can now make a bomb!" This changes NOTHING that hasn't been known for 50+ years. I would rather live in a society that does not suffer a knee-jerk reaction everytime something unusual is expressed. If anybody knows if this place exists, let me know; I'll start packing.

    --
    "The price good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by evil men." ~Plato (427-347 BC)
  4. Funny, then not so much... by pjt48108 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This is yet another example of things which, eight years ago, might have seemed merely odd, rather than somewhat unsettling.

    How quaint the 20th Century already seems.

    --
    Mmmmmm... Bold, yet refreshing!
  5. "Most of the time, I'm somebody else's problem" by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 5, Insightful

    A working replica would be dangerous and surely illegal.

    If I had a working replica of a nuclear bomb in my basement, I don't think I would give a rat's ass about whether it was dangerous or illegal.

    If I did have a nuclear bomb, I would not have a problem.

    Some other folks would have a problem.

    --
    Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
  6. Intentional misdirection by sphealey · · Score: 4, Insightful

    One thing to keep in mind when you read statement such as "Destroy R. Worlds, former Director of Bomb Design at Los Alamos, said of Joe Amateur's work 'That's very well-done'" is this: reading between the lines of many interviews, articles, and books about and by former weaponeers they give out a lot of misleading, and/or misdirecting, information about how _exactly_ devices are built. They talk openly about the general principles and their scientific and political implications, but when the discussion/interview/chapter turns to the actual details of design, well, the replies turn a bit fuzzy or clever. I suspect that either by explicit training or shared values they give away very little and much of what they say would deliberately lead anyone following down the wrong path.

    sPh

  7. Best Line in the Article by dd1968 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    From the article: "Actually, he said, nothing about the bomb is secret. He smiled and added, 'The secret of the atomic bomb is how easy they are to make.'"