Slashdot Mirror
Antineutrino Detectors Could Be Key To Monitoring Iran's Nuclear Program
agent elevator writes: Tech that analyzes antineutrinos might be the best way to keep tabs on Iran's nuclear program. The technology, which can tell how much of and what kind of plutonium and uranium are nearby, should be ready to serve as a nuclear safeguard in less than two years, according to IEEE Spectrum. In a simulation of the Arak nuclear plant, which the Iran deal requires be redesigned to make less plutonium, a detector parked outside in a shipping container could do the job.
How about we also install these in Israel, a country that has threatened to bomb its neighbors? They apparently have an extensive nuclear program that isn't inspected or regulated by the International Atomic Energy Agency.
They are also a repressive country that denies same sex couples and interracial couples the right of marriage while their kin in the legal system and media forces it on us. It is 2015 and it is time Israel joins the rest of us in it.
monitoring irans nuclear project has already been done, full stop. the only countries clammouring about the lies and deceit of the Iranian program and is utter affront to mankind are Israel and the United States. the IAEAE reports are impartial, international, and widely regarded to have the final say that Iran is not in fact developing a nuclear weapon. But for the US this doesnt matter because internationally accepted standards of monitoring and regulatory observation do not apply to it. Israel objects to a nuclear program on any level as it represents energy independence and, this is key, the ability to emerge as a regional superpower capable of selling resources to neighbouring allies. Presently Oil is the currency to which most middle east nations operate, but if Iran emerged to provide clean nuclear power it would result in many nations being able to not only free up their own oil dependencies by purchasing the resource, but lend them more power against western interests through their increased autonomy. Iran itself would find relief from perpetual sanctions by the US and allies, and in doing so cement its already rising status as a regional power player.
for the hawks, its also worth noting that Iran has already enriched to 'bombmaking' levels, and never once pursued the weapon. They did this after numerous assassinations of scientists by Israeli mossad, and a cyberattack by western security agencies. Iran is inflammatory, declaring the destruction of zionism (a form of government thats led to the palestinian apartheid, not the underlying religion of judaism) but so to is the US in calling for bombings of iran, iraq, and numerous proxy war states in the past.
finally, the reason the US wants a deal is because its ability to project power and stability in the region has been delt a crippling blow after iraq and afghanistan, a domestic housing crisis and market collapse. the US understands that, deal or not, Iran will very soon have the ability to take a far more decisive role in domestic and regional politics than Washington can effectively control. the coup-and-replace shuffle doesnt work in south america anymore, as it increasingly doesnt work in the middle east. Think of this as baby steps toward a reconcilliation. The united states has a choice: partner with regional power centers or bleed itself dry for 50 more years protecting an apartheid state and an inconsequential amount of crude oil.
Good people go to bed earlier.
Now that Iran is going to get nukes, Saudi Arabia and Egypt are going to try to get them, too.
And thanks to Obumble's fecklessness with Ukraine (provoke a regime change that you know will lead to war, then run away), there isn't any country on Earth that is going to be willing to give up nukes ever again.
This isn't the Hope and Change you expected, now is it?
- Massive surveillance state
- "Extrajudicial" killings of US citizens
- Regime change in Libya that led to one of the worst failed states ever (and you thought Iraq was bad? But we can't publicized The Won's FAILURE in Libya, now can we?)
- "The JV" in control of 3/4 of Syria and 1/3 of Iraq and inspiring if not actually conducting terrorist attacks inside the US.
- Iran nuclear deal where Iran gets out from under crippling sanctions for paper promises they're going to walk away from (aka taqiya)
You are all quarks. Quarks say whazblarp. WHHHAAAAZZZZBLARRRP! WHHHAAAAZZZZBLARRRP! Whazblarp say the quarks. YOU QUARKS!!
Iran gets 24 days warning before any inspection and has sites that can't be inspected at all .
These short range detectors are going to help how ? All they have to do is move the material around.
Obama's straw man was the only alternative to this deal was to allow Iran getting nukes because we couldn't stop them.
We still can't stop them, but we've removed sanctions.
And isn't it nice that with Congressional approval still required, Obama's saying that if Congress disapproves the deal, Iran still gets out from under sanctions?
WHAT THE FUCK?
Did Obama just negotiate an agreement subject to Congressional approval that's still in force even if it's not approved?
What the fuck is this? Star Trek?
No, seriously, we can detect antineutrinos? From space? Warp drives and teleportation can't be far behind!
Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
Oh, it gets better.
We don't know if there's even a *difference* between a neutrino and an antineutrino. It may in fact be its own antiparticle.
And then there's this thing about how they each oscillate among three types.
That worked out real well.
Of course, you'll have to wait 24 days to actually be permitted to inspect anything.
Good thing you can't move anything or alter the equipment in any meaningful way in a month.
Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
Why are everyone against neutrinos? Why not a nice pro-neutrino detector. How about some support for our tiny mass brethren?
Where in the various treaties negotiated in the recent past has a "blind trust" as you term it, been an essential part? Seriously, you'd cast out all forms of diplomacy as being too trusting, and instead prefer war? Have you ever been in a war? Have you ever seen civilians killed because they had the misfortune of living nearby a perceived threat? If you had, then I believe that you would (eventually) prefer a flawed diplomacy to what promoters of war would profess to be the perfect solution.
This amounts to "we'll give you a bunch of money if you stick to just killing a bunch of people using conventional weapons".
And way to extrapolate my argument for one specific situation to every situation everywhere.
Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!