A Deeply Unsettling Time Lapse Of Every Nuclear Explosion On Earth

Why am i not suprised america has the most explosions, and still they try to ban other countries from producing nuclear fuel. The future generations will probably like the fallout on us soil. Congrats, this is a wondefull vid.

bluedino• 13 years ago

It's been 50 years since the US did a non-underground test. What do you think we use all these supercomputers for? Nuclear testing.

dedward2• 13 years ago

Yup. The test partial test ban treaty was signed in 1963 by all the nuclear powers at the time - everything after then, US or otherwise, has been underground, with the exception of, I believe, India, who was not a nuclear power when the treaty was drawn up - india set of a series of undersea tests late in the century.

This was done specifically because they realized they would collectively make the planet uninhabitable if they continued.

dedward2• 13 years ago

The concern isn't that they are producing nuclear fuel. It's that the plutonium needed for nuclear weapons is a by-product of those reactors. Plutonium isn't naturally occurring on earth - the only place to get it is from a reactor - either yours, or buy it from someone else who has one.

MJR• 13 years ago

Previously on HN...

Nuclear Explosions since 1942 (map) (datavis.tumblr.com) 3 points by transburgh 4 years ago | 1 comments | cached

Animated History of Nuclear Explosions (ctbto.org) 2 points by brianmckenzie 3 years ago | 0 comments | cached

Animated map of nuclear explosions, 1945-1998 (pinktentacle.com) 58 points by gnosis 3 years ago | 26 comments | cached

pdenya• 13 years ago

If you want to contribute to the thread, link to the comments on the previous posts. Otherwise, the fact that this has been posted before (apparently 3 years ago..) doesn't make it less interesting now.

Animated map of nuclear explosions, 1945-1998 (pinktentacle.com) 58 points by gnosis 3 years ago | 26 comments | cached

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1586544

etanazir• 13 years ago

The brits tested a bomb on U.S. soil?

Pinckney• 13 years ago

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julin_Bristol

Crito• 13 years ago

Yep: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julin_Bristol http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1958_US%E2%80%93UK_Mutual_Defen...

colechristensen2• 13 years ago

I, for one, am not deeply unsettled by nuclear weapons.

As weapons of peace, they have made war a strongly negative sum game between advanced nations. The only way to win is not to play.

The drawback of nuclear weapons isn't the actual threat or consequences of war, but using the nature of the game by a government to spread fear, uncertainty, and doubt amongst its own people to consolidate power. That, in itself, is not a problem with the weapon, but with the lack of enlightenment amongst the people and their government.

vezzy-fnord• 13 years ago

In addition, a lot of people have completely warped, fantastical and exaggerated perceptions of how powerful nuclear weapons are.

chris_j• 13 years ago

Would you mind expanding on that? What exaggerated perceptions do a lot of people have and in what way do they not match reality?

seiji• 13 years ago

Drop 60 kg of knives on a city then see how many people you kill versus dropping 60 kg of uranium with technology surrounding it.

Edmond• 13 years ago

You are clearly someone who has never even been mugged much less dealt with war and violence in any real sense.

Your post reflects an incredible naivety about what true death and destruction means. A weapon doesn't have to be able to break the planet apart in order for it to be terrifying.

Sure, maybe media depictions of nuclear weapons are sensational, but that is hardly a reason to doubt their destructive power.

ddebernardy5• 13 years ago

I'd be curious know how you'll revisit your opinion of "weapons of peace" when a nuclear nation is on the receiving end of a nuclear storm sent by some religious nut job.

colechristensen2• 13 years ago

I was referring to exactly this sort of FUD. If there are conflicts between the nations and cultures of the world, the casualties can rest no blame on technologies or weapons, but on the ignorant attitudes and behaviors of people.

'nuclear storm' and 'religious nut job' are meaningless phrases designed to illicit fear and agreement with your viewpoint, not legitimate arguments.

Houshalter• 13 years ago

The point is that it hasn't happened and probably never will. No nuclear armed country has ever been invaded. Despite all predictions to the contrary, there was never a World War III and it doesn't seem like there ever will be.

sehugg• 13 years ago

In theory, yes, MAD and Nash Equilibrium and all that.

In practice, people and government are irrational and make mistakes (most notably in 1983 when we almost destroyed the world due to a false alarm) -- and the cost of policing this theoretical balance of power costs a hell of a lot of resources that could be better spent doing more productive things.

hcarvalhoalves• 13 years ago

and the cost of policing this theoretical balance of power costs a hell of a lot of resources that could be better spent doing more productive things.

I don't think there's more productive use of resources than maintaining peace between big nations.

peterashford• 13 years ago

You only need one mistake or rogue agent and nukes don't look so pretty

wallflower• 13 years ago

Reminds me of "Rise Of The HFT Machine":

http://imgur.com/DxWer

cstavish• 13 years ago

The vast majority of these detonations occurred after the US, UK and USSR signed the Limited Test Ban Treaty in 1963, which permitted only underground detonations. Ideally, underground detonations don't release radioactive material into the wider environment, but there were of course failures to contain along the way.

batbomb• 13 years ago

My favorite example of an underground nuclear explosion was project gasbuggy, near where I grew up. They thought it might be useful if they could perform nuclear fracking:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Gasbuggy

Where they performed the test is a very beautiful area.

Part of a larger project to actually perform nuclear terra-forming:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Plowshare

http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,899941,...

Someone shouted: "We did it! We did it!" Hand shakes were exchanged all around. The U.S. had successfully set off the first nuclear explosion sponsored jointly by the Government and industry.

bernardom• 13 years ago

The number of tests is not what bothers me. The number of times we have had accidents is what does. Thankfully, none has ever resulted in accidental detonation- but this involved a lot of luck.

Eric Schlosser's book Command and Control, which just came out this year is a pretty comprehensive treatment of every accident the US has ever had, from decades of filing Freedom of Information reports. I'm halfway through it right now, it's pretty chilling.

Book: http://www.amazon.com/Command-Control-Damascus-Accident-Illu...

NYT review: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/15/books/review/command-and-c...

dnautics• 13 years ago

the number of tests should bother you, especially the atmospheric ones. People do epidemiological studies of industrial chemicals and their effects on cancer rates. Nobody does the epidemiological study of how the atmospheric tests affect cancer rates. Because there is no negative control.

stevewilhelm• 13 years ago

Description of artist and the video http://www.ctbto.org/specials/1945-1998-by-isao-hashimoto/

A Deeply Unsettling Time Lapse Of Every Nuclear Explosion On Earth

Related Stories