09-23-2009, 02:26 AM
There are 4 inconsistencies even after the revealations of Santhanam:
(1) Total Yield
GOI claimed that the total yield was 60 kt (S1=45 kt; S2=15 kt).
Santhanama claims the total yield to be about 50 kt (S1=60 % of 45 kt=27 kt; S2=25 kt);
Western seismologists claim the total yield to be 5-20 kt.
Even if we take the total yield to be 25 kt (larger than the largest number of western seismologists), even Santhanam's number is twice that number.
GOI claims that destructive interference due to two explosions separated by 1 km is the cause of the apparently low seismic yield. I am skeptical about this since it is difficult to believe that any substantial effect of such interference would be visible thousands of kms from Pokharan.
(2) Crater Size
GOI claimed that the 15 kt S2 yielded a crater of 40 m diameter. That value has been accepted as a reasonable figure by the international seismological community. Now according to Santhanam the figure is 25 kt for S2 yield. Won't that change the crater size? Also won't a S1=27 kt explosion at more than 200m below the surface (double the depth of S2) show larger effect than seen at the S1 site? Won't it at least damage the shaft?
(3) Tritium
It is being claimed that India is producing Tritium. Why should India need Tritium if all that it has are 25 kt fission weapons.
(4) Gen V P Malik
Gen Malik wanted the scientists to reassure the military about the yield of the thermonuclear device. Why should the military care about any TN device if all that it has is fission weapons?
Is there any scenario that explains all these inconsistencies?
(1) Total Yield
GOI claimed that the total yield was 60 kt (S1=45 kt; S2=15 kt).
Santhanama claims the total yield to be about 50 kt (S1=60 % of 45 kt=27 kt; S2=25 kt);
Western seismologists claim the total yield to be 5-20 kt.
Even if we take the total yield to be 25 kt (larger than the largest number of western seismologists), even Santhanam's number is twice that number.
GOI claims that destructive interference due to two explosions separated by 1 km is the cause of the apparently low seismic yield. I am skeptical about this since it is difficult to believe that any substantial effect of such interference would be visible thousands of kms from Pokharan.
(2) Crater Size
GOI claimed that the 15 kt S2 yielded a crater of 40 m diameter. That value has been accepted as a reasonable figure by the international seismological community. Now according to Santhanam the figure is 25 kt for S2 yield. Won't that change the crater size? Also won't a S1=27 kt explosion at more than 200m below the surface (double the depth of S2) show larger effect than seen at the S1 site? Won't it at least damage the shaft?
(3) Tritium
It is being claimed that India is producing Tritium. Why should India need Tritium if all that it has are 25 kt fission weapons.
(4) Gen V P Malik
Gen Malik wanted the scientists to reassure the military about the yield of the thermonuclear device. Why should the military care about any TN device if all that it has is fission weapons?
Is there any scenario that explains all these inconsistencies?