Nuclear apocalypse in real life.

[minngarm]

I like cookies, but this girl im talking to now works in a cookie shop, and she hates them because of it. Problem presented, awaiting resolution!

 

 

And yea he could be copy and pasting, he could be typing it up, he could not know anything or he could know what hes talking about and simply being copy and pasting because he cant be assed to type it out himself. I've had many a time I havent typed something out fully because I'm too damn lazy about it to do it. Either way, kinda getting to much hot air in here from several people, lets take the self idolizing egos down for a bit.

[ModelV]

When you dont wanna type something out it usually means its something thats too complex and will go over people's heads. In that case you simplify what your talking about which you can only do if you actually know what your talking about. And hes obviously copying and pasting with the large amount of text plus you can see variations in typing style showing what hes saying and whats getting pasted.

 

Btw that large wall of text didnt answer my question. And since you couldnt not communicate that in your own words and without walls of text Im going to say you dont actually know. My mother was a US military mechanic. She fixed any many of things from planes to trucks to machines that fix and maintain them. If I ask her anything about mechanics she can communicate it in her own words and simplify it.

 

As for my English: I live in a non-english speaking country I own use english in my own home its bound to deteriorate over time.

 

To prevent you somehow using those 2 conflicting statements as an argument tool. Im American. I moved to a different country. We clear?

 

And to get you to shut up about it already:

Occupation: Student(College level)/Writer(Yes the Irony we know.)

My academic strengths are Physics, Electronics, And Chemistry.

 

We clear now?

 

And Im not gonna read the walls of text if you cant communicate in your own words in an understandable manner you dont know what your talking about.

Edited December 3, 2011 by ModelV

[phoenix777]

Not everyone is capable of simplifying complex subjects which is why not everyone is capable of being a teacher, and even then you can get bad teachers. Secondly I'm not a writer and I'm dispraxic which means my mind works on a different wavelength to most people which makes communicating complex information a very trying and tiring task. Your mother must be a good teacher if she is able to simplify complex subjects.

A good teacher can easily simplify information whereas a bad teacher can not, that doesn't mean that one does not know what they are talking about. I have provided external reference not just my own thoughts, I would like to see you reference facts, proof, statistics - anything that concurs to your theories. If you believe that I haven't answered your question then can you explain your question in detail. From what you have posted it is your mother who knows about vehicle mechanics and not your self and note the word mechanics from what you have said she doesn't know about electrics. Could you provide evidence on your views of how an EMP would affect a single prop piston engine light general aviation aircraft. Can you explain to these good people following what Ohms law and the effects of EMF on electrical circuitry as I find it hard to explain in simple terms.

 

A good argument is one where facts are laid out by you and the other person.

 

As an EMP weapon depends on many parameters, thus the question cannot be answered without a lot of caveats. In essence the charged particles enter the magnetic field of the Earth and spiral around the magnetic field lines. This gives off essentially high frequency radio waves which induce currents in the things being damaged.

From what I understand EMP are created from the ionisation of air. It has a short duration on the order of billionths of a second but has an extremely high energy level of up to 50kv/meter. Given that anything with electronics, solid-state and especially digital, could be damaged. I don't believe anyone could give and authoritative and definite answer to your question because it depends on several indeterminate variables for each case. The yield and construction details of the weapon; the distance from the weapon when detonated;

Geographical depth or intervening geographical features; the local strength of the magnetic field of the Earth. Many vehicles that one would expect to be disabled by an EMP due to their dependence on sensitive electronics might be shielded well enough to continue to operate. Automotive electronic ignition systems in general are much better shielded and protected against EMP than other electronics. (After all, the purpose of an electronic ignition is to make high-voltage sparks.) Circuits in the automobile outside of the electronic ignition are actually the most vulnerable. Actual tests on vehicles in simulators have been very inconsistent. EMP will cover the wide geographic region within line of sight to the nuclear weapon. One reason for the ability of a car to resist EMP lies in the fact that its metal body is "insulated" by its rubber tires from the ground. This creates a Faraday cage of sorts. (Drawing on the analogy of EMP being similar to lightning, it is interesting to note that cases of lightning striking and damaging cars is almost non-existent; this apparently carries over to EMP effects on vehicles as well.) The bottom line is that all vehicles probably won't be knocked out by EMP. An ordinary battery should be immune. Only local current flow can happen and that usually doesn't bother anything. Old vehicles should be essentially immune as well. To a lesser degree this is also true for an old television. Vacuum tubes can be damaged, but it's hard. Finally, a new television and new car would be toast. Modern circuits are quite sensitive to small currents. It's why new chips come in Mylar "anti-static" bags.

And why I am having this debate with a writer? My links are reference to show you’re wrong. I can't prove or give reference to what is in my head, anyone would have to refer to an external source which you haven't done. Plus you’re using tactics to avoid answering my questions whilst at the same time only giving more questions every time I present you with an answer.

 

 

Also why do you act like Hitler dictating that we are all wrong and we are all going to die a horrible death, your incapable of admitting your wrong and are purposefully dragging out this entire debate.

Edited December 11, 2011 by phoenix777

[ModelV]

Im trying to teach you how slim your chances of survival are and knock out the fictionalized ideas a lot of people have in their mind of how to survive and generally get rid of all the flawed logic.

 

Take your whole plane idea for instance. Sınce we are assuming this is a worse case senerio(sp) nuclear attack it wouldnt help you evacuate to a safe location as everywhere will be covered with the same amount of fallout more or less. Now obviously an airplane has its other uses but in your senerio its total anarchy with everyone trying to kill everyone so those uses go away pretty quickly.

 

The easier degree to get is actually a degree in teaching. Yes there are variables so the best thing to do hear is plug some in, model of place, distance of nuke(we know it hit the ground but still far enough away to not damage the plane directly.) and you should know which parts are the most sensitive to EMP. Plus its a rather low tech plane and I image it wouldnt take low to explain repairing each and every electronic part since there are so few. Plus you dont have to explain how it damage the parts. Just the damage itself.

 

EDIT: Also yes the many organic filtering of water does work. But since your using organics the supply is just not enough.

Edited December 4, 2011 by ModelV

[phoenix777]

You have fictionalised ideas and flawed logic.

 

Take my whole plane idea for instance. Since we are assuming this is a worse case scenario(sp) nuclear attack it would help you evacuate to a safe location as everywhere wouldn't be covered with the same amount of fallout more or less certain areas would have a high dose of fallout and a lot of areas very little, who's going to bother nuking a desert?. Now obviously an airplane has its other uses but in my scenario it's not complete anarchy, in some respects yes (absence of government, a state of lawlessness or political disorder due to the absence of governmental authority) and I never said it was. Who said everyone would be trying to kill everyone, some groups would (raiders and gangs) but that happens all the time in the real world, it is the few people that would kill you to take what you have got that you would need to worry about, you should try going to Africa. So those uses go away pretty quickly? I wouldn't have thought so as no matter what happens you would need an escape route, secondly you would be able to use an aircraft to travel to a safer area which has not suffered severe fallout, fallout works a bit like snow (doesn't melt) it falls to the ground in pretty much the same pattern and builds up on the ground in the same way, it will stack up against the side of a building that the winds have blown it into (this is basic physics) which would lead to an unexposed area being fallout free. Now if it works that simply with a wall what do you think a mountain range (which even works as a blast barrier) would do? you have stated ground bursts which minimises the spread of fallout and as you have said in you are in the mountains you would have a greater chance of survival a valley would survive the initial blast but collect fallout, with an aircraft you would be able to travel beyond these areas into what would most likely a pretty untouched area, are you saying that wouldn’t be useful.

 

The easier degree to get is actually a degree in teaching. Yes there are variables so the best thing to do hear is plug some in, model of place, distance of nuke(we know it hit the ground but still far enough away to not damage the plane directly.) and you should know which parts are the most sensitive to EMP. Plus its a rather low tech plane and I image it wouldnt take low to explain repairing each and every electronic part since there are so few. Plus you dont have to explain how it damage the parts. Just the damage itself.

 

EDIT: Also yes the many organic filtering of water does work. But since you’re using organics the supply is just not enough. - So organics would be less obtainable that chemicals = dumb - organics are renewable

Who said anything about teaching degrees?

And from what you have posted you don't understand how an EMP works, how it affects vehicles, what damage it causes. Also just saying model of place, distance of nuke, we know it hit the ground but still far enough away to not damage the plane directly isn't enough variables to even contemplate an answer. You haven't even mentioned what model of aircraft (we talking F22 spit or 747, a single prop single engine general light aviation aircraft doesn't mean it has low tech avionics) age of aircraft, what avionics it has installed, rotation of aircraft, geographical location, earth's magnetic field in relation to location, type of nuke, payload of nuke, how many nukes in area never mind their distance, elevation, is the aircraft grounded, is aircraft in metal clad building (remember metal conducts), was aircraft at time of EMP connected to a power grid, geographical features. The real problem would be fuel which you haven't even thought of - are you dumb? Your question is like these questions ; if I run a vehicle over a gun what would the damage be?, how would you repair the damage? (Here’s one for all you drivers out there) if I drive a vehicle into another vehicle what would the damage be?, how would you repair the damage? There is no one definitive answer there is about 1,000,000,000 variations of answer. Each and every electronic part since there are so few could actually consist of ignition, radio and transponder - dependant on type and age of aircraft, early panels were mechanical and clockwork, some aircraft's only electronic component is it's ignition. The only damaged component could be the battery if any. The most probable damage to any other component would be voltage overload as an EMP is similar to a lightning strike which would be testing and replace of each individual component using a multimeter to test each component for continuity, resistance, polarity, and testing the wiring with an insulation resistance continuity tester.

Edit: The hard part would be finding replacement components

Edited December 11, 2011 by phoenix777

[ModelV]

Okay Im pulling the "arguing with an idiot"* card here. Since onlooker have difficulty discerning which is which. Not only are you forgetting what were are talking about but your copying what Im saying showing youve run out of ideas.

 

 

Bye!

 

*Not flaming. Thats what its called. If admins think its too much I understand.

Edited December 5, 2011 by ModelV

[phoenix777]

GOD THIS IS SO POINTLESS!!! listen I am sick of saying this over and over, you obviously r to stupid to understand even BASIC ENGLITSH and Im getting sick of your dumb posts so I'm blocking u once and for all GOODBYE DUMB ASS! DONT BOTHER EMAILING ME CUZ I WONT GET IT, WELCOME TO IGNORESVILLE POPULATION: YOU, HOPE U LIKE TALKING TO A BLOCK LIST

I firmly believe what I wrote is correct, I'm absolutely fed up with your idiocy and simply cannot bear to read another word of your text, and if I somehow accidentally receive another communication from you, my head will explode and shower the surrounding tri-metro area with fragments of my brain atoms.

[marharth]

GOD THIS IS SO POINTLESS!!! listen I am sick of saying this over and over, you obviously r to stupid to understand even BASIC ENGLITSH and Im getting sick of your dumb posts so I'm blocking u once and for all GOODBYE DUMB ASS! DONT BOTHER EMAILING ME CUZ I WONT GET IT, WELCOME TO IGNORESVILLE POPULATION: YOU, HOPE U LIKE TALKING TO A BLOCK LIST

I firmly believe what I wrote is correct, I'm absolutely fed up with your idiocy and simply cannot bear to read another word of your text, and if I somehow accidentally receive another communication from you, my head will explode and shower the surrounding tri-metro area with fragments of my brain atoms.

Why would you mention his grammar when he said that is not his main language? It is also a terrible idea to attack someones grammar when you type in all caps and use "Im" and "r."

[phoenix777]

GOD THIS IS SO POINTLESS!!! listen I am sick of saying this over and over, you obviously r to stupid to understand even BASIC ENGLITSH and Im getting sick of your dumb posts so I'm blocking u once and for all GOODBYE DUMB ASS! DONT BOTHER EMAILING ME CUZ I WONT GET IT, WELCOME TO IGNORESVILLE POPULATION: YOU, HOPE U LIKE TALKING TO A BLOCK LIST

I firmly believe what I wrote is correct, I'm absolutely fed up with your idiocy and simply cannot bear to read another word of your text, and if I somehow accidentally receive another communication from you, my head will explode and shower the surrounding tri-metro area with fragments of my brain atoms.

Why would you mention his grammar when he said that is not his main language? It is also a terrible idea to attack someones grammar when you type in all caps and use "Im" and "r."

It's called sarcasm. And language is not the same as grammar, grammar is in every language. Dictionary definition; In linguistics, grammar is the set of structural rules that govern the composition of clauses, phrases, and words in any given natural language.

[marharth]

GOD THIS IS SO POINTLESS!!! listen I am sick of saying this over and over, you obviously r to stupid to understand even BASIC ENGLITSH and Im getting sick of your dumb posts so I'm blocking u once and for all GOODBYE DUMB ASS! DONT BOTHER EMAILING ME CUZ I WONT GET IT, WELCOME TO IGNORESVILLE POPULATION: YOU, HOPE U LIKE TALKING TO A BLOCK LIST

I firmly believe what I wrote is correct, I'm absolutely fed up with your idiocy and simply cannot bear to read another word of your text, and if I somehow accidentally receive another communication from you, my head will explode and shower the surrounding tri-metro area with fragments of my brain atoms.

Why would you mention his grammar when he said that is not his main language? It is also a terrible idea to attack someones grammar when you type in all caps and use "Im" and "r."

It's called sarcasm. And language is not the same as grammar, grammar is in every language. Dictionary definition; In linguistics, grammar is the set of structural rules that govern the composition of clauses, phrases, and words in any given natural language.

How is that sarcasm when you had similar grammar in your other posts?

 

If you English is not your main language, you obviously won't have good grammar in English.