28 Dec 2009 | India
Reply to comment
Test more
September 30, 2009 by Dr N K Srinivasan (not verified), 12 weeks 5 days ago
Reply
What's In
ADVERTISEMENT
Most Read and Popular on HardNews
Recent comments
Any history student would tell you that Gandhi was pro-British. He even fought wars for British against the locals in South Africa. When he came...
Kartikeya, Could you please do me a favour: could you read this article with an open mind without being emotional about it? See the gulf between...
I find it unfair that people dubbed MS Dhoni as the man with the Midas touch to begin with. Dhoni’s captaincy is different from other captains. As...
It’s brilliantly written and a horribly honest account. Almost every Muslim faces such situations and more so when the person is a Kashmiri.
...It is clear that we cannot stop with one test which yielded low results, even if the thermonuclear (TN) device (H bomb) worked. We need to test...
I’m unable to understand the justification of the last line of Sadiq Naqvi’s report which provides the number of people killed in the Naxal...
The story gives us the true picture of the condition of domestic helps for whom growth rate has little meaning. Their struggle for social equality...
This is not a news article, but an opinion piece. The writer is certainly entitled to his opinion but his statistics should not be taken as fact....
It is clear that we cannot stop with one test which yielded low results, even if the thermonuclear (TN) device (H bomb) worked. We need to test six or seven TN devices to gain adequate confidence and design capability in making these bombs. Computer simulations are not adequate. As for Shakti 1, the TN device, the yield was low, perhaps, due to poor design. After all, this is the first time BARC made this device. As for Santhanam’s assertions, one would doubt whether DRDO instruments performed well enough to draw any conclusions.
Seismic data analysed by Sikka et al, Douglas, Wallace and others point out the yield could be 55 kt plus/ minus 20 kt. Note that the seismic results are subject to a lot of calibrations/ assumptions to calculate the yield.
The third method — radiochemical analyses of debris are of great value which is available only to BARC. Only this data can confirm the achieved/ claimed yield. Santhanam may not have access to this data. It is high time that Chidambaram, Kakodkar et al release these data and explain fully their claims for 45kt yield. Such a step is required before further thinking is bestowed on this vexed, but important issue.
Dr NK Srinivasan
Via email