Wednesday, November 28, 2012
Iranian scientists running simulations of large nuclear weapon
VIENNA (AP) — Iranian scientists have run computer simulations for a nuclear weapon that would produce more than triple the explosive force of the World War II bomb that destroyed Hiroshima, according to a diagram obtained by The Associated Press.
The diagram was leaked by officials from a country critical of Iran’s atomic program to bolster their arguments that Iran’s nuclear program must be halted before it produces a weapon. The officials provided the diagram only on condition that they and their country not be named.
The International Atomic Energy Agency — the Vienna-based U.N. nuclear watchdog — reported last year that it had obtained diagrams indicating that Iran was calculating the “nuclear explosive yield” of potential weapons. A senior diplomat who is considered neutral on the issue confirmed that the graph obtained by the AP was indeed one of those cited by the IAEA in that report. He spoke only on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to discuss the issue.
The undated diagram that was given to the AP by officials of a country critical of Iran’s atomic program allegedly calculating the explosive force of a nuclear weapon. The curve peaks at just above 50 kilotons at around 2 microseconds, reflecting the full force of the weapon being modeled. The Farsi writing at the bottom translates “changes in output and in energy released as a function of time through power pulse” (photo credit: AP)
The IAEA report mentioning the diagrams last year did not give details of what they showed. But the diagram seen by the AP shows a bell curve — with variables of time in micro-seconds, and power and energy both in kilotons — the traditional measurement of the energy output, and hence the destructive power of nuclear weapons. The curve peaks at just above 50 kilotons at around 2 microseconds, reflecting the full force of the weapon being modeled.
The bomb that the United States dropped on Hiroshima in Japan during World War II, in comparison, had a force of about 15 kilotons. Modern nuclear weapons have yields hundreds of times higher than that.
The diagram has a caption in Farsi: “Changes in output and in energy released as a function of time through power pulse.” The number “5” is part of the title, suggesting it is part of a series.
David Albright, whose Institute for Science and International Security is used by the U.S. government as a go-to source on Iran’s nuclear program, said the diagram looks genuine but seems to be designed more “to understand the process” than as part of a blueprint for an actual weapon in the making.
“The yield is too big,” Albright said, noting that North Korea’s first tests of a nuclear weapon were only a few kilotons. Because the graph appears to be only one in a series, others might show lower yields, closer to what a test explosion might produce, he said.
The senior diplomat said the diagram was part of a series of Iranian computer-generated models provided to the IAEA by the intelligences services of member nations for use in its investigations of suspicions that Iran is trying to produce a nuclear weapon. Iran denies any interest in such a weapon and has accused the United States and Israel of fabricating evidence that suggests it is trying to build a bomb.
Asked about the project, Iran’s chief IAEA delegate, Ali Asghar Soltanieh, said he had not heard of it. IAEA spokeswoman Gill Tudor said the agency had no comment.
Iran has refused to halt uranium enrichment, despite offers of reactor fuel from abroad, saying it is producing nuclear fuel for civilian uses. It has refused for years to cooperate with the U.N. nuclear agency’s efforts to investigate its program.
Iran’s critics fear it could use the enriched uranium for military purposes. Such concerns grew this month when the IAEA said Iran is poised to double its output of higher-enriched uranium at its fortified underground facility — a development that could put Tehran within months of being able to make the core of a nuclear warhead.
In reporting on the existence of the diagrams last year, the IAEA said it had obtained them from two member nations that it did not identify. Other diplomats have said that Israel and the United States — the countries most concerned about Iran’s nuclear program — have supplied the bulk of intelligence being used by the IAEA in its investigation.
“The application of such studies to anything other than a nuclear explosive is unclear to the agency,” the IAEA said at the time.
The models were allegedly created in 2008 and 2009 — well after 2003, the year that the United States said Tehran had suspended such work in any meaningful way. That date has been questioned by Britain, France, Germany and Israel, and the IAEA now believes that — while Iran shut down some of its work back then — other tests and experiments continue today.
With both the IAEA probe and international attempts to engage Iran stalled, there are fears that Israel may opt to strike at Tehran’s nuclear program. The Jewish state insists it will not tolerate an Iran armed with nuclear arms.
An intelligence summary provided with the drawing linked it to other alleged nuclear weapons work — significant because it would indicate that Iran is working not on isolated experiments, but rather on a single program aimed at mastering all aspects of nuclear arms development.
The IAEA suspects that Iran has conducted live tests of conventional explosives that could be used to detonate a nuclear weapon at Parchin, a sprawling military base southeast of Tehran. The intelligence summary provided to the AP said data gained from those tests fed the model plotted in the diagram. Iran has repeatedly turned down IAEA requests to visit the site, which the agency fears is undergoing a major cleanup meant to eliminate any traces of such experiments.
The intelligence summary named nuclear scientists Mohsen Fakhrizadeh, Majid Shahriari and Fereidoun Abbasi as key players in developing the computer diagrams, adding that Shahriari and Abbasi were also involved in the Parchin testing.
Iran has for years rebuffed IAEA attempts to question Fakhrizadeh for his suspected involvement in secret programs. Shahriari was assassinated in 2010 by what Iran says were Israeli agents. Abbasi, now the head of Iran’s nuclear agency, was wounded in a separate assassination attempt the same day that Shahriari was killed.
The senior diplomat, who is familiar with the Iran probe, said the agency has not yet determined any connection between Parchin and the computer models. But Olli Heinonen, who headed the IAEA’s Iran investigation until 2010, said using the results of the alleged Parchin tests would “make sense as part of the design and testing of a (computer) model.”
Times of Israel
The diagram was leaked by officials from a country critical of Iran’s atomic program to bolster their arguments that Iran’s nuclear program must be halted before it produces a weapon. The officials provided the diagram only on condition that they and their country not be named.
The International Atomic Energy Agency — the Vienna-based U.N. nuclear watchdog — reported last year that it had obtained diagrams indicating that Iran was calculating the “nuclear explosive yield” of potential weapons. A senior diplomat who is considered neutral on the issue confirmed that the graph obtained by the AP was indeed one of those cited by the IAEA in that report. He spoke only on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to discuss the issue.
The undated diagram that was given to the AP by officials of a country critical of Iran’s atomic program allegedly calculating the explosive force of a nuclear weapon. The curve peaks at just above 50 kilotons at around 2 microseconds, reflecting the full force of the weapon being modeled. The Farsi writing at the bottom translates “changes in output and in energy released as a function of time through power pulse” (photo credit: AP)
The IAEA report mentioning the diagrams last year did not give details of what they showed. But the diagram seen by the AP shows a bell curve — with variables of time in micro-seconds, and power and energy both in kilotons — the traditional measurement of the energy output, and hence the destructive power of nuclear weapons. The curve peaks at just above 50 kilotons at around 2 microseconds, reflecting the full force of the weapon being modeled.
The bomb that the United States dropped on Hiroshima in Japan during World War II, in comparison, had a force of about 15 kilotons. Modern nuclear weapons have yields hundreds of times higher than that.
The diagram has a caption in Farsi: “Changes in output and in energy released as a function of time through power pulse.” The number “5” is part of the title, suggesting it is part of a series.
David Albright, whose Institute for Science and International Security is used by the U.S. government as a go-to source on Iran’s nuclear program, said the diagram looks genuine but seems to be designed more “to understand the process” than as part of a blueprint for an actual weapon in the making.
“The yield is too big,” Albright said, noting that North Korea’s first tests of a nuclear weapon were only a few kilotons. Because the graph appears to be only one in a series, others might show lower yields, closer to what a test explosion might produce, he said.
The senior diplomat said the diagram was part of a series of Iranian computer-generated models provided to the IAEA by the intelligences services of member nations for use in its investigations of suspicions that Iran is trying to produce a nuclear weapon. Iran denies any interest in such a weapon and has accused the United States and Israel of fabricating evidence that suggests it is trying to build a bomb.
Asked about the project, Iran’s chief IAEA delegate, Ali Asghar Soltanieh, said he had not heard of it. IAEA spokeswoman Gill Tudor said the agency had no comment.
Iran has refused to halt uranium enrichment, despite offers of reactor fuel from abroad, saying it is producing nuclear fuel for civilian uses. It has refused for years to cooperate with the U.N. nuclear agency’s efforts to investigate its program.
Iran’s critics fear it could use the enriched uranium for military purposes. Such concerns grew this month when the IAEA said Iran is poised to double its output of higher-enriched uranium at its fortified underground facility — a development that could put Tehran within months of being able to make the core of a nuclear warhead.
In reporting on the existence of the diagrams last year, the IAEA said it had obtained them from two member nations that it did not identify. Other diplomats have said that Israel and the United States — the countries most concerned about Iran’s nuclear program — have supplied the bulk of intelligence being used by the IAEA in its investigation.
“The application of such studies to anything other than a nuclear explosive is unclear to the agency,” the IAEA said at the time.
The models were allegedly created in 2008 and 2009 — well after 2003, the year that the United States said Tehran had suspended such work in any meaningful way. That date has been questioned by Britain, France, Germany and Israel, and the IAEA now believes that — while Iran shut down some of its work back then — other tests and experiments continue today.
With both the IAEA probe and international attempts to engage Iran stalled, there are fears that Israel may opt to strike at Tehran’s nuclear program. The Jewish state insists it will not tolerate an Iran armed with nuclear arms.
An intelligence summary provided with the drawing linked it to other alleged nuclear weapons work — significant because it would indicate that Iran is working not on isolated experiments, but rather on a single program aimed at mastering all aspects of nuclear arms development.
The IAEA suspects that Iran has conducted live tests of conventional explosives that could be used to detonate a nuclear weapon at Parchin, a sprawling military base southeast of Tehran. The intelligence summary provided to the AP said data gained from those tests fed the model plotted in the diagram. Iran has repeatedly turned down IAEA requests to visit the site, which the agency fears is undergoing a major cleanup meant to eliminate any traces of such experiments.
The intelligence summary named nuclear scientists Mohsen Fakhrizadeh, Majid Shahriari and Fereidoun Abbasi as key players in developing the computer diagrams, adding that Shahriari and Abbasi were also involved in the Parchin testing.
Iran has for years rebuffed IAEA attempts to question Fakhrizadeh for his suspected involvement in secret programs. Shahriari was assassinated in 2010 by what Iran says were Israeli agents. Abbasi, now the head of Iran’s nuclear agency, was wounded in a separate assassination attempt the same day that Shahriari was killed.
The senior diplomat, who is familiar with the Iran probe, said the agency has not yet determined any connection between Parchin and the computer models. But Olli Heinonen, who headed the IAEA’s Iran investigation until 2010, said using the results of the alleged Parchin tests would “make sense as part of the design and testing of a (computer) model.”
Times of Israel
Fitch downgrades Argentina and predicts default
Fitch cut its long-term rating for Argentina to "CC" from "B," a downgrade of five notches, and cut its short-term rating to "C" from "B". A rating of "C" is one step above default, AP reported.
US judge Thomas Griesa of Manhattan federal court last week ordered Argentina to set aside $1.3bn for certain investors in its bonds by December 15, even as Argentina pursues appeals.
Those investors don't want to go along with a debt restructuring that followed an Argentine default in 2002. If Argentina is forced to pay in full, other holders of debt totaling more than $11bn are expected to demand immediate payment as well.
Argentine politicians, even those opposed to President Cristina Fernandez, have nearly unanimously criticized the judge's ruling as threatening the success of the debt relief that enabled Argentina to grow again.
Ratings by agencies like Fitch are used by investors to evaluate the safety of a country's debt. Lower ratings can make it more expensive for countries to borrow money on the bond market, exacerbating their financial problems.
Argentina is in a deepening recession and is grappling with social unrest. Besides the court case, Fitch cited a "tense and polarized political climate" and public dissatisfaction with high inflation, weak infrastructure and currency.
Fitch also said that Argentina's economy has slowed sharply this year.
Of the two other major rating agencies, Standard & Poor's has a rating of "B-" for Argentina, five steps above default, and Moody's rates it "B3 negative", also five steps above default.
Telegraph
Atom Smasher Creates New Kind of Matter
Collisions between particles inside the Large Hadron Collider atom smasher have created what looks like a new form of matter.
The new kind of matter is called color-glass condensate, and is a liquidlike wave of gluons, which are elementary particles related to the strong force that sticks quarks together inside protons and neutrons (hence they are like "glue").
Scientists didn't expect this kind of matter would result from the type of particle collisions going on at the Large Hadron Collider at the time. However, it may explain some odd behavior seen inside the machine, which is a giant loop where particles race around underneath Switzerland and France.
When scientists sped up protons (one of the building blocks of atoms) and lead ions (lead atoms, which contain 82 protons each, stripped of their electrons), and crashed them into each other, the resulting explosions liquefied those particles and gave rise to new particles in their wake. Most of these new particles, as expected, fly off in all directions at close to the speed of light.
But recently scientists noticed that some pairs of particles were flying off from the collision point in correlated directions.
"Somehow they fly at the same direction even though it's not clear how they can communicate their direction with one another. That has surprised many people, including us," MIT physicistGunther Roland, whose group led the analysis of the collision data along with Wei Liof Rice University, said in a statement.
A similar flight pattern is seen when two heavy particles, such as lead and lead, crash into each other. In this case, the collisions create what's called quark-gluon plasma — a superhot soup of particles similar tothe state of the universe just after the Big Bang. This soup can sweep particles in the same direction, explaining why their flight directions wouldbe correlated.
But quark-gluon plasma isn't possible with lead-proton collisions, like the ones in the new study. Now researchers think a different state of matter, the color-glass condensate, may act in a similar way. The color-glass condensate's dense swarm of gluons may also sweep particles off in the same direction, suggested Brookhaven National Laboratory physicistRajuVenugopalan, who first predicted the substance, which may also be seen after proton-proton collisions.
The mechanism may depend on a weird quirk of particles called quantum entanglement. Two particles can be entangled so that they retain a connection even after they are separated, and an action on one reverberates on the other.
Entangled gluons in the color-glass condensate could explain how particles flying away from the collision point might share information about their flight direction with each other, Venugopalan said.
The intriguing phenomenon was not expected to result from the LHC's run of proton-lead collisions, which was meant to serve as a reference point for comparison to other types of collisions.
"You don't expect quark-gluon plasma effects" with lead-proton collisions, Rolandsaid. "It was supposed to be sort of a reference run — a run in which you can study background effects and then subtract them from the effects that you see in lead-lead collisions.
Space.com
Muslims Claim Netanyahu Plans to Build ‘False’ Holy Temple
Al Aqsa officials warn that the “new Likud” is planning to build a “false” Third Holy Temple and divide the Muslim compound.
Muslim paranoia of Jews on the Temple Mount had reached panic stages even before this week’s Likud primaries that placed Jewish Leadership faction leader Moshe Feiglin in a ranking that assures hiselection to the Knesset in January.
Arab world media constantly report of Jewish “invasions” of the Temple Mount every time Jews try to ascend the holy site. Israeli authorities enforce the Muslim Waqf policy that forbids Jews to pray there or carry prayer books or other holy articles with them.
The Palestinian Authority and the Islamic Movement’s branch in the Galilee frequently claim that Israel is digging underneath the Temple Mount to cause its collapse.
Now, the Al Aqsa Foundation has pointed to the popular support for Feiglin and other strong nationalists of the Likud as proof that Al Aqsa Mosque on the Temple Mount will be “contaminated” by Jews.
Worst of all, the Foundation claims that the election results show that Prime Minister Netanyahu soon will announce plans for building the Third Temple, which it describes as “false," in line with increasingly popular Muslim ideology that the First and Second Temples never existed.
All of the “evidence” is “undeniable proof that the Al Aqsa mosque is in danger and that the Muslim world must shoulder the responsibility to save it,” according to Al Aqsa.
Feiglin is known for his desire to pray on the Temple Mount, and after the Pillar of Defense counter terrorist operation, he wrote, “We must expel the Muslim Waqf from the Temple Mount and restore exclusive Israeli sovereignty over the Mount – Judaism's most holy site. We must encourage Jews to ascend the Temple Mount after the proper halakhic preparations and to actualize their sovereignty over the beating heart of the Jewish Nation.”
Israel National News
The new aircraft carrier will make Russia superpower on sea
The new aircraft carrier will combine the properties of a command and control vessel and that of a powerful defensive ship. It is also planned to fit up this cruiser with the most advanced equipment that has no analogues in the world.
The main purpose of such a ship is to deliver strikes at targets in the air, on water, on land and even in space. The latter task will be achieved if the ship works in a tandem with a group of orbital facilities.
At present, Russia has only one heavy air-capable cruiser, called “Admiral Kuznetsov”, which is drawing its duty in Russia’s northern waters. There are plans to modernize it by 2020, but Russian navy commanders have long been saying that Russia needs more heavy cruisers as well.
In an interview with the Voice of Russia, analyst Ivan Konovalov said:
“There have been certain misunderstandings between the Russian United Shipbuilding Corporation and the Defense Ministry concerning this issue. But when the country’s top leaders announced that Russia needs new aircraft carriers, there are no more misunderstandings. The Russian navy has 4 subdivisions - thus, it is planned that Russia will have 4 battle groups headed by aircraft carriers.”
These groups will consist of the aircraft carrier itself, at least 6 more other battle ships and 1 or 2 submarines.
On November 23, the Russian Navy’s Commander-in-Chief Admiral Victor Chirkov said that works on the project of the new aircraft carrier should be finished by 2020. Money on this project has already been allocated.
The conditions which the commanders have put forward for the new ship is that it should spend a very long time without being reloaded with any energy from outside (it is planned that this will be reached by equipping the ship with nuclear reactors), be workable at any weather and have a high combat viability.
The editor-in-chief of the Russian magazine “Export Vooruzheniy” (“Export of arms”) Andrey Florov says:
“For Russia, having such a cruiser would mean more than just having another military ship. If Russia has it, it will be able to claim for the status of a superpower from the point of view of navy – although, of course, the cruiser will be not only a symbol of power, but be used for practical aims as well. It will defend Russian submarines and land-based marines from air attacks.”
The displacement of the new aircraft carrier will be more than 50,000 tons, which is bigger than that of “Admiral Kuznetsov” but smaller than that of its modern US analogues. It will be able to take about 80 airplanes on its deck.
Voice of Russia
Britain should vote on leaving EU, Italian prime minister Mario Monti says
Mario Monti said he had told Mr Cameron in person that he must resolve “the fundamental question" over Britain's future: “Do you want to remain in the European Union or not?”
He also suggested that some European politicians, especially in France, would like Britain to leave the union.
Mr Monti is the second European leader in recent weeks to suggest publicly that Britain’s EU membership is now in doubt.
Angela Merkel, the German chancellor, told MEPs earlier this month that Britain could be left “alone in the world” if it leaves the EU.
The remarks from EU leaders will add to the pressure on Mr Cameron to give a clear statement about his policy on Britain’s EU membership.
A growing number of Conservatives, including Cabinet ministers, have said Britain should be willing to consider withdrawal. The Prime Minister has said he backs membership for now, but has not ruled out leaving.
Speaking on a late-night Italian chat show earlier this week, Mr Monti said that uncertainty about Britain's position is a concern.
“There is a problem with Great Britain,” Mr Monti said. “I am among those people who say that we need to keep Britain within the European Union.
“It is in the interests of Britain to remain in the EU and it is in the interests of the EU that Britain remains.
He added: “In Europe there are some who would feel that their heart would be lighter if Great Britain left the union. I believe some of the French share this view. I am convinced that we must find a compromise with the British.”
Mr Cameron visited Rome earlier this month. Mr Monti said he had told the Prime Minister to clarify Britain’s European position.
“Above all, the British – I spoke with David Cameron about this last week – must ask their electorate, not whether they agree or disagree on the latest change that other European countries want to adopt...but pose a fundamental question: do you want to remain in the European Union or not?”
Mr Monti, sometimes seen as sympathetic to Britain in EU negotiations said there were three important areas in which Britain’s contribution to the EU was important – the economy, foreign relations and, “one day”, defence policy.
“But the English manage to be quite exasperating when they ask, as a condition for remaining aboard this great European ship, particular exceptions, particular dispensations, that could amount to making holes in the ship and making it sail less well, if not sink altogether."
The Telegraph
Chinese fighter plane: US reaction on the verge of a nervous breakdown
Last Sunday, China successfully conducted the first test flights of carrier-based fighter planes launched from its first aircraft carrier. So far experts hesitate to forecast when the Chinese 'shock' air-force unit will begin operations. However, in the opinion of Konstantin Sivkov, first vice-president of the Academy of Geopolitical Studies, Washington has already detected a threat to its presence in the Asia-Pacific region, in the form of China's first aircraft carrier:
Currently, China is showing special activity there. And if in the past its influence was economic and demographic, it is now prepared to interfere relying on military power. China has built an aircraft carrier based on the former Soviet carrier Varyag. This naturally gives it more military power when necessary. Especially given that the construction of four new carriers has begun.
Konstantin Sivkov believes that the five Chinese aircraft carriers represent China's response to the US strategy of escalating its own military presence in the Asia-Pacific region. Beijing's upgrading of its military presence coincides with the Pentagon's deployment of up to 60% of its offensive naval capacity in the region. Today, no fewer than two US aircraft carrier squadrons are stationed in the Pacific and Indian oceans. They participate on a regular basis in joint naval exercises with South Korea, Japan, the Philippines and Australia.
The geopolitical standoff epicentre is moving to the Asia-Pacific as both the USA and China view that region as vital to their interests, says Vladimir Yevseev, director of the Center for Socio-Political Studies:
Currently, a global system to contain China is taking shape. This is the reason behind the US and Australia setting up a powerful naval and air force base. Apparently, the US presence in the Philippines will be strengthened as well. The USA does everything it can to get closer to China. For that purpose apparently, it will escalate its military presence in other countries as well. In general, from Australia to Alaska, a missile defence arc is being built.
According to experts, the missile defence system in Asia is intended to nullify the escalation of China's missile potential. The appearance of Chinese aircraft carriers will inevitably prompt changes to America's surveillance system for monitoring the Chinese Navy. Today China, in its military talks with the USA, absolutely insists that US intelligence activity in the Pacific region must stop.
Recently, in Beijing the US Defense Secretary, Leon Panetta, promised not to interfere in China's disputes with its neighbours. Victoria Nuland's statement about the USA's readiness to support its allies in Asia, against the background of China's escalating military power appears, in fact, to run against those promises made by the Pentagon chief.
Voice of Russia
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)