Bitcoin Forum

There are rumors of war everywhere as you guys know...

I can write a whole book showing evidence for WWIII coming really soon... and my question for you is.. What kind of influence do you think such a war would have on Bitcoin?

Rly? First Time I've heard of that.



Maybe you should do that might make you a small fortune from other people like you ;-).


To answer your question: Should WWIII happen BTC will become essentially worthless as will any other currency.

I don't know where you live, but there certainly are none of them here.

BTC Will cause WW3  mayb

There is a big possibility that world war III even in few months time. I thinks bitcoin's/gold/silver/platinum  price will skyrocket if people sees this as their last resort to store and retains the value of their money.

If WWIII happened the price of BTC would be the least of my concerns

But we will die due to an epdimic virus before, but that cannot happen because we will die due to an asteroid impact before, but that cannot happen because aliens will invade us first, but that cannot happen because terrorists will nuke us all to death but that cannot happen because the zombie outbreak will be before but...

The idea is, America + Israel are aiming to attack Iran, as we're still in this war for oil/petrodollar dubbed "kill the terrorists".  Russia & China are saying, if America or Israel attacks Iran, they're going to attack back; China's also at war with America through currencies, but I'll let you do your own research there.

Thus, WWIII.  Or something close to it.

If the internet survives then cryptocurrency will survive.

Right now there is a lot possible starting point of world war III.
1..Japan and China >sinkaku islands,  rich in oil and gas.
2. China & Taiwan and Philippines> panatag shoal and spartly islands both rich in oil and gas, Us will be drag because of mutual defense treaty.
3.NorthKorea, its brewing. In times of war 90 percent possibility china will help north korea.
4. If Israel attacks Iran. US and Russia possible china will be drag  to war because its one of their biggest oil supplier.
5. Syria. If Israel attacks Syria. Russia and US will be drag to war.

yeah it really depends on how big the WW3 is, if it demolishes most of the worlds civilizations and makes the internet useless then it'll be as useless as any other form of wealth

Doubt it.

Even if the internet survives, what benefit can bitcoin give? The main benefit of internet is to facilitate communication and make deal (exchange). The actual exchange of good still requires unrestricted border movement and transportation infrastructure intact for it to happen.

In a total war scenario, one can not buy basic necessity 200 miles away from where one is.

 

And lets not forget that there's nuclear weapons in every part of the land and the sea, many of which we do not know the whereabouts.

I don't know how we figured out how to sleep at night, but we did it.  Mostly by forgetting.

I can't sleep at night  :-[

"Rly? First Time I've heard of that."

As you can see from other replies... it's NOT new... at all and many people have been following on what's going on with the world military and financial movements.

"I don't know where you live, but there certainly are none of them here."
I don't know where you live... but it seems you are REALLY disconnected with the rest of the world - I will show a few links at the bottom of this reply just to give some evidences for people who don't follow up on what's going on... but again - just look at other replies and you will see... this is real and is happening right now.

Generally speaking, I completely agree with you and this is a fair "one liner" summary for a very thorough investigation and research leading up. I won't go long about this right now as I want to hear more opinions first:)


Very educated person - following up on what's going on and you got my respect sir, well done. The list of 5 you just mentioned are really the main events going on as we speak and they all have great chance of happening during 2013, while the 5th one has increased chances to happen before September this year, after that we have the 4th option (rated by chances and date) and then the rest.
Again, I'm being very general here, as I think people should research on their own and I want to hear more opinions. but really - great reply sir.


The thing is... think about a post-war world, where over 50% of the world's population is gone... Some form of payment system that unites the world should appear and help the world recover. After such a war, there is a very good chance of a "united world" instead of just "USA" or "European union", therefore there will also be a need for a single "currency" to work with.

Again, I won't go deep into this right now, just wanted to clear my through in regards to this.

I also promised some links,
So here you go (notice the dates to connect dots):
https://www.youtube.com/user/MrWoodworksfilms Watch a few of these talk shows.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e4f2mgj4UT0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6iUmBVR-RLI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zemQ4u5J7gA

I just listed a few... if I wanted - I could list a few... hundred..

That's it for this reply - thanks for everyone - I'm very impressed with the level of people on this forum... and we are just on the "newbie" section! nice:)

I bet Bitcoins will become the world wide currency, after the apocalypse of course.

That would likely follow, as all the sheeple would either stop being sheeple or stop being alive.

If it happens i wish i could survival it to spend my BTC :(

Nope. We all know after an acopalypse it will either be poker chips or coke bottle caps that we'll have for currency ;-).

if  WWIII will happen so will the bitcoin skyrock,

no way that it could go another way .


internet will never be unavalibul.

I have a feeling if WWIII ensues, there will be a limit on the internet. Spread updates, false news  :P and what not. No doubt all traffic will be monitored everywhere.

ww3http://static.wix.com/media/0ad54b_d95891e8074e12d9b61a0062236a7755.jpg_srz_400_254_75_22_0.50_1.20_0.00_jpg_srz



ww2 http://s1.hubimg.com/u/973616_f520.jpg

When you say WW3 do you mean a full exchange of nuclear weapons between major powers?  Because if that happens the "currency " anyone will accept is food, medical supplies and fuel.  Those who are unlucky enough to survive to see the beginning of 10,000 years of blighted earth.

If you are envisioning something less than a double digit exchange of WMD,  then pretty much most of the current powers will still be around and international trade will continue.  Everything will be different but it will be the same.  Look at pre and post WW2 for clarity on that problem.

If you do not envision an exchange of WMD between major powers, why are we talking about this?

BTW, a simple guideline to who are major powers (today) is permanent membership on UN Security Council.  Regional powers are of interest to their neighbors but not the world.

For example, Israel engages Iran in Air Sea war to cripple WMD capabilities.   No shared borders so no land war. Iraq, Jordan, Syria, and Saudi Arabia will not be volunteering to be battle ground.   Dominant Air Sea power in region is US. US allies and China will press hard for US intervention to limit or stop conflict.   Russia will attempt to befriend Iran with limited success.

Minimal impact on world trade six months after end of war.

Feel free to send BTC if this was useful.    ;)

WW3 Really?

Anyway a true world war would obliterate bitcoin since it relies on the worldwide network. In a world war the internet itself will be shredded to pieces and perhaps never be rebuilt into the free network that it is today but stay fractured and under the jurisdiction of local law like china or worse.

"I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones."

-Albert Einstein

I have a feeling the internet would be a pretty broken concept if such events ensued...

But, up, I guess?

I'm not sure the global climate exists nowadays for a full blown world war.
The world is significantly different from the days of world war 1 and 2.
The major superpowers need each other too much to annihilate each other.

The modern age of warfare is all to do with small localized conflicts and proxy wars.

This was a common viewpoint before the Great War (later renamed WW1) and before WW2.

In the run up before each of those conflicts,  the thinkers claimed the Great Powers were to interconnected to have a big war.  The leaders prior to WW1 were all related by blood or marriage.   It was unthinkable that they would have more than a little proxy war somewhere.  Prior to WW2, world trade was a significant cohesive force and WW1 had shown how costly war is.

We will always have another war.  It will always be longer, deadlier, and more expensive than planned.  I expect we are transitioning to a period when wars will be more about belief systems than  economic access.  Conversion at the point of the sword with morality enforced by the government.   This also means wars will be fought against enemies that are dehumanised.   War time atrocities will become more common as the enemy is less human.  This leads to the use of WMDs against civilian targets.

Sorry,  very depressing but this the trend I see.  Bitcoin will be valuable as long as there is a communication medium to support it and traders moving goods between money systems.

The way things stand since the crash of 2008 - any little thing can set things off -
just look at Greece, Spain, Portugal.  How long to do you think that the young
and unemployed will hold still?

Try draw as many similarities as you like but... Can any major power even survive without importing nowdays? They are consuming everything from food to metal and only perhaps Russia has the diversity of resources to piss off the world. Even then they dont have the infrastructure to utilize it.

Todays super powers simply cant afford to cut trade relations. Especially since their enemies are their greatest trading partners.

Informative post! Keep em coming  :)

Possible, but not likely.
The costs are to high compared to the possible effect of such actions.

Meh

China has more to gain from stability in the region, even though they may show some strength and be disruptive.

Meh.

NK might do something stupid. (Which is not helped by US's confronting line -NK is like an attention seeking child and US plays along instead of being the sensible one at the sideline.)
But I doubt China will step in except as negotiators.
I think China sees NK as a loose cannon and not like something worth defending too much.


Meh.
Doubt Israel will do any first attack, they have enough problems as it is, and Iran knows that US will step in if they attack.
If there were to become a conflict, russia might support with equipment, but they will get a deal to get their oil anyways.
Don't think US would risk being tangled up in another war if they can avoid it.


Meh.
Israel has nothing to win by this, and Syria does not have a proper rule ATM.
Would not be too surprised if there were some border-attacks by Syrian warlords though. But not something that is likely to escalate.


Remember that China own a huge amount of US debt. If they wanted to hurt the US, they would simply sell their debt and collapse the dollar. They could also stop export to US. This would hurt both nations. But China could still export to europe knowing that a lot of the export would be resold to the US, but then at a higher price which would hurt US more.

There is a big possibility that world war III even in few months time. I thinks bitcoin's/gold/silver/platinum  price will skyrocket if people sees this as their last resort to store and retains the value of their money.

Who do you think will fight if there's ww3? China/ US?

Please write the book.

I think the current world power balance are pretty stable, too stable for something like WWIII, things going on in south china sea would be nothing bigger than a conflict at the worst. and most likely it would never happen. And China would never risk everything to support NK b/c that's against it's best interest

I wanted to post this. :)

A new game coming out?  ;D

Israel is a very small country, it is smaller than most states in the USA and is surrounded by tons of enemy countries, just open the middle east map to see the sizes. Now, with that in mind, you need to look at the history of Israel and the Jewish people. Every generation there is some nation, at least one, that wants to annihilate all Jews from the face of the earth, this is why a country that is only 65 years old and had so many wars already. Wars with Egypt, wars with Syria, wars where Egypt, Syria, Jordan and Lebanon joined together to destroy Israel and many many more. Just look at the history. Now, as you understand Israel takes threats seriously, as history proved that those threatening to kill Jews, once they are capable or think they are capable of doing so, they act on it.
Just like in WWII the Nazi's decided to kill every Jew on planet earth and did what they did to kill over 6,000,000... So, what I'm getting at here is simple: today Iran keeps on saying (publicly) that they want to destroy Israel completely and remove it from the world's map. While saying that they keep on advancing their nuclear capabilities and once they have that... there will be a time + place in history, once again, where a nation that has intentions on killing Jews will have the capabilities, or think they have the capabilities to do so will emerge.
This means Israel wants to prevent that situation from ever happening, and therefore if Iran keeps going nuclear as they do right now... there will be no choice for Israel but to attack Iran in a defensive attack. Just like when a person tells you he wants to kill you and your entire family, he hates you deeply and then he starts to load a gun... You might tell yourself that as long as he doesn't have a means of killing you, let him talk, but once he has the gun, once he has the bullets and once he starts putting the bullets inside the gun you might want to stop him before he does what he does to you and your family.

So all you need to do in order to know the chances of this scenario happening is to check how far Iran advanced and is advancing with their "Gun-Loading" or in our case - making of nuclear bomb(s).


You need to watch the news more carefully. Israel doesn't aim to attack Syria itself, but Hizballah is getting armed by Syria, and as you might know, Hizballah wants to destroy Israel, and already poses amazing arsenal of weapons and arms... Israel must make sure Hizballah doesn't get strategic weapons capable of destroying cities and important factories and areas in Israel country... Again, the size of Israel is very important here, because there's almost no strategic-depth. If a rocket is fired from Lebanon (Hizballah) to Israel, there is no sea, or almost any land for it to fly above... which means the time it takes for the rocket to hit is very short and also it means that less-advanced rockets (rockets that are capable of flying shorter distances, carry less explosives etc) can hurt Israel easily.

Therefore, when Hizballah keeps on threatening  to destroy Tel-Aviv, there is the same story here... while they just "talk", let them talk... but once you see they are arming with weapons capable of doing what they want to do... Israel must defend itself and prevent such arms of ever getting to Hizballah.
Therefore, Israel already attack deliveries from Syria to Hizballah and after these attacks Syria... instead of saying they wouldn't give Hizballah weapons and arms... said they will give them their most advanced weapons and they will do it asap! Furthermore, Iran and Russia are backing-up Syria by giving them weapons, troops and diplomatic support but if that's not enough, recently Russia gave Syria s-300 rockets, which are super-advanced anti-aircraft weapons. Furthermore, the officers activating these rockets are Russians and it's already setup in Syria.

This is like saying to Israel to "stop defend itself against weapons and arms delivery to Hizballah by Syria"... but just as you thought it couldn't get any worse, Russia clearly stated that Israel must "stop attacking Syria" which we all know is not "attack" but a pre-attack-defensive measures.

So, just imagine the next missile cargo going from Syria to Hizballah, and I'm talking about chemical weapons and advanced rockets here... Israel will look at the cargo and... what? do nothing?! would you?!? at that point, the cargo delivery will have to be stopped, and then Russia should activate their s-300 missiles, and then we have the beginning of a WWIII.

I have so much more to tell you guys...as I said I can write a book about all this. but I think, it's enough for now. Just look at the nations involved here and go research on your own a little bit. You can come back here and ask questions - I would answer them, mostly.

One more answer to a question asked here before I wrap this reply up:


Generally speaking there will be 2 sides for the conflict, from the one hand we have USA + Many countries in Europe, like France, England, Italy, Ireland etc and also South Korean and Japan and from the other hand we have Russia+China + North Korea + Iran + Syria etc.

If we take a look at a complete list I think we get to about 70 countries involved in this thing... just look at the current Sea-Military-exercise taking place near Iran by USA and 40 more countries together exercising sea-mining removals and attacks from sea.
(Yes, it is taking place as we speak).

I honestly wonder exactly how many countries will jump in to aid America. I get the feeling that most are tired of their bullshit. Its not like they are going to turn on America but exactly how willing are they to help?

Ao what you are saying is that Israel needs to attack all neighbouring countries before they do?

No, I'm not saying Israel is to attack "all neighboring countries", only those proving to have the agenda and will and capabilities to destroy Israel and also as a last resort.

Think about it, if you live in the USA and North Korean threatens to destroy the USA, the USA will "ask" the same questions:
1. Are the serious about this threat - do they have an Agenda of actually doing such a thing?
2. Do they have the capabilities to do such a thing, or are they aiming to get such capabilities?
3. Will they act once they have such capabilities?

So, in the USA case its much harder to destroy because of the size of the united states and also because of the distance, and also it's harder to "imagine" one will actually "Act" (3) because of the USA military power is so overwhelming and can avenge even after a strike hits it. But what if there was a bomb that can destroy ALL of the USA in 1 strike? would the USA allow North Korean to hold such a bomb? Would they allow North Korean to try and get to it underground - all the while threatening to annihilate the USA? Fortunately for the USA there is no such a single-bomb yet, but a country the size of Israel can be destroyed by a single bomb these days..
So in Israel's case, passive defensive measures are of course also taken into consideration, such as:
1. Once a country/Terror organization has the means to act, can anti-missile defense work efficiently enough to defend the Israel?
2. Do Israel have enough Air-dominance to remove threats before happening, i.e while launching missiles?
3. Can Israel take such hits without being critically damaged, wounded or even completely destroyed or crippled and thus vulnerable to other threats? (etc) and what is the rate of death from potential attacks?

But once you start answering these questions, you might find yourself in a position where all  of Israel's (or any country) measures start to fail and the potential damage is too high, then the defensive measures must become active measurements, such as politically trying to stop movement of troops or arms, moving army to locations where it shows you will act if the other side prepares to launch attacks, and even strike against critical points of "balance changing abilities".

Those "balance changing" "things", such as mass-destruction weapons that are being sent to Terrorists are called "balance changing" because up until the Terrorists or the ones want to kill others get to such capabilities, there's a balance between the passive defensive measures and the threats.
This balance is often called "cold war" or "peaceful time" where in fact it is not peaceful at all, but an arm-race.
Once the line of "balance changing capabilities" is crossed,  the balance is broken and passive-defenses become less and less effective sometimes over time and sometimes at-once. Then we get to the active measurements where at the top of the line we see military action to prevent the other side of harming your country.
(Such as defensive strikes to remove the balance-changing capabilities from the world).
Such calculations are different from country to country, according to location, demographics, capabilities, allies, resources, current threats, future potential threats and many more factors.

So, as you can see, we are not talking about a Strike against Syria, but against Hizballah trying to get Syrian weapons of mass-destructions. Same goes for Iran. these are "balance changing weapons" or "capabilities."

To summarize:
No, I am not saying Israel needs to attack all neighboring countries before they do". I'm saying Israel, just like any other country, needs to evaluate the threats the country is facing and measure them according to capabilities of passive defense, allies, politics and active defensive measurements.
Once done the calculation, just like any country, Israel needs to defend itself against threats that can actually harm it. Again, I'm not talking about just threats, but a real agenda+will+capabilities.

(No is speaking about Israel attacking Turkey, or Jordan, or Egypt for example.... which are all neighboring countries).

If the super powers of today _were_ able to survive with out importing, we would probably be safer.  Japan attacked the US and UK because they could not survive with out US and UK oil.  Truly independent super powers would not be forced to compete for resources on the world market.  The argument that our world powers are too interconnected to go to war ignores the competition inherent in that interconnection and the risk of conflict rising from that competition.

Three of the five cases listed by OP are obviously resource competition (China - Japan, China - Taiwan, N. Korea - S. Korea).  I submit the fourth case, Israel - Syria, can be traced to water and land competition.  The last case, Israel - Iran is a more interesting problem since it is not obviously about resources but more along the lines of power projection and status.  Those can be tied back to resource access.


In any case, trade and resource competition seem to be more likely to lead to war than prevent war.

What I mean is that countries like America might not survive long enough to fight seriously if they get cut off from certain key trading partners. Especially food and oil.

100 years after, burned communication save with only miracles help part of internal network, mining is a pleasure of richest peoples, latest block is found in one of the closed underground cities, and nobody still, no know who really was this Satoshi.....

So they should only be attacking Iran and Syria then... All in the name of peace and a final solution offc.

I would say a better question is will the US act to protect those countries who are not supporting the US today?

It is only recently that the US has taken an "aggressive" position on the world stage.  Up until WW2, the US was isolationist to the Western Hemisphere.  In the words of Fowler, "Pushy Americans, always showing up late for every war. Overpaid, oversexed, and over here."  Getting the US to come to the Great War and then to WWII was not easy.  Convincing the US to stay engaged in Europe following WWII was not easy either.  Following the end of the Cold War, there was significant domestic pressure to "bring the boys home".  There is no guarantee that the US would jump in to aid yet another foreign nation, especially given that we are sick and tired of being played for the bad guy by the same ass-hats we save.

Next time some fascist, socialist or theocratic dictatorship decides he wants to occupy your homeland, rape your women, steal your wealth and burn your crops remember that there is no guarantee the "merikans" will show up.  We don't have to.  We are safe and secure behind our oceans.  So, before you chose to bad mouth the "merikan" go visit the Normandy American Cemetery and Memorial and ask yourself what the world would be like without "merikans" on the beaches of Nomandy.

Good luck facing the Russian bear and the Chinese dragon without the "merican" eagle.

Food

The US exports food.

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

China and Russia depend on food imports.



Oil

The US oil production is rising and will soon exceed domestic consumption.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/may/14/us-oil-surge-transforms-markets-undercuts-opec/ (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/may/14/us-oil-surge-transforms-markets-undercuts-opec/)

China is a net importer of oil.



So, explain to me again why the "mericans" should bother to come to the assistance of yet another ungrateful nation "over there"?

Actually we got an eagle already. The Black Eagle that almost conquered the world during WW2 and WW1. Germany. Besides dont get me started on what America did and did not do during WW2. I dont want to crush your dreams.

The thing is... No one hates us so why would we be attacked? On the other hand everyone hates you so your a prime target. Remember 9/11? Yeah... your the one they want.

Good points; hell, America has so much food, it has to burn it; it even pays farmers to stop farming, because there's too much fucking food.

But if America was cut off from China, who would make all those little plastic figurines?

You are welcome to submit to that black eagle again, if that is your preference.

As for my dreams about what America did and did not do during WW2, bring it on.  You might be surprised about my knowledge of military history.  Not just US military history but world military history.  Let's just call it a hobby of mine.


I remember 9/11.


The fact that the US is targeted by terrorists correlates with the US being involved in the world "over there".  No US presence, no US target.


Tell me again, why should those "merikans" save your ass the next time it is in a sling?

Not a problem.  We cut off food and oil imports to China until they give us as many of those little plastic figurines as we want.

This points out how easy that would be.

http://americansecurityproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/choke_points.jpg

Interesting to ready replies. More interesting to see how fast it went off-topic.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Amt9mLvQM5w

People never know that they are in a world war in the early stages of that war. Its all up to this historians. I suspect though that historians may mark this -> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XP1Za-xu8r0 as the beginning of world war 3.

Remind me again how much of that food power you got there that is actually consumed by people and not wasted on cattle?
Regarding the Oil. Perhaps I was wrong about the supply but you will still run into allot of problems trust me.

Alright *Cracks his fingers* What was the largest role America played during WW2? What is the role we have to thank you for? The arms dealer. You took the money, produced the weapons and equipment then got rich. Fair enough. But what have you to be proud of? That your troops arrived to Europe equipped for WW1? That some of your troops had British tin can helmets from WW1 all through WW2? The "Ronson" tank that never failed to light up after the first strike? There are plenty of stories of how entrenched Germans only got overwhelmed because you had more burning tanks then they had anti tank rounds.

You hardly got involved on the West front and even then the war was on the East front with 80 to 65% of the Nazi army fighting the Russians (the number went down when they got crushed and moved a bit to engage the west)

Then we have the "largest naval war" in WW2... In a land based conquest thats not a very hard title to get btw so good job. Your navy and air force fiercely engaged crazy Japanese soldiers with planes made out of wood. Seriously aside from their navy and motivation there was nothing exceptional about the Japanese during WW2 and dont come to me with the kamikaze bullshit. All it did was give you 3 hours of repair woopdedooo. Then you became the first country to use a Nuke (2 to be exact) against another country. On hindsight not that great of an idea if you ask me MR annihilator of citizens. Seriously talk about throwing stones in a glass house with the accusations against nazi war crimes.

Shall i go on? Perhaps you want to talk about Omaha beach? How about the golden age after the war fueled from the spoils of war? Id love to talk about how you fire bombed cities also.

http://www.investopedia.com/financial-edge/0712/top-agricultural-producing-countries.aspx (http://www.investopedia.com/financial-edge/0712/top-agricultural-producing-countries.aspx)
Figure it out for yourself.


So rather than reference any kind of fact, you are asking me to take your word?   ::)



Feel free to continue.  The occasional source document would improve your presentation.

Just keep speaking English since it proves my point every time you open your mouth.

Here, let me help you with that rant...

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v478/jenli/America.png

Of course how silly of me. Pictures are always a pretty sight.
For example this aerial picture of Omaha beach after it was "won". Notice the craters from the 13000 bombers the americans insisted to use during the landings. Oh wait... there is none. All the bombs missed and took out a few land mines inland instead which alerted the Germans if anything.
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-yy8Jk1uP21A/Tezg_31JXlI/AAAAAAAAC1o/rVTxWZ-iaig/s640/beach+storming.jpg
Great job assaulting one of the longest beaches in France during low tide btw.

Even worse your ass was saved that day because your special forces failed their mission to capture an (empty) gun emplacement on a nearby bluff. The troops that won Omaha beach should never even have been there if their friends had not fuck things up royally. Victory through incompetence?

Want a picture of the most flammable tank in WW2?
http://img139.imageshack.us/img139/5476/mace55ag.jpg
Still nice and toasty. American tax money burning before your eyes.

No lets get serious for a moment. Cold hard facts incoming:
Casualties for Western front (This is you guys :D )
Allied: 2,905,420–3,043,860 casualties
Axis: 997,386–1,000,256 casualties
Great job guys you really showed them!
The germans only had like a 3-1 Kill /death ratio while full on losing. Thats not so bad right? Luckily the Russians saved your ass by occupying the vast majority of the German army from stomping your ass into oblivion.

it would likely cease to exist

http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/news/world_news/Middle_East/article1261403.ece?CMP=OTH-gnws-standard-2013_05_18

WWIII has already started, IMO. When we look back decades from now, I believe Iraq and Afghanistan will be considered the opening salvos of WWIII. The United States is not going to be on the right side of history.

Hard to say how it will impact bitcoin. Given the West's push for global military and banking hegemony, I believe bitcoin will probably be one of the next targets by governments and TBTF financial institutions.

How relevant the bitcoins would've been in the stone age?

To answer your question: Should WWIII happen BTC will become essentially worthless as will any other currency.
 
 
 

WW3 will never happen with bombs and bullets, but rather bits and bytes.

Besides, seeing as how the world is so economically entwined...even the bad guys know it would be a pyrrhic victory at best even if they did come out on top.

This is why China still hasn't taken over itty bitty Taiwan.

Risk ticking off their biggest trading partner? nawwww.

Agreed.
Considering the South Hemisphere which there is almost zero movement in Bitcoin economy because of taxes and exchanges to get USD, THEN trade in bitcoins, in a world war scenario the prices would dramatically fall if this war affect the big portion of the net. But thinking in South America, especifically Brazil, these same countries just entering in the crypto economy, all pacifists, there's a a way to save the network, imo.

The value of BTC will increase when WIII comes.

What exactly USA send back to the middle east for that fat brown oil arrows? And who is a terrorists sponsor that way?

If WWIII happened the price of BTC would be the least of my concerns

impossible to say

World war III lol I can't wait.

lol "rumors of war" who be saying these things?

Lmao this was funny!

Why does everyone assume WWIII would be like WWII?

Wars are very unpopular these days and I think the only wars we are going to see between the G8's would be economic or coldwars.

None of these self interested leaders would risk political suicide by going to war with any of the other majors. Will always see the next tier of countries duking it out with influence from the majors.

The only war you'll see will be the silent war of money

+1

Bankers expand monetary supply at their will, economy thrives, credit expands. Then they remove monetary supply, credits default, banks get it all. Then they usually get rid of "useless eaters" by war, and make money by supplying weapons and grabbing everything that has value in the longtime: gold, natural resources, farmland.

Now comes Bitcoin, banks won't get it all ;-)

If you look back through history we are actually living in one of the most peaceful periods ever recorded. I don't see BTC contributing to a WW III in any way.

Arrrg Pirates from somalia!  8)  ::) I'd hate to see em have bitcoins

So the basic thrust of your arguement is US forces had self-exploding tanks, bombers who could not hit a beach, and generally incompetent leadership.  I believe you also ranted about WWI helmets, ugly casualty rates, fire bombing of cities, atomic weapons and fearsome enemies flying bamboo airplanes.

So, if the US forces were as incompetent as described why do the WWII nations of  Germany, Italy, Japan and USSR no longer exist?

Seems to me that despite all the faults, failures and just plain incompetence that you have so carefully located, the US soldier, sailor, airman and Marine simply kicked ass.  Something about being willing to say "NUTS".

So my question still remains. 

Why should the US protect Europe, Japan, Taiwan or Korea?  Why should the US protect the Middle East oil fields when the majority of that product goes to Europe, Japan, and China?  What does the US care if heating oil prices in Europe skyrocket?

If you really think the US is going to get involved in your WW3 scenarios, you better explain why the US will be interested.

Actually if oil prices in Europe skyrocketed due to being cut off for example the american based oil producers would simply prioritize selling to Europe. Free market and all that so of course they will sell where they get the most profit. Its also fun how you always expect that everyone wants your help and you base that on WW2.... when the whole world had to band together against Germany.... Which is in Europe.... And is currently a much nicer country then America ever was.... I honestly dont see a problem with the Atlantic Ocean being between us right now. Could perhaps have been wider but one can dream.

I gave you ample evidence on Americas lack of morals, leadership, preparedness, priorities, realistic view point and training. The fact that you exist and X country dont has nothing to do with your "greatness" and you just claiming it is outright childish. A country does not need to be successful or unique in any way to persist. Cant you see how silly you are going "haha we lived longer then youuuu"?

You claim that Germany, Italy and Japan does no longer exist? They are far greater now then they ever were. Who do you think is leading the world in stuff like Technology, economy and social development? Who the heck needs oil when we get our electricity from green energy combined with nuclear power plants?

I believe USA will be the one to START WW3. No one else seams to bother except some arab countries that have not had peace since they invented the stick.

Countries don't start wars, bankers do. Remember, there is nothing more lucrative to a bank than a war. World War III will be started by bankers. The countries participating are just pieces on the board.

Here's a question for you all, then:

If WWIII does begin - with the West/EU pitted against the East/Eurasia - where would you recommend taking your wealth (gold, silver, bitcoin wallets, litecoin wallets, etc.) and going to, for safety?  Where do you think would be a stable locale for yourself and your family to work and make a living while the world blows itself apart?

PS: Wheee, my first post here!  ;D

I don't know where you live, but there certainly are none of them here.

When and if total war happens, I'm looking for weapons, ammo, protective gear, and a boat...not bitcoins, or any currency, or even gold (unless I can make bullets out of it).

I live in the USA.  I would think that midwest, low population states like Wyoming and Montana would be one of few places "safe" from the effects of a third global war?  Where do you live?


With these materials, how would you intend to feed and clothe yourself + the family you are protecting (if you don't have children, let's include your elderly parents, uncles, aunts, cousins, etc)?  I would think it would be easier to find a quiet place in the world to farm/sharecrop, work, trade, etc. while the various nation-states fight it out. 

Back to my original question: where to go in the event of WWIII if one would like to stay out of the crossfire?

Sorry, I should have added that I would take along some basic tools to build and hunt with. I would also look for a place with an abundance of freshwater rivers and lakes and get the hell out of dodge (high density population centers).

It wouldn't be a solo effort, but my family is quite small. The goal would be to get as far away from people as possible and live in a completely self-sustaining way. Money of any sort would be completely unnecessary and I imagine Bitcoins would still be inedible at that point. The weapons would be for protection against any chance encounters with 'the bad guys'.

Bitcoins will be my last attempt when WWIII exploded. Here real thing we shoud have.

1. Gold
2. Clean Water
3. Land for farming
4. Livestock
5. Bow and horses

^This.
+1

Of course you are right. Germany and Japan is HUGE when it comes to technology.

I fear that my country of Sweden would take side with US when the time of war comes... since we no longer have the military resources to defend ourselves, we kind of have to take side with SOMEONE. I don't want any part of that stuff so I'd probably just travel 1100 miles north and go back to basics!


LOL why no.1 is Gold? You gonna make nice gold necklaces for your eventually starved-to-death body ? ^^

I mean, there would be better imho to prioritize food and water. Points 2-5 is what I'd care about. Bling-bling can wait.

banks don't have standing armies. only governments have those. a government is like a giant robot death machine available for rent to the highest bidder. not so unexpectedly the highest bidder is often a banker. Eliminating banks wouldn't address this problem though. If you still have the robot death machine it will simply be piloted by the next highest bidder. The way to address this problem is not to persecute bankers, they would serve a useful function in a free society, but rather to not create the giant robot death machine to begin with.

I opened this discussion on the General discussion area, if you guys want to read more and/or post replies there:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=210850.0

WWIII has always been happening -- in the financial world.

No there wont be ww3

Quite optimistic!

With WWIII on the menu you have to realize that whoever survives will be much better off than before, in terms of physical wealth. In terms of infrastructure there will be terrible consequences rendering all wealth relatively useless.

+1

How about drying up the money supply for the banks before anything worse happens. Deal in bitcoins and exclude the bank(st)ers! I suggest a social review system on top of bitcoin transactions. For example verification of bitcoin addresses you are dealing with. Follow the good trail of commerce! Military has to get paid, they won't go to war for nothing so they won't follow the bankers without them having the money (press) anymore. With all the money spent for the bankers and for the military we already could/would have paradise on earth. It's already there, but the satanists are preventing it. Sad. Ok we could question what was first, religious extremism or bankers. That's another problem to discuss and it seems there are not only materialistic problems to solve here on earth. I hope money can some day be a thing of the past, and before we could invent intermediary forms of money that inherently spread love and wealth amongst humanity. Be inventive!

And lets not forget that there's nuclear weapons in every part of the land and the sea, many of which we do not know the whereabouts

exactly . i am surprised i am still alive :-X

If WWIII takes place in my lifetime I'll definitely try to get as far away as I possibly can. Far into the wilderness. My goal would be to have a small, self-sustained society.

The Germany, Italy and Japan that started WW2 no longer exist.  What we now call Germany, Italy and Japan exist by the efforts of those Americans whose morals, leadership, preparedness, priorities, realistic viewpoint and training you question.

Yes, I have been in Germany, Italy and Japan.  The US funded reconstruction did wonders.  The US funded protection from encroaching powers provided an opportunity for these nations become strong again.  If you really want to see the value the US provided to those nations, take a wander through, East Germany, Czech, Slovak, Poland and Hungary.  (Yes, I have.)  There you will see what happened when the morally bankrupt, incompetent, etc Americans were not around to make it all better.

Your fear that the US will start WW3 is, IMHO, unfounded.  Historically, the US is an isolationist country with strong internal pressures to disarm.  You pointed that out quite correctly with your observations regarding exploding tanks, crappy equipment and poor training.  If the US were intent on conquering the world, we would be paying a little more attention to the military forces needed.  Right now, in fact, the US military is downsizing.  Our nuclear weapon stockpiles are being reduced.  Our manning levels in all the services are being cut.  Now, I am sure you can come up with some way that points to the US getting ready for WW3. 

BTW, I am delighted that you take such joy in using the peaceful nuclear technology developed by your friends, the Americans. As someone who spent my first years as an adult operating a nuclear reactor, I have always felt we have not benefited enough from that technology.

Back on topic, bitcoin will only be useful post WW3 if there is enough of the internet left to serve all those who want to use bitcoin.  Since we have not yet reached agreement on what WW3 would look like, it is foolish to attempt to answer the question.

First of there is an immense difference between USA back then and now. For example remember how long it took for America to get involved in WW2? Now remember that not that long ago America jumped headlong into a war with Iraq over 9/11 which Iraq had no part of in the first place. If you think America is this peace loving nation that only want to keep to itself then tell me the longest period you have ever had peace in America. You can pick any part of your history it makes no difference in the end.

Lets see how long you will have peace after the war in Iraq and Afghanistan. With how eager you seam to invade Syria I am not expecting a new record this time either. Another important fact is that America spends more on its military then the next 15 countries combined and guess how many of those 15 countries are its allies? There is not a question about if America is "prepared" to start a world war. Its a question of if they will have enough time to fuck it up that much before someone else do it intentionally. Do not get me wrong I am not afraid of war. I could not care less about if I live or die honestly. I am just being realistic here and saying that America is capable of starting WW3, active in warfare, constantly instigating its enemies and incompetent enough to one day fuck things up for everyone.

Do not bother speaking about 2 countries that hardly suffered infrastructure damage during the war and Germany that only brushed off the dust on its shoulders after WW1 to become the predominant super power in a few decades. For all the help you "gave" it was far out weight by the spoils of war you took at the conclusion of the war not to mention the allies were the cause of the spreading of Nazism to begin with. You created your own worst enemy after WW1 when you made life miserable for the Germans after the war. Anyway point is Italy and Japan could just continue with business as usual a few years after the war and Germany is robust enough to rebuild itself even with your so called "help". I am sure they are still thankful for the Berlin wall.

I would like to draw your attention to a specific man. Albert Einstein. A German and father to Nuclear energy and the Atomic bomb. The Nuclear reactor itself and the components for it was developed all around the world and the first Nuclear power plant was built in Russia. Its clear as day that whatever development America did was not a critical discovery meaning it was going to be rapidly discovered by someone else if America had not gotten to it first. If anything America might have saved a year or two of time and I am being generous here.

If 25% of the internet was cut off or more chances are that the credibility of bitcoin will be hit hard. Perhaps even crippled to the point where inverters wont trust it anymore and that will bring the downfall of Bitcoin as a currency. You also have to consider that with a World war people will either withdraw their investments OR relocate them to take advantage of the most lucrative market on the planet. Warfare.

if you believe that ww3 is going to happen soon you should invest your money into basic survival things...not into bitcoin

Bitcoins and no internet don't mix.

actually bitcoin could work quite well without internet. probably not if the devs raise the block size too much though.

But you will need the internet to download the Bitcoin client etc.  Can do without the Internet for transactions also

Without the internet bitcoin will not have any value.

bitcoin needs p2p.  No internet, no bitcoin

How???

It would result in several blockchains and double/tripple/quadrupple spending. No-one would know what wallet owns the coins.

business as usual.

WW3 would presumably be the end of us, so holding BTC is academic

WW3 doesn't mean the end of the internet.. The internet is bomb-proof.

I'm not bored enough to deal with the rest of your false statements but I loved the one above.

Perhaps you could detail exactly what role Albert Einstein played in the Manhattan Project?

To make it a little easier for you to answer this question I am providing a link to the wikipedia article.  When you are finished reading that, please continue on to the list of sources and references at the bottom.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manhattan_Project (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manhattan_Project)

Bitcoin, or anything but "useful stuff" working well after WW3 is laughable.  Brings images of post-revolution Russian gentry daintily chowing on their pets with silver they couldn't unload. :D

BTC needs the Internet to work properly and has better chances to survive than any particular fiat. WW3 may or may not break all things loose. In the worst case scenario, all fiat and crypto currencies turn into dust together.

Do a word search for Albert and you will find that they got his singature as support to even start the project. Its under the fucking "origins" for crying out loud. Ever heard of E=MC^2? Yeah... He is the father of Fission (manhattan project and beyond) and Fusion (the next generation of nuclear power plants) and the person that bound the world of energy to the world of matter. He is the single most important person in the invention of the Nuke. How more clear do i have to be?

.... running to (find a) bunker ...

It's not as obvious as you make it seem, just like it isn't obvious that the man who discovered the wheel is the father of automotive industry.  "Nuclear fission of heavy elements was discovered in 1938 by Lise Meitner, Otto Hahn, Fritz Strassmann, and Otto Robert Frisch." -wikip, Fermi set up the first "reactor" at UC in '42.  Einstein's role at this point was mainly political, he was the Big Cheese in the field, and his letter in support of developing a nuclear weapon was prompted by Germany's nuclear weapons research.  His warning made the threat more viable, that's all. 
If you mean the whole atomic age wouldn't have been possible without the neat formula, i can't argue against that -- a car would be impossible if someone hasn't invented the wheel first.

This isn't a bad idea.

Well the thing that I am trying to say is while the development of a nuclear reactor is kind of "scientific grunt work" since the theories and speculations had already been made. All they needed was to put the pieces together and make it work more or less.

What Albert did however with discovering E=MC^2 was a revolutionary way of thinking. Putting the importance it has on everything else aside it told of unimaginable quantities of energy that could be unleashed from matter. It was not that radioactivity divided atoms but that it could produce scary amounts of energy. Without this breakthrough in thinking it would take years or perhaps decades until we would get there with ordinary science. Albert Einstine could singlehandedly be responsible for the Manhattan project not starting this year instead of back during WW2.
Yes it would be. A world wide currency has to be designed to be a world wide currency. Just because bitcoin or Euro works in a certain situation does not mean that simply up scaling it will be okey. If you want to have a truly good world wide currency it has to be specifically designed for that purpose.

If the US wanted to go to war with Russia and China (to "liberate the people and bring democracy" of course) they would have to borrow insane amounts of money (because war is very expensive). And guess who the biggest creditor is to the US? Right: China. ;D

So instead the Fed would have to print even bigger piles of dollars to finance the war. Which would crash the US economy before any American soldiers set foot on Russian and Chinese soil.

I'm not disputing Einstein's brilliance, and E=mc² is certainly a neat package.  The only thing we don't agree on is the matter of degree.  It's not something i can logically argue, just a matter of opinion.

For instance, i agree with this:
"E = mc² has sometimes been used as an explanation for the origin of energy in nuclear processes, but mass–energy equivalence does not explain the origin of such energies. Instead, this relationship merely indicates that the large amounts of energy released in such reactions may exhibit enough mass that the mass-loss may be measured, when the released energy (and its mass) have been removed from the system." -- wikip again, sorry 'bout that, it's just so darn handy.

Einstein came up with that relationship way back in 1905, almost 40 years before things started jumping -- another thing to consider.  But i don't even think we disagree.  Just semantics.

The United States can't afford a full scale assault on either China or Russia. They don't seem to have enough resources even to invade Iran which is a much easier target.

Just to sum up, you're saying that US can't afford to start a war with China without borrowing "insane amounts of money" from China?  Which China is unlikely to lend to US 'coz US is such a deadbeat?


Here's the funny bit:  If you assume US is currently responsible for her debt to China, printing boatloads of $$$ is perfectly reasonable to fund that war:  After all, if China is defeated, US will be debt-free! :D +1 for enlightened agression :o

US needs exactly $0 to turn either China or Russia into molten glass.  She already has the nukes, it's just a question of key-fiddling & button-pushin'.  The reason it's not on the agenda is neither $$$ nor the inherent decency of peace-loving Americans.  US is simply a bit put off by the prospect of being turned into molten glass herself.   :D

The amount of money they spend on military is immense. They spend to protect, not to start nuking other countries and start a war that'll force the Earth into a nuclear winter.

I'm not disputing that.  Just pointing out that claiming "US can't [financially] afford to start a war" is ludicrous.

Its funny how people think E=MC^2 is only limited to nukes and reactors. (while its off topic) If you ask me the most important thing it achieved was to get one major step closer to a unified theory of everything.

They always said war is the mother of all inventions. Before the war science was actually quite slow so 40 year old tech was still considered fairly new. Its during and right after the war that the explosion of inventions and discoveries took place. In a way WW2 catapulted the world into the year 2000.

That 40 years was actually an incredibly productive time, though it doesn't prove you wrong -- there was that *other big war*. :D

Hehe you got me there and what can i say? Everything is relative.

Amazing.  All that emotion and yet not any clear understanding of the question much less an accurate answer.  ALL that he did was sign a letter, written by someone else.

The Manhattan Project was not done when the ink dried on AE's signature.  To credit AE with building the atomic bomb ignores a vast amount of work that was done to move from theory to practice.  Perhaps you have heard of the man who provides us this quote:

“In theory, theory and practice are the same. In practice, they are not.”  ― Albert Einstein


So which isotope separation scheme did AE develop?  Which bomb design did he work on?  How many times did he visit Los Alamos, Oak Ridge, or even Alamogordo?

What?  The "Father of the Atom Bomb" some dude named J. Robert Oppenheimer??

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._Robert_Oppenheimer

WTF dude, how did that happen?

BTW, who is this dude Enrico Fermi?  He seems to have gotten his name down for "Father of the nuclear reactor."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enrico_Fermi

Looks like that second rate education they pass out in US high schools glossed over a few pertinent facts.

I kind of find it insulting that you think I am from America. I wonder if that is wrong of me?

Speaking of which you mentioned something about not understanding the question. Did it ever strike your mind that perhaps you did not understand my answer?
“In theory, theory and practice are the same. In practice, they are not.” If all he had to do was sign a letter why did it have to be Albert Einstein? It was not the act of signing the letter which was important but his signing that it was possible.

You asked me what role he played. He was the one that gave them the idea and showed them how. You mentioned something about the large amount of work involved in developing the nuke and its true... Allot of GRUNT work. What they did was nothing really spectacular just something that had to be done at some point or another. You cant pretend that it required a genius to work from where Albert Einstein and those who came after him had left off.

You know what else? Albert Einstine was even the guy that warned the allies that Germany might develop a nuke and suggested that they would start a similar program.. Which became the manhattan project. Good job on making yourself out to be a fool.

Only if you don't want our ICBMs & stealth bombers to bring freedom & democracy to your unenlightened country. :o

I see. 
You are shown to be wrong on your "father of the nuke" claim with references to the two men who _are_ the father of the atom bomb and nuclear reactor respectively.
You are provided a quote by Albert Einstein which demonstrates HIS understanding of the great effort needed to move from theory to practice, yet you profess it was simply some mechanics playing with monkey wrenches.
You seem to be convinced that if you stand there and claim you are right, it will become true.

Do you wonder why I think you are a product of a US high school? 

I figured anyone that ignorant of facts had to be a victim of the US education system since we have been informed in the very thread that everything evil, bad and wrong comes from the US.  Now you are going to tell me there is a place worse than the US?  That won't be well received around here.

As long as you dont come during the Easter because the airforce will be away celebrating.


Am I really wrong? Who predicted the (destructive) energy of fission? Who was the person that warned the allies and pushed them to start the Manhattan project? Who was it that created the physics used to create the nuke and who gave it the signature? He might not have been there with a monkey wrench but without Albert Einstein there would have been no Nuke to stop WW2. Everyone else is unimportant in that they could be replaced with someone else without much difference to the end result. If you want to dispute this go ahead, dig your hole deeper and deeper.

No worries, it's fine, just make sure to stock the pantry -- we'll make ourselves at home.

Naaah.. Im sure we will be fine. You see we dont have any oil. :3

In that case your human rights are not being violated, carry on.

Yes


Leó Szilárd
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Le%C3%B3_Szil%C3%A1rd
" He conceived the nuclear chain reaction in 1933, patented the idea of a nuclear reactor with Enrico Fermi, and in late 1939 wrote the letter for Albert Einstein's signature that resulted in the Manhattan Project that built the atomic bomb. "



Ernest Rutherford aka "Father of Nuclear Physics"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_physics
I recommend you learn about Henri Becquerel, J. J. Thomason, Atto Hahn, James Chadwick an Marie Curie.  Once you have gained this foundation, please proceed on to Ernest Rutherford, Hans Geiger and Ernest Marsden.  From there James Chadwick, Walther Bothe, Herbert L. Becker, Irène and Frédéric Joliot-Curie would be good to add to your knowledge base.  Beyond them, you should learn about Alexandru Proca and Hideki Yukawa.





It is good to know that you believe it was all Einstein, all the time.  That belief does not make it so.

The fact of the matter is "Einstein did not work on the Manhattan Project, the project to develop atomic bombs, because General Leslie Groves considered him to be a security risk because of his pacifist leanings, so he was assigned to work on improving conventional artillery for the U.S. Navy. Einstein had no knowledge of the atomic bomb's manufacturing, and no influence on the decision for the bomb to be dropped.[2]"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Einstein%E2%80%93Szil%C3%A1rd_letter#cite_note-2


The real irony here is I can refute each of your statements will simple searches of _wikipedia_.  Are you sure you are not a graduate of the US education system?  Your knowledge level is on par with some of the dumbacrats that get liberal art "degrees" from various US colleges.

So what you actually mean is Leó Szilárd who is a collaborator with none other then Albert Einstein? Also there is a huge difference between a nuclear chain reaction and a bomb so I have no idea why you are even trying to drag that into our conversation.

Its astounding how you attribute parts of the development of the nuke to people dead long before it even began and who even did not contribute more then a basic understanding of nuclear layout. Yet you completely dismiss Albert Einstein which has clear links both in theories and even connections to the project and people working with it. Its like you have a double standard but that cant be true (/sarcasm). Ernest Rutherford never did anything complicated enough to be of direct help to the manhattan project anyway so its about as valid as giving the credit to Aristotle. Just because he holds a title does not mean that everything done afterwards needs to be credited to him you know.

*sighs* Anyway you have yet to even grasp the simplest part of my answer and I am getting quite tired of your quite frankly pathetic display of "intellectual superiority".

Wow.

Simply.

Wow.

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

That you would even attempt to claim that a nuclear chain reaction has nothing to do with a nuclear weapon is simply mind boggling.

I don't know where you are from, what your education is or why you persist in exposing your ignorance but please, stop embarrassing yourself.  At this point, I really have to consider that I should disengage from this because it is fundamentally unfair to engage in a battle of wits with the witless.

REALLY?  no connection between a nuclear chain reaction and a nuclear bomb?

REALLY????

I agree with this view. btc will change the world.

I agree with this view.

Yeah really. Take that boot out of your ass and tell me what is so scary about a helium nuclei resulting from radioactive decay hitting another atom and triggering another decay. I do not know about you but we did that in basic physics class and I dont remember any mushroom clouds.

It is not the nuclear chain reaction that is the scary part. Its the mass to energy conversion better known as E = MC^2

When will you get this through that thick skull of yours. Perhaps I should make a wikipedia page for you?

I agree with this view.

I agree with this view.btc will change the world.

I agree with this view. :)

 I very much agree with this point of view。

World War Z

lol, World War Z ?

btc will change the world.

btc will change the world.

Speaking of forum bots. We haz them?

(maybe)

 I agree with this view.

Yeah!!!  You actually took a physics class!!!

Did they convince you that Einstein built nuclear weapons?  'Cause so far, everything posted here states that his involvement was about as much as the inventor of the wheel had to do with the automobile.

BTW, the concept you are reaching for is Mass Defect.

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

If you paid attention in that physics class you would have noted that a graph of mass defect versus isotope shows Helium to be remarkably unsuited as a nuclear fuel.

Everyone is a scientist with wiki...

Omg do you not even know that a helium nuclei is what they call Alpha radiation as in the thing that makes Nuclear chain reactions happen? There is a HUGE difference between a helium NUCLEI and a helium ATOM.

Also if you actually decided that your head is more then something to store a hat ontop of you would probably realize that there are few English words in a text book from another country. "mass defect" Does not exist. In fact there is not even a native word for it because its a redundant word. We just call it nuclei energy. So do my lack of linguistic knowledge about a useless term as "mass defect" reflect poorly on me or is it you who cant even figure out that two languages are not the same?

I am just going to proceed to bang my head against this wall. Its more productive by far.

like has been said if internet is down we screwed. but if not our new currency is the best thing that ever came out of the web.
Its no different to gold really in only in digital form you cant craft anything out of it.
But gold diamond silver etc the value was placed on it by man. just objects
you can place value on anything.
technically you dont need money
barter systems can be divised as all things have value.
I am kind of board maybe ww3 would be exciting!! LOL

Diamonds have no value these days, Gold and silver is the way to go, but +1 to WW3 for some excitement  lol

oh yeah gold and silver. i have about a pound or more in silver.
but the point i was making was who first put value on gold?   man
thousands of years ago just because it looked nice and was easy to work with and hard to find.
had no value for industral use just ornamental.
case in point.
that twilight zone episode where those guys steal all this gold put themselves in suspended animation in a cave in desert. they wake up in 100 years or so and one guy is left. no water dying on road tries to give someone a bar of gold for water.
they say gold? didnt i hear that was worth something may years ago? and they laugh!

English board >> english terms >> mass defect.

Alpha particles are not useful for sustaining nuclear reactions in bombs or nuclear power plants.  Neutrons are the driving force behind sustaining criticality (nuclear reactors) or super criticality (nuclear bombs).

"Suppose you have four cookies: A gamma cookie, a neutron cookie, a beta cookie, and an alpha cookie. You have to eat one, put one in your pocket, hold one in your hand, and throw the other away. Which do you do with each, and why?"

Correct answer is here:
http://bubbleheads.blogspot.com/2005/12/suppose-you-have-four-cookies.html

A pound in silver is a good start... Silver is actually more rare than gold, and because of price maniulation, silver prices should be much higher.
 Gold, you said it has no practical applications?  lol

 Gold is used in, Dentistry, phones, computers, electronics, spacecraft, gold is required in a lot of space exploration applications, gold is also used in medicine. The best conductor of electricity, does not tarnish, easy to work with, does not inflate because of scarcity.

etc....   oh, and other than the fact Gold has been used as currency since the beginning of civilization.

Oh please like I care what you bother to call any particular phenomena, theory, function etc... Its just a waste of time to go through the trouble.

Since when did "Nuclear fuel" become "Bombs"? I think i should have been notified of this in advance since well.. I am the one you are talking to.

Anyway back on topic. Albert Einstein and the Manhattan project. Put down the ground work and the possibility for the research into nukes to exist, driving force behind the programs creation, personal connections with other major people etc.. etc.. etc..

I wonder what would have happened to the project if Albert Einstein had not signed the letter. Would the allies simply have rejected it or perhaps not taken it seriously at all? Who knows. All i know is its like Einstein invented electricity and they made a battery.

I did not say
"Gold, you said it has no practical applications?"
I said
thousands of years ago just because it looked nice and was easy to work with and hard to find.
had no value for industral use just ornamental.

i said thousands of years ago man said it had value
just as easy man can say it has no value.

if sh t hits the fan gold will be worthless if you dont have food and water.
food will be the new gold

Yes, food and water will be traded as if it were like Gold.

 But, when shit hits the fan, and it will someday, gold and silver will once again be used as currency.

 It was in the beginning and it will be in the end....

I guess the cookie question was too much for you.  When I was 19, it was all the rage in the crowd I ran with.

"The most common fissile nuclear fuels are uranium-235 (235U) and plutonium-239 (239Pu)."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_fuel

Only fissile isotopes of certain elements have the potential for use in nuclear weapons. Additionally they must be produced in sufficient quantity and purity to be usable. Uranium-235 and plutonium-239 are well known examples for which this is the case.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weapons-grade

U-235 and Pu-239 are both fuel and, in a more refined form, weapons grade material.  I expected you to be familiar with this.

What if Albert Einstein had not signed the letter?  No idea.  What if Leó Szilárd didn't write it?  What if Teller and Wigner had not agreed with the concerns in the letter?  What if Alexander Sachs had failed to deliver it?  Sounds like Al gets 20% of the credit.

BTW, it would be discovered electricity and invented the battery.  One existed before it was discovered where the other one was created for the first time.

The world is in what Jim Rickards refers to as a currency war, with each country in a race to devalue it's currency more than it's neighbor so as to increase it exports. The only way the little guy can retain some of his/her wealth is to buy assets such as Gold, Silver and yes Bitcoin.

yeah if anyone is left.
M.A.D.
it would be along time till anyone
cared about precious metals in that scenario.

but a limited nuclear war of course it most likely would still be used currently.

The ugliness comes when there is no more room to devalue.  Then what?

Historically, economic implosions are closely followed by wars of aggression.

First nation to the bottom, starts the war.

... Great... remind me never to play "lets pretend" with you since you do not understand what imagination is. Whatever equivalency aside you actually graced my point here. What if Leo Szilard had not written that letter? Would there have been someone else who could or would have? Most likely YES. Could you have taken those 130,000 people involved in the manhattan project and replace them while still end up with a nuke? Most likely YES. Would it have been possible without Einstein? No.

If Einstine had not given this project his support and done the discoveries he did before that there would have been no nuke above Hiroshima Monday, August 6, 1945.

So.  Your proof for this statement is?

I am of the opinion that some other luminary would be point man on the letter with as much effect.

What proof do you provide that nuclear physics would not have developed with out E=mc^2?

BTW,  what was the first practical experiment that showed E=mc^2 was the correct equation?  This might help you determine how important this idea was to building the atom bomb.

Silver is more rare than gold in refined form. But that is because it's recycled and reused while gold is hoarded.

Silver is much more common "in the wild" but much more resources are put towards mining gold because of the high price it catches.

I'm gonna go with BTC would not be very helpful during WW3 - gotta have working computers and internet to make this currency go around...

In this context I suggest to read this piece about the banksters:

"Sorcha Faal" from June 3rd: http://www.whatdoesitmean.com/index1684.htm

including:

"Press TV in their article “Banksters Attack Syria To Enslave America” also said:

“Israel bombs Syria and threatens Iran. Russia moves its warships into the Mediterranean, and furnishes Syria with advanced anti-aircraft weapons. Hezbollah defends Syria against al-Qaeda. Pro-Israel US Senators like John McCain join forces with al-Qaeda.

What is really going on here? Who is fighting whom, and why? Will Syria become the flash point for World War III?

Is the West attacking the Islamic world in a “clash of civilizations”? Then why are the Israeli and American governments backing al-Qaeda in Syria?

The old narratives no longer make sense.

The real war isn't between nations, civilizations, or religions.

The real war is the bankers' war to conquer the entire world.
"
[...]

E=mc^2 does not necessarily need to be directly proven because its a consequence of Special relativity. Not to mention its proven useful in practice. Its kind of like how we dont need to directly observe black holes or the higgs to assume they are there because assuming they exist helps us understand other parts like how much energy can be released from a nuke.

Without Einstein saying you can make a bomb out of radioactive materials is like saying i can make a bomb out of peanut butter. Its not like gunpowder where you just need to add fire and watch it explode. The whole point of the Manhattan project was to figure out in practice how to do something they had already done on paper.

Aside from that E=mc^2 has very little implications to nuclear physics (and i never said otherwise). It only comes into effect when you go from atoms to energy or back and unifies nuclear physics with energy physics.

Another great source to get educated:

Leuren Moret, Radiologist and Whistleblower:

scroll down for a lot of interviews here:
http://www.youtube.com/user/X888Quetzalcoatl888X/videos

define "soon"

Yeh, I just lol'd when I saw this topic... :P

i was just thinking that maybe ww3 would be hugely bullish for bitcoin because it would allow for commerce between the subjects of different factions when the governments could probably restrict such commerce through the traditional banking channels.

I think it would increase Bitcoin's value, similar to how stocks go down, in war.

just as that the internet and the electrical grid would be shut down, the financial system reset and subjugated to total surveillance, but probably not transparency, and the bankers will get it all - if we do not invent and digitally implement the new layers of a true productive constructive intelligent sharing and participating society. The bitcoin code also allows for transparency of transactions (preventing corruption) and documenting proof, see https://www.proofofexistence.com/about , and other features not to forget. Just how can I upload my dna and my consciousness into the blockchain if the earth is radioactively contaminated for 100 million years?

I believe WW3 would be atomic war, and no computer infrastructure will be present because of nonexistent power plant supply. So very bad scenario for bitcoin

Let's all go to Antarctica and confront the Rothchilds and Rockefellers in their underground bases about what they have done.

You underestimate the creative force that is Bitcoin!

http://s14.postimg.org/lb25zzi35/canphone.jpg (http://postimage.org/)

Bitcoin V2.0

I don't know what virtual world you are living in, though if we have a world war 3, bitcoin is gone. Everything is gone.
the last world war had no effect on technology as there was no internet to destory. Once that little black box in england is gone, we will have to start a fifth of the world again.
Humanity is to reliant on technology, world war 3 is not going to raise bitcoins strength, but it will destroy it along with everything that you use to access it.

That is just my 2 cents :)

WWIII would put us back to the stone age ... we have to make a stone coin ::) ::) ::)

Actually there were many scientific and technological advances during ww2, just to keep a competitive edge. http://www.expertreviews.co.uk/general/1286401/top-10-technical-innovations-of-world-war-2 actually really interesting!

Ww3 and Bitcoin. Shit people come up with sometimes.