World War III and BTC

[AquaMan]

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.

[Dasneko]

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.

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?

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?

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.

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.

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

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.

[FdaFedGov]

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.

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

[AquaMan]

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....

[TomUnderSea]

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 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.

[US Andy]

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.

[FdaFedGov]

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....

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.

[TomUnderSea]

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.

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.

[Dasneko]

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 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.

... 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.

[TomUnderSea]

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 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.

... 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.

[Malawi]

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.

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.

[COINPRADER]

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...

[icoins]

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.
"
[...]

[Dasneko]

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 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.

... 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.

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.

[icoins]

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

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.
"
[...]

[zeta1]

define "soon"

[monbux]

define "soon"

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

[Anon136]

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.

[markjamrobin]

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

[icoins]

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