Millions of degrees Kelvin shock input temperature rise due to the world’s dams caused the units to melt and explode
© 2018 Ramaswami Ashok Kumar
1. See
The extract:
Title: Nuclear criticality explosions in Fukushima due to plutonium fractionation and the consequences for health; some questions from a physical chemist
Source: LOW LEVEL RADIATION CAMPAIGN (llrc.org)
Author: Chris Busby
Date: 23 April 2011
Emphasis Added
1.1 Nuclear criticality explosions in Fukushima due to plutonium fractionation and the consequences for health; some questions from a physical chemist
1.2 […] With regard to the nature of the explosion I make the following suggestion: the melting points and boiling points of plutonium and uranium oxides are not the same. The MP of plutonium oxide in MOX is 2701 degrees C but that of the Uranium oxide is 3120 degrees C (Popov et al 2000). Therefore when a mixture of these boils, there will be fractional distillation of the plutonium oxide, separation of the mixture, just as happens with alcohol distillation from alcohol water mixtures or the fractional distillation of crude oil. Thus plutonium will become concentrated in the vapour and in the nearest cooler areas w(h)ere the vapour condenses. This would inevitably lead to a nuclear explosion when the concentration of plutonium exceeded the critical level for chain reaction. It is not only in MOX fuel that plutonium exists in nuclear reactors. It is produced as a result of the neutron irradiation of uranium fuel. […]
1.3 My explanation:
1.3.1 So looking at Table Fukushima, the shock input temperature Rise on a foundation block of 370 billion K if all the Water Moment applied by the dam content change of 9863 BCM were converted to heat of the 200mx200mx1m foundation block could easily have caused the fractional distillation of the plutonium oxide mix resulting in criticality and explosion of units.
1.3.2 See also discussions on my comments as navilu at
http://enenews.com/ap-japan-poised-to-flood-pacific-with-1-million-tons-of-nuclear-water-contaminated-by-fukushima-newsweek-experts-want-japan-to-push-a-million-tons-of-radioactive-water-into-ocean-relea/comment-page-3#comment-883175
2.1 See the following plan view of the earth and the Tohoku earthquake data:
2.2 Data for the above schematic plan view of earth is drawn from the Table PAD below:
Earthquake data:
Hypocenter: 17.469, -83.52,10 km. For direction of rupture progression see map for a first view.
https://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/map/#%7B%22autoUpdate%22%3A%5B%5D%2C%22basemap%22%3A%22terrain%22%2C%22feed%22%3A%2230day_m25%22%2C%22listFormat%22%3A%22default%22%2C%22mapposition%22%3A%5B%5B-55.37911044801048%2C11.953125%5D%2C%5B54.97761367069628%2C387.421875%5D%5D%2C%22overlays%22%3A%5B%22plates%22%5D%2C%22restrictListToMap%22%3A%5B%5D%2C%22search%22%3Anull%2C%22sort%22%3A%22oldest%22%2C%22timezone%22%3A%22utc%22%2C%22viewModes%22%3A%5B%22map%22%5D%2C%22event%22%3Anull%7D
See the water moment arm drawn on the map passing through the Center of gravity of the world's dams and the Honduras earthquake extended on the sides of the center of gravity and the Honduras quake:
The water moment arm on a plot of rectangular coordinates with longitude on y axis and latitude on x axis provides an insight in to the rupture progression of the Honduras major quake:
When you study scientifically how earthquakes are caused by dams of the world and look up and study Figure2Ch2 above you see how ruptures are being inflicted on the earth by the dams of the world. See Ref 7 below.
The water moment arm from the center of gravity of the world's dams to the north Honduras earthquake hypocenter is the plunge line: plunge 3.27 degrees, azimuth of plunge 179.61 degrees. It is a normal fault with dip 86.73 degrees, rake 90 degrees. Strike 89.61 degrees.
The star diagram provides an idea of dam dynamics controlling the location and magnitude of earthquakes.
See the KML rendering of the 7.6 MM quake Honduras 10.1.18:
6.0 References
2.3 Compare the above analysis with the USGS analysis on the Tohoku earthquake.
The USGS Tohoku earthquake is described here:
Results from the above URL:
Nodal Planes
Plane Strike Dip Rake
NP1 193° 9° 78°
NP2 25° 81° 92°
Principal Axes
Axis Value Plunge Azimuth
T 5.587e+22 N-m 54° 297°
N 0.012e+22 N-m 2° 204°
P -5.598e+22 N-m 36° 113°
2.4 When the above data is analysed and compared with USGS data on the Tohoku 9.1 MM magnitude earthquake on March 11 2011 the following are the initial findings:
1. My result P -5.01E+22 N-m Plunge 34 Azimuth 108.3 Normal Fault, Dip=90-34=56.
2. USGS P -5.598E+22 N-m Plunge 36 Azimuth 113
Note both results are practically the same, the USGS result from studying seismograms and mine from considerations of global dam dynamics which in contrast to USGS conclusion of thrust fault, shows up a normal fault based on dam dynamics. But look at this summary from its event page: Modeling of the rupture of this earthquake indicates that the fault
moved as much as 50–60 m, and slipped over an area approximately 400 km
long (along strike) by 150 km wide (in the down-dip direction). Looks like a normal fault!
2.5 It is easy to derive the plunge and azimuth data for the T axis from my data: Plunge 90-34= 56, Azimuth 108 +180= 288.
Note that the strikes for the Nodal Planes NP1 and NP2 from my analysis are 18+180=198(USGS 193) and 18.2(USGS 25)
2.6 Direction of propagation of rupture aims straight at the Center of gravity of the dams of the world.
3.0 The magnitude of Tohoku earthquake has been revised to 9.1 by USGS on 11-07-2016. The Shock input Temperature Rise will then be even more than what has been computed for 9 MM quake.
4.0 The study of the Andaman Sumatra 9.1 MM magnitude earthquake similarly reveals the world’s dams as the cause:
2.6 Direction of propagation of rupture aims straight at the Center of gravity of the dams of the world.
2.6.1 What
was the direction of propagation of the rupture with time?
See Hisashi
Nakahara Haruo Sato Takeshi Nishimura Hiroyuki Fujiwara.July 2011.Direct
observation of rupture propagation during the 2011 off the Pacific coast of
Tohoku Earthquake (Mw 9.0) using a small seismic array at the link at
The
Abstract:
A great
earthquake of Mw 9.0 occurred on March 11, 2011 off the coast of Tohoku region,
Northeast Honshu, Japan. Strong ground motions from the earthquake were
recorded at 4 stations of a small seismic array, with an aperture of about 500
m, located 120 km away from the epicenter. Peak ground acceleration exceed the
full scale of 2g on the horizontal components, and was larger than 1g even on
the vertical component. Two prominent bursts and at least two following smaller
bursts are identified on the strong-motion records which lasted for longer than
200 s. We have performed semblance analysis to estimate the rupture propagation
during the earthquake using coherent seismograms at frequencies of 0.5–2 Hz.
The rupture seems to consist of at least four stages. Rupture propagated in a
northerly direction in the beginning 50 s forming the first burst, then
proceeded to the southwest from the epicenter in the next 50 s during the
second burst. The rupture further extended southwests in the following 40 s,
and finally migrated to the south for about 30 s. A small seismic array makes
it possible to observe rupture propagation during a large earthquake even with
a small number of stations.
End of Abstract.
I then plot
this propagation on the plan view of the earth depicting the Tohoku earthquake.
The vector direction is in plan along the Water Moment Arm from the Center of
Gravity of the World’s dams. The initiator of the earthquake at Tohoku is
therefore the dam content changes of the world’s dams when studied along with other studies(Ref 3). See 2.1 above. Tragedy of tragedies, Fukushima Daichi was caught in the direction of the rupture propagation of the great tsunamigenic earthquake.
3.0 The magnitude of Tohoku earthquake has been revised to 9.1 by USGS on 11-07-2016. The Shock input Temperature Rise will then be even more than what has been computed for 9 MM quake.
4.0 The study of the Andaman Sumatra 9.1 MM magnitude earthquake similarly reveals the world’s dams as the cause:
4.1 First see
Thorne Lay et al:
The Great
Sumatra-Andaman Earthquake of 26 December 2004 at
"Fig. 8. Summary
rupture scenario for the 2004 Sumatra-Andaman earthquake. We subdivide the
rupture zone into three segments according to the inferred rupture process, not
because of clear physical fault segmentation. The rupture begins at the southeastern
edge of the Sumatra segment, with the initial 50 s of rupture characterized by
fairly low energy release and slow rupture velocity. The rupture front then
expands to the north-northwest at about 2.5 km/s, extending about 1300 km.
Short-period radiation tracks the rupture front, with a total duration of about
500 s and clear north-northwest directivity. Large, rapid slip occurs in the
Sumatra segment, with some patches having slip as great as 20 m during the
first 230 s. The Nicobar segment has weaker slip during the next 2 min, and the
Andaman segment fails with little (<2 m) rapid slip. Slow slip appears to
continue in the Nicobar and Andaman segments, with a total duration of about 1
hour. The precise amount of slip and total moment of the slow-slip component
are not well resolved, but about 10 m of slip under the Andaman Islands is
required to account for the tilt experienced by the islands."
Here the
dip is for the various areas indicated around an average of 17. The rake varies
from 110 to 150 at an average of 370/3=
123.
My dip
value from Table PAD1 is 16.12. The rake is 90 degrees(normal fault). Please replace Tohoku with Andaman Sumatra in Table PAD1.
4.2 An extract from
USGS event(Ref4) page on the directivity
of propagation of rupture:
“…fault
rupture propagated to the northwest from the
epicenter and that substantial fault rupture occurred hundreds of kilometers northwest of the epicenter. The data upon which the
modeling is based do not permit confident resolution of the extent of rupture
beyond about 500 km northwest of the mainshock epicenter. The width of the
earthquake rupture, measured perpendicular to the Sunda Trench, was about 150
km, and maximum displacement on the fault plane was upwards of 20 m. The sea
floor overlying the thrust fault was uplifted by several meters as a result of
the earthquake, causing the ensuing tsunami that devastated shores around the
Indian Ocean. “
Note that
the center of gravity of the world’s dams is in the north northwest direction
from the epicentre(Table PAD1).
4.3 See below the
plan view of the earth with the Andaman Sumatra earthquake and its details
plotted:
4.4 Progression
of Rupture of the 9.1 MM Andaman Sumatra Great Earthquake of 26 December 2004.
This is
derived through data from Ref 6. p 226. Table 2 Subfault Parameters. See Figure 10Ch10:
The rupture
and its progression is controlled by the total changes in the global dam
contents at any instant.This progression of rupture in the vector direction of the center of gravity of the world's dams from the hypocenter of the 9.1 MM Andaman Sumatra Earthquake is plotted in the above plan view of the earth depicting details of this earthquake. Port Blair which lay in the path of the rupture was hit and the Naval Base destroyed.
5.0 See also the 2018 significant earthquakes:
M 7.6 - 44km E of Great Swan Island, Honduras
2018-01-10 02:51:31 UTC
17.469°N
83.520°W
10.0 km depth This also exhibits similar attributes and the water moment arm is also the azimuth of the plunge of the earthquake. The center of gravity of the world's dams at 23.99, 97.1 is to the north west north of the Honduras quake: See the USGS URL: https://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/eventpage/us1000c2zy#executive "Early focal mechanism solutions indicate that rupture occurred on a
steeply dipping structure striking either west-northwest
(right-lateral), or west-southwest (left-lateral). "
5.0 See also the 2018 significant earthquakes:
M 7.6 - 44km E of Great Swan Island, Honduras
my analysis using dam dynamics.location of center of gravity of the world's dams : 23.99,97.2.
Earthquake data:
Hypocenter: 17.469, -83.52,10 km. For direction of rupture progression see map for a first view.
https://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/map/#%7B%22autoUpdate%22%3A%5B%5D%2C%22basemap%22%3A%22terrain%22%2C%22feed%22%3A%2230day_m25%22%2C%22listFormat%22%3A%22default%22%2C%22mapposition%22%3A%5B%5B-55.37911044801048%2C11.953125%5D%2C%5B54.97761367069628%2C387.421875%5D%5D%2C%22overlays%22%3A%5B%22plates%22%5D%2C%22restrictListToMap%22%3A%5B%5D%2C%22search%22%3Anull%2C%22sort%22%3A%22oldest%22%2C%22timezone%22%3A%22utc%22%2C%22viewModes%22%3A%5B%22map%22%5D%2C%22event%22%3Anull%7D
See the water moment arm drawn on the map passing through the Center of gravity of the world's dams and the Honduras earthquake extended on the sides of the center of gravity and the Honduras quake:
The water moment arm on a plot of rectangular coordinates with longitude on y axis and latitude on x axis provides an insight in to the rupture progression of the Honduras major quake:
When you study scientifically how earthquakes are caused by dams of the world and look up and study Figure2Ch2 above you see how ruptures are being inflicted on the earth by the dams of the world. See Ref 7 below.
The water moment arm from the center of gravity of the world's dams to the north Honduras earthquake hypocenter is the plunge line: plunge 3.27 degrees, azimuth of plunge 179.61 degrees. It is a normal fault with dip 86.73 degrees, rake 90 degrees. Strike 89.61 degrees.
The star diagram provides an idea of dam dynamics controlling the location and magnitude of earthquakes.
See the KML rendering of the 7.6 MM quake Honduras 10.1.18:
6.0 References
1. ENENEWS.COM at
2. R. Ashok Kumar.2011. nuclear damage infinite: CHERNOBYL FUKUSHIMA ONLY PLUTONIUMA !
CHERNOBYL 25 YEARS ON and FUKUSHIMA ONE AND A HALF MONTHS ON-
AN ALTERNATIVE PERSPECTIVE FOR DEADLY NUKES at
3. R. Ashok Kumar.2011. PERFECT DESIGNS: Ignore root cause, get root shock- Dams the cause of Irma's Fury at
https://livingnormally.blogspot.in/2017/10/ignore-root-cause-get-root-shock-dams.html
5. Hisashi
Nakahara Haruo Sato Takeshi Nishimura Hiroyuki Fujiwara.July 2011.Direct
observation of rupture propagation during the 2011 off the Pacific coast of
Tohoku Earthquake (Mw 9.0) using a small seismic array at the link at
6. Bulletin of
the Seismological Society of America, Vol. 97, No. 1A, pp. S223–S231, January
2007, doi: 10.1785/0120050627
Rupture
Process of the 2004 Sumatra–Andaman Earthquake from
Tsunami Waveform
Inversion by Alessio
Piatanesi and Stefano Lorito
See Figure
10Ch10.
See the link:
http://igpphome.ucsd.edu/~shearer/Files/Sumatra_Papers/piatanesi_bssa07.pdf
7. R. Ashok Kumar. 2015. Predicting Earthquakes.The science of dams causing earthquakes and climate change at
https://predictingquakes.blogspot.in/2015/04/the-science-of-dams-causing-earthquakes.html
7. R. Ashok Kumar. 2015. Predicting Earthquakes.The science of dams causing earthquakes and climate change at
https://predictingquakes.blogspot.in/2015/04/the-science-of-dams-causing-earthquakes.html