What Are the Implications of 13 Neutron Beams Detected at Fukushima?

[Escapekey]

Can someone explain what are the implications for the 13 neutron beams that have been observed at Fukushima? How are they created? What will cause more to be created?

 

[M. Bachmeier]

Can someone explain what are the implications for the 13 neutron beams that have been observed at Fukushima? How are they created? What will cause more to be created?

I don't know enough to comment, but there is an article on the subject at: http://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&sourc...FpQhlYNHg&sig2=ymzw9RMGXOZHf8xxe3z4LA&cad=rja

 

[Escapekey]

Am I just paranoid or is this question being ignored?

 

[Borek]

Am I just paranoid or is this question being ignored?

You are just paranoid

Seriously - information is so scarce that it is difficult to make any reasonable guess about what the information means, it can be everything from the translation error (not Japanese to English, more like technicalese to journalese) to some serious problems. Selecting anything in between is just an idle speculation. Try to follow other threads, this problem is discussed there between others. But don't expect any answers for the reasons explained above.

 

[Escapekey]

Not sure i have time to dig into other threads... can you be more specific as to which one?

Ok, let us say that there is NO translation error. WHAT would a neutron beam mean in this situation? HOW would it be possible?

 

[Borek]

See for example this post:

https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=3207165&postcount=1037

 

[Jorge Stolfi]

My guess is that "neutron beam" is a mistranslation of "neutron radiation"; or, perhaps. "neutron burst". (I don't think they could have determined that the neutrons were in beams).

 

[orndorf]

Arnie Gundersen gives his theory on why neutrons are being detected at Fukushima in his new video.

http://www.fairewinds.com/multimedia

 

[minerva]

Arnie Gundersen gives his theory on why neutrons are being detected at Fukushima in his new video.

http://www.fairewinds.com/multimedia

But surely we don't consider crackpot anti-nuclear activists like Gundersen as credible sources around here, do we?

 

[clancy688]

But surely we don't consider crackpot anti-nuclear activists like Gundersen as credible sources around here, do we?

Gundersen isn't treated as a "crackpot anti-nuclear activist" in this forum. He's an often cited source for a new point of view on the situation, but many of his claims were proven false in following discussions.
Still it's not justified to call him a crackpot anti-nuclear activist. At least he's trying a scientific approach, even if he often fails in doing so.

 

[Caniche]

, but many of his claims were proven false in following discussions.

But in all honesty ,truth be told ,thus guy has got miles to go to catch up with the number falsehoods published by Tepco and the IAEA. (no meltdown; 75% fuel integrity;no containment breach;etc.etc)