The situation is as follows:
- The Russians warned that if NATO fires long range rockets into Russia proper, the rockets that can only be aimed and fired by NATO personnel, NATO will be considered to be at war with the Russian Federation. Russia also “clarified” its nuclear doctrine, basically allowing the use of nuclear weapons if a nuclear-armed foe uses a proxy to wage war with Russia;
- USA and UK fired said missiles into the territory of RF;
- Russia responded by using a “Oreshnik” IRBM MIRV cluster, of kinetic impactors only, onto a rocket factory in Dnepropetrovsk;
- USA, UK and France announced that it’s basically a free-for-all, no red lines will be observed, and they launched another series of long range cruise missiles into Russia proper; this time several cluster warheads made it through and hit an airfield in Kursk;
- The Russians announced that “punishment” is being prepared, and the airspace around Kapustin Yar, from where “Oreshnik” was launched, is closed until Nov 30.
The political statements from the West indicate complete unwillingness/inability to de-escalate. The political statements from Russia indicate that they are no longer waiting for the West to come to their senses. Also, the Russians are making significant advances on the battlefield, indicating that the Ukrainian front line is collapsing. Also, statements from the future Trump administration indicate that they intend to continue with pressure on Russia.
It is my opinion that nuclear war is imminent. It’s only a matter of time until someone uses the first nuclear warhead, and then the pace will increase. It used to be decades/years between significant moves, then months, and now we are under a week already, and it seems to be exponentially decreasing. It will be days, then hours, and then it’s all automatic.
There has been information that the Russians have showered leaflets across some sections of Kiev, advising the civilians to evacuate. I can't confirm the accuracy of that, but I guess we'll know soon enough.
At the very end of the video, information is provided about the sequence of notifying the opposing side.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/video/news/putins-direct-threat-to-west-after-icbm-strike-%E2%80%98expect-response-in-mirror-like-manner%E2%80%A6%E2%80%99/vi-AA1uySx1?ocid=BingNewsSerp&cvid=d07dfb7cffa74c1cacf246c7c0a3f2a7&ei=26
Today, I asked ChatGPT to answer some questions related to nuclear war.
Among other things, I also asked the following:
If a nuclear war were to occur, and there was no danger of a direct strike where people live, but rather the risk comes from air currents and radioactive clouds as a consequence of the war, what would be the dangers of radiation, and what precautions should be taken and avoided? What levels and types of radiation should be avoided, and for how long? Provide other relevant and important information related to the question.
What levels of radiation can be expected if radioactive clouds have brought contamination from a distance of 500 km?
Give me a specific step-by-step guide on how to use the RADIASCAN 701A device in the aforementioned situation, and how to act based on certain results that are critical for taking appropriate protective measures.
I'll give the questions a try, because I wouldn't trust ChatGPT with anything; it's basically going to try to get the generally established prejudice and cite it as fact.
"If a nuclear war were to occur, and there was no danger of a direct strike where people live, but rather…" – it depends on the number of nuclear devices detonated globally, then on the number of nuclear devices detonated in the vicinity, direction of wind carrying the fallout, type of devices and proximity of the fireball to either ground or sea. This contains too many conditionals to be useful, so I'll simplify by approximating heavy global fallout to moderate/heavy local fallout, and assume almost the worst case scenario with the wind; basically, you have a Castle Bravo kind of fallout, you're down wind from the blast zone and you're close enough for fallout not to disperse too much. The best you can do is assume it's survivable inside, stay inside for at least two weeks, don't eat or drink anything that's been outside during that time (water from the tap is probably safe, but check with the dosimeter, because that's what it's for). Tap water will be initially safe, but later on you must assume that the fallout has found its way to the water towers, and if the dosimeter confirms that, use the tap water only for washing and flushing the toilet, but not for drinking. Basically, not having water is more likely to kill you than radiation, unless the radiation is extreme, and it's very unlikely to be. Distance is key. If fallout is on your roof, avoid sleeping on the top floor where it's close. Try to create distance, because radiation will fall with the square of the distance from the origin. Also, having fallout on your body is bad; if you really have to move on the outside, cover yourself with something, and throw that something away when you have arrived to shelter. It's safer than hoping to wash it away with water. However, after disposing of contaminated clothes and cover, do wash yourself thoroughly and absolutely avoid getting the stuff into your mouth, nose and eyes. People who tasted the black rain in Hiroshima died. Having the stuff on your roof is bad, but it's survivable bad. Having is in your mouth is deadly. Absolutely avoid contact with fallout and stay indoors until it clears. If it's on you, get it off ASAP, because it's a function of time.
"What levels of radiation… 500 km?" – You'd have to be really unlucky for it to matter. With Castle Bravo, the dirtiest bomb ever detonated, people on a fishing boat 130 km downwind from the blast got seriously fucked; radiation sickness and all. All of them survived, but they had access to medical aid. In a situation without medical facilities, they would have likely died. With 500km distance, assuming a MIRV warhead of 150kt as the most likely scenario, at 500km, you'd be likely fine without much if any protective measures. I would still shelter in situ and check environmental radiation with the dosimeter before going out, and definitely check food and water before ingesting it, but your no1 danger would be panic and a combination of state overreaction/lockdown/curfew, limited access to food and water, disruption of utility services, and breakdown of law and order/looting. Also, lack of money, and therefore lack of options, would be a major problem. At 500km, I would honestly not care about the blast at all. 50km is another matter, there I would be very careful to check wind direction and keep the dosimeter on at all times. At 5km, if you're inside a concrete basement and not exposed to flying glass/debris and observe the "duck and cover" principle, you would most likely be fine. Even at 1km distance, if you're in an underground shelter and the blast is not directly above you, but at an angle, and you're somewhat lucky with the direction of the fallout, you would probably be fine. The dangers of a nuclear explosion outside of the area of immediate danger is extremely overblown, and it's intentionally so in order to discourage nuclear war. However, in my simulations, unprotected and unprepared people in the first few km of the blast are fucked. In a good concrete basement or other protective structure, especially underground, those "duck and cover" things can save you from the most likely killer: the flying debris. Just observe the Chelyabinsk meteor and how people got hurt: glass from the exploding windows. Also, if you're in a clear line of sight to the blast, you're fucked, but even covering yourself with a white cloth can reduce your infrared-caused burns from third degree to first or nothing. Duck and cover actually helps, that stuff was invented by the guys who actually experienced atmospheric nuclear blasts themselves and knew what they were talking about. Basically, if you're too close, you're fucked regardless. If you're outside the first deadly kilometer or two, hiding behind something, covering yourself with a white reflective sheet, and especially putting a concrete structure between yourself and the blast, can increase your survivability from almost none to almost certain.
"Give me a specific step-by-step guide on how to use the RADIASCAN 701A device" – put it in the mode for checking a,b and g to check food and water, from direct proximity, and with the back cover removed. Always carry it with you when going outside, to inform you of the danger spots, because the radiation is never equally distributed. There are safe zones, and then there are the deadly ones, like the carousel or the bridge in Pripyat, the stuff in clear sight or down wind from the blast. Check radiation in your home, and move the beds to the safest zone. Exposure for short periods in order to shower, use the toilet etc. is fine; avoiding that stuff in fact exposes you to more danger than radiation. However, sleeping in a place with high radiation is not a good idea, because dosage is a function of both time and intensity.
Also, why two weeks of sheltering in situ? It's because of the radioactive decay of the short-lived isotopes that are the result of the blast. Initially after the blast, everything is "hot" as all hell and you absolutely don't want to get near it. However, those "hottest" isotopes are also the quickest to decay, exactly because the atomic nuclei are so unbalanced that they "scream" high-energy photons, and eventually the nucleus splits. Then you get another set of isotopes, and another, and another, until you get ones that are long-term stable, still radioactive but much less dangerous. The curve of danger falls exponentially with time, and the longer you are removed from exposure, the better chances you have of making it safely through. Two weeks is the rule of the thumb there – sure, you can shelter for longer, but it won't increase your safety level that much. The first few days are absolutely deadly, with those short-lived isotopes screaming gamma-photons at full blast. Avoid that at all cost, and then you can slowly go out for a limited time, especially if you have the dosimeter with you to guide you away from the "hot" areas. All the rules are a poor substitute for that instrument, especially when combined with common sense and some knowledge of physics.
I thank you for your kindness and for the useful information and advice.
Also2, neutron activation is a thing. It's the most neglected problem with radioactive contamination, because people who are not physicists don't understand the phenomenon and thus the theories about purely fusion bombs not causing radioactive contamination. In fact, something like a neutron bomb can flood an area with neutrons that basically cause transmutation of the nuclei of the impacted materials, converting them into radioactive isotopes, that then behave very similar to normal radioactive fallout. This means you can have a closed bag of food that wasn't contaminated by the fallout, but the food inside can be neutron activated and thus radioactive. Fireball touching sea water and evaporating it is extremely dangerous in that respect, because both sodium and chlorine from sea water can and will be neutron activated into very hot isotopes, that will be carried far together with water vapour. The same happens with dirt and concrete if the fireball touches them; basically, evaporated rock, similar to volcanic ash but highly radioactive, then floats in the air until rain washes it out.