User talk:RaptorHunter/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions about User:RaptorHunter. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Hi RaptorHunter, I left a message on the talk page which may interest you: Talk:RGB color model#TrueColor isn't complete.. –jacobolus (t) 08:01, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four halfwidth tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 18:23, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Why should I bother when you do such a good job? Now get back to work, robot!

The table is not to compare KB with KiB. The purpose of the table is to compare KB with the number of bytes. See [1] Please do not revert again until we have discussed this on the policy page. 220.255.2.50 (talk) 16:39, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Replied at: User_talk:220.255.2.53#Binary_Prefixes

It is not vandalism to improve an article when there is consensus. WP:MOSNUM says the consensus is to not use IEC prefixes. Removing the confusing IEC prefixes improves the article. Please reply on WT:MOSNUM not here. 220.255.2.79 (talk) 16:49, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

If you are as experienced an editor as I suspect you are, you know full well that minor changes to the typestyle in someone’s !vote in an RfC to make it better fit with the conventions used in a given RfC or to clarify the meaning for those who speed read is appropriate and is done all the time. I alerted Arthur Rubin to my minor tweak to his post so he can change it back if he doesn’t approve. Greg L (talk) 18:51, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

You edited the text of other people's posts. For that you were blocked. Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#User:Greg_L_is_editing_other_user.27s_comments_on_an_RFC --RaptorHunter (talk) 19:31, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Which was reversed in a matter of minutes and where an admin here stated that it was clearly an editing misjudgment on my part. Now you may delete this comment since I am pretty darn sure you can’t have me leaving a last word like this here on your talk page. That admin also didn’t seem charmed by your trying to prosecute an edit war over there. Greg L (talk) 22:31, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Greg I warned you, but you kept on changing comments anyway. I ended up having to revert you three times. Now please go bug someone else.--RaptorHunter (talk) 22:36, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

I have to say, I don't completely understand how you can get a steam explosion that powerful, but Nesterenko is quite clear, and others confirm throughout the film that much or all of Europe was feared at risk of being rendered uninhabitable, though I presume most of that would have been due to a massive dispersal of radioactivity, rather than directly from the blast. I can imagine that if a glob of molten fissile material fell into water, the steam explosion on all sides could compress the glob rapidly, with an effect like the implosion that forms the critical-mass in a Fat Man-style bomb, which might cause a nuclear explosion, but I don't know if this is what they're on about.

For a blast that big, I don't believe it's a matter of whether it's in a contained reactor or not -- it wouldn't make much difference. I can't speculate much more than that, but I can say that everyone I've asked regarding Fukushima, including those who seem to be on the more pessimistic side, are pretty sure there's no possibility of a nuclear explosion occurring there, whether it be through molten fuel pooling together into a critical mass or other means. I think a steam explosion was a concern at one point at least, since in those plants the reactor vessel sits above a torus-shaped damping chamber filled with water, which is supposed to alleviate excess steam pressure during normal operation. I believe there was some fear that if a core boiled off all its water it could melt through its containment in the form of corium, and fall into the water.

I think the main concern there, though, is (or was) that one of the spent fuel pools will either leak or boil off its water, and that an uncontrollable fuel fire will begin, which could see large quantities of spent fuel melting. If it pools into a critical mass (and I think they try to design against this, but I don't know how it can ultimately be prevented) then the fire would give off incredible radiation as well as incredible heat. Apart from large quantities of vapourised nasties going up in the air, molten fuel could easily melt downwards towards the water table where it would poison the aquifer for a large area of Japan. In some ways it would be a more scary fire than at Chernobyl, since each of those spent fuel ponds contains a large amount of fuel:

• reactor 1: 50 tons
• reactor 2: 81 tons
• reactor 3: 88 tons
• reactor 4: 135 tons
• reactor 5: 142 tons
• reactor 6: 151 tons
• a separate ground-level pool: 1097 tons

(Figures according to Scientific American.) By comparison, the Chernobyl reactor contained 115kg of fuel. Also, the Fukushima Daiichi no. 3 unit houses MOX fuel, which has a lower melting point and contains large quantities of Plutonium, a much nastier substance than Uranium with a half life of 24,000 years and extremely toxic as well as radioactive.

Fortunately, from what I can make out, they're having some success keeping the fuel rods cooled. We'll soon be able to go back to business as usual, and the less said about it, the better. Fuzzypeg★ 05:26, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

My information on how much fuel was in Chernobyl is probably wrong: I was revisiting the Battle of Chernobyl doco, and realised that they state at one point that 195 tons (or tonnes?) of nuclear fuel were burning in the reactor. I presume that must have included spent fuel, since the normal fuel assembly for that class of reactor is (according to WP) 114.7kg. Fuzzypeg★ 00:17, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four halfwidth tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 07:53, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Please be careful. --John (talk) 03:47, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

How do I strip out the IPs edits, without reverting your additions?--RaptorHunter (talk) 04:10, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Use the "undo" function, or edit manually. --John (talk) 15:38, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

The reason I made my edit was due to seeing this edit. Seems to be some kind of glitch that sidetracked me before I could undo my edit. If you have concerns regarding any of my edits you can always ask me. Tiderolls 01:25, 4 May 2011 (UTC)