Talk:Mushroom cloud

message: Is the Nagasaki blast really appropriate here, considering how many people's death that represents? Perhaps we should use an image of the Trinity explosion instead. What do you think? Foobaz
:The photo shows a mushroom cloud. It's appropriate regardless of the results of the blast. Should we remove the Nagasaki entry too because of the kill count? No, I don't think so. Adraeus 05:51, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: This seems more plausible to me too, but it would be nice to have someone who knows what they're talking about confirm this, and explain its shape while they're at it.  Though it should be noted that a sudden decrease in pressure does result in a decrease in temperature in a gas.  The page Smoke ring claims that it is observed in atomic bombs, which would explain its shape and movement, but in that case it is unclear to me how it forms in the first place.
Where are the photographs of the Shoemaker-Levy 9 m-clouds? euyyn 11:49, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)

text: Agreed. The photo on the article is not a good example of a "perfect" mushroom cloud, as it appears in the first few seconds after the explosion. The one on the picture (besides the bad quality of the image) has been release for a longer period than what is usually depicted in film, so the mushroom shape is already a bit lost.
'The reasons why the cloud has been described as a "mushroom" are not entirely understood, though the actual shape of a mushroom, with its wide cap on a narrow stem, likely played a part.' This bit made me laugh. It seems a bit ludicrous. Also, the last line, 'Most of the stuff written here has not been confirmed and extra research needs to be done, before its validity can be verified.' should not be there, it isn't very... proper, and there seems to be quite a lot of confirmation (quotes being cited and such), so I'll remove it until someone can think of a good reason to put it back up. Bgh251f2 16:25, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I suggest that at least during the present state of the article, minimizing the amount of art and focusing more on actual photographic evidence.  I think this will provide much more credibility.  — FJ | hello 06:43, May 16, 2005 (UTC)
:Evidence of what, exactly? There is no "art" in the current article that I can see (there is one diagram, but I assume that is not what you mean). --Fastfission 14:39, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Emphasize photographic evidence over art

message: Isn't it worth cross-referring to the analogies here? It's only the close proximity of the ground that causes the stem to develop IIRC. 
see say Batchelor 'Fluid Dynamics' p476 section 6.11 ('large gas bubbles in liquid') which notes that spherical cap bubble theory give the right-ish rate of rise. Linuxlad 10:32, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: So... add it in. --Fastfission 14:37, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Spherical Cap Bubble

message: I always thought the vertical column (or stem) was created when the blast is blocked and diverted upward by the doughnut shape cloud of debris kicked up from the ground around the point of impact. Does this contribute even a little to the shape, or is my physics way off? 205.174.22.28 06:01, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I assume you are talking about the blast being reflected off of the ground? I don't think that contributes to the stem. There are a few shots where you can actually see it reflecting off the ground and while it raises the ground a bit and deforms the fireball (and of course can created a Mach stem, which is different) it doesn't seem to be responsible for a visible stem. I could easily be wrong, but I don't recall that being a big aspect of the stem formation. --Fastfission 14:34, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Doughnut

message: Should there be a mention of things like what is seen in Image:MountRedoubtEruption.jpg?—a thing 18:37, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's pretty neat. --Fastfission 18:39, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Volcanic mushroom clouds? 

message: If I understand correctly, it sounds like mushroom clouds created by nuclear blasts are so dense and so large because of a great deal of dust and debris that's sucked up into the air (the exact mechanism is not explained), whereas a mid-air nuclear burst that is a mile off the ground would have a far less dense cloud, whose visible particles would only be the vaporized particles from the bomb itself.  Some questions I think the article would benefit from answering:
1. Roughly what percentage of the smoke visible in a mushroom cloud is ground dust and debris?  99%?  More?  Or is there some other phenomenon that causes some of the visible smoke?
2. What is the mechanism of the dust being sucked up into the mushroom cloud?  Is it just high winds blowing the dust around?
3. A photo of a mid-air nuclear burst, if one is available, would be a good contrast with the ground-burst photos.
4. Over at the Tsar Bomba article, it's claimed the explosion "touched the ground".  The resulting mushroom cloud was the largest ever. If it had been a surface blast, would the mushroom cloud have been even larger because of the larger amount of vaporized soil available for the winds to suck upward?
Tempshill 16:29, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Aerial nuke bursts 

message: Is it worth including the famous Bush quote about Iraq, "Facing clear evidence of peril, we cannot wait for the final proof -- the smoking gun -- that could come in the form of a mushroom cloud."? Superm401 - Talk 15:52, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bush quote 

message: I dont have a profile here, so I dont know how to change it.
Putting your mouse over the last picture of the mushroom cloud in the scroll bar gives the description "Mushroom cloud.  Cornchips taste good with salsa, but not good with mushrooms. yaaaaaaaaaaaay."
scratch that, all of them say it...
:Thanks for the info. I just deleted it. E Wing (talk) 14:13, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  More vandalism 

message: ...sorry to be a bother, but it has returned again lol...  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 168.170.197.10 (talk) 18:08, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  return of vandalism 

message: Does anybody know more about the condensation effects observed at higher-yield nuclear blasts? A good description of formation of the ice caps and skirts and bells and all those beauties? Also, description of the atmospheric fluorescence observed in e.g. the Trinity test would be nice. --Shaddack (talk) 06:44, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Condensation effects, fluorescence of air? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Mushroom cloud. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090216224028/http://dimaggio.org:80/Heroes/richard_feynman.htm to http://www.dimaggio.org/Heroes/richard_feynman.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 19:15, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Mushroom cloud. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.atomicarchive.com/Effects/effects9.shtml
*Added  tag to http://www.princeton.edu/sgs/publications/articles/effects/effects-2.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051204035910/http://www.cddc.vt.edu/host/atomic/nukeffct/airburst.html to http://www.cddc.vt.edu/host/atomic/nukeffct/airburst.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:38, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (February 2018) 

message: The text contains two times expressions of this form whose meaning is beyond my understanding. 151.29.19.73 (talk) 18:14, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  yield 19 kt at 143 m / kt^(1/3)