Lamont-Doherty Seismologists Show Latest Korean Blast Larger Than 2006 Nuclear Test

May 27, 2009 Lamont-Doherty Seismologists Show Latest Korean Blast Larger Than 2006 Nuclear Test

Enlarge

Seismograms of North Korea’s May 25, 2009 nuclear test (top, in red); October 2006 test (middle); and natural earthquake from the same region.

(PhysOrg.com) -- Columbia seismologists who have intensively studied North Korea’s nuclear testing efforts say Monday’s blast was certainly a nuclear bomb, roughly five times larger than the country’s first test in 2006. The scientists, at Columbia University’s Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, say signals picked up by seismic stations, including one in China, showed clear characteristics of a shallow underground nuclear explosion with a force of probably several kilotons.

“The second test appears to have a significantly higher yield,” said seismologist Paul G. Richards, Mellon Professor of Natural Sciences in the department of earth and environmental sciences and a longtime expert on seismic detection of nuclear tests. He and his colleague Won-Young Kim, Doherty Research Scientist at Lamont, are coauthors of articles on the 2006 North Korean test in and Eos Transactions, and most recently wrote a piece on current advances in nuclear-test detection in the March 2009 Scientific American.

Reports so far have given varying estimates of the explosion’s size, and many suggest that only eventual leakage of radioactive particles into the air will confirm that the explosion was nuclear, not chemical. The assessment by Richards and Kim is in line with an anonymous Obama administration official who told The New York Times shortly afterward that it was a nuclear blast of “several kilotons” (a kiloton is equal to 1,000 tons of TNT).

Lamont-Doherty Seismologists Show Latest Korean Blast Larger Than 2006 Nuclear Test
Enlarge

Nuclear test site (star) and surrounding seismic stations (initials). China’s Mudanjiang station (MDJ) is 370 kilometers north of the blast.

The seismic pattern produced by the latest blast was also nearly identical to the Oct. 9, 2006, North Korean test, which later leaked radioactive particles. “The seismogram is almost a carbon copy of the previous image,” said Kim. The seismograms show two sudden, sharp jolts, followed by a violent shuddering of the earth. The dominant seismic waves produced were fast-traveling compressional, or P-waves, which alternately compress and dilate the ground outward from the source—the signature of an explosion. Earthquakes, by comparison, usually start out with weaker P-waves, and produce more shear waves, which shake the ground sideways in relation to their direction of travel. Kim said analysis of signals collected by different stations located the explosion in the same mountainous area where the last test took place, some 80 kilometers northwest of the city of Kilju.

Richards said it was “implausible” that the blast, which produced shaking equivalent to an earthquake of magnitude 4.5 to 4.7, could have been made by surreptitiously planted conventional explosives. The explosion’s size cannot be exactly quantified because seismic measurements are influenced by the depth of the explosion and the type of material in which it takes place. Geologic maps show that the surrounding area is made of hard granite and other rocks that transmit energy efficiently, but no one except the North Koreans knows the depth of the blast, or if it was in direct contact with bedrock. Kim put the blast in the range of 2.2 to 4 kilotons. By comparison, the 2006 test was estimated to be less than a kiloton, and was considered by many to be only a partial success that did not completely detonate.

Other estimates of the current test have ranged widely. The Russian Defense Ministry said it might have yielded 15 or 20 kilotons—the size of the bombs that leveled Hiroshima and Nagasaki—while European scientists have estimated three to eight kilotons. However, some of these estimates were made using data from stations far from the source, or which did not have readings from the 2006 event to use as a baseline.

Richards and Kim took data only from a handful of stations that monitored the 2006 test, as well as earlier known chemical explosions and natural earthquakes in the same area that could be used for comparison. This included readings from the closest station from which data is available, in Mudanjiang, China, some 370 kilometers north of the test site. Much Chinese seismic data is unavailable to other countries, but Mudanjiang, operated with the U.S. Geological Survey and an international consortium of universities, transmits readings to researchers worldwide almost in real time. Kim and Richards also obtained information on signals from stations in South Korea, Australia, Alaska and Kyrgyzstan. Each showed amplitudes three to seven times higher than in 2006, leading to the conclusion that the new test had a yield roughly five times larger than the previous one.

By any account, the latest test blast was small compared with the bombs now stocked by major countries including the United States, which run upward of 50 megatons. But, said Richards, “Even the 2006 North Korean test would have been a disaster if it had gone off in a metropolitan area. This one was bigger.”

Provided by The Earth Institute at Columbia University (news : web)


print this article email this article download pdf blog this article bookmark this article     Stumble it Digg this share on Facebook retweet share on Reddit add to delicious
Rate this story - 5 /5 (3 votes)


May 27, 2009 all stories

Comments: 0

5 /5 (3 votes)
  • Stumble this up

  • Digg this

  • share this

  • hide
  • Related Stories




  • hide
  • Relevant PhysicsForums posts

  • Climate Science Update
    created 11 hours ago
  • The IPCC and the term "most"
    created Nov 23, 2009
  • Is global warming a fact?
    created Nov 23, 2009
  • Random variability of wind patterns
    created Nov 23, 2009
  • Record precipitation in the UK
    created Nov 22, 2009
  • How to move cloud from one time to another..
    created Nov 22, 2009
  • More from Physics Forums - Earth

Other News

Fermi Telescope Peers Deep into Microquasar

Fermi Telescope Peers Deep into Microquasar (w/ Video)

Space & Earth / Astronomy

created 8 hours ago | popularity 4.5 / 5 (4) | comments 0

(PhysOrg.com) -- NASA's Fermi Gamma-ray Space Telescope has made the first unambiguous detection of high-energy gamma-rays from an enigmatic binary system known as Cygnus X-3. The system pairs a hot, massive ...


The Energy Sources of Ultraluminous Galaxies

The Energy Sources of Ultraluminous Galaxies

Space & Earth / Astronomy

created 8 hours ago | popularity 4.4 / 5 (8) | comments 0

(PhysOrg.com) -- Ultraluminous infrared galaxies ((ULIRGs) are galaxies whose luminosity exceeds that of a trillion suns; for comparison, the Milky Way galaxy has a typical (and much more modest) luminosity ...


Space shuttle Atlantis, 7 astronauts back on Earth (AP)

Space shuttle Atlantis, 7 astronauts back on Earth

Space & Earth / Space Exploration

created 9 hours ago | popularity not rated yet | comments 0

(AP) -- Space shuttle Atlantis and its seven astronauts returned to Earth with a smooth touchdown Friday to end an 11-day flight that resupplied the International Space Station.


Herschel takes a peek at the ingredients of the galaxies

Herschel takes a peek at the ingredients of the galaxies

Space & Earth / Astronomy

created 6 hours ago | popularity 5 / 5 (1) | comments 0

(PhysOrg.com) -- The European Space Agency has today released spectacular new observations from the Herschel Space Observatory, including the UK-led SPIRE instrument. Spectrometers on board all three Hershel ...


China is set to launch its second moon orbiter next October, state media have reported

China to launch second lunar probe: state media

Space & Earth / Space Exploration

created 13 hours ago | popularity 5 / 5 (3) | comments 0

China will launch its second moon orbiter next October, state media reported Friday, as it powers ahead with a space programme that has sparked concerns abroad.