Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2017 May 24

Welcome to the Wikipedia Miscellaneous Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

May 24

Radiation as a direct weapon

Have radiation emitting pointers ever been considered as a weapon. Perhaps something mounted on an armoured vehicle that could concentrate an extremely intense beam of highly focused gamma rays over a long distance. Something that could directly deliver say 2-4 SV's over 500 meters. Obviously that sort of material would be highly dangerous if it got destroyed, but how would this idea hold up from a purely theoretical stand point?

This could be a terrifying weapon, particularly as a lethal but non destructive crowd control device. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.17.57.222 (talk) 21:37, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

I believe somebody was assassinated using such a weapon, but so far I haven't found a ref. The Russians, in particular, seem to like assassinating enemies with radiation, but the method you propose is too dangerous and leaves behind too much evidence for them. See crimes involving radioactive substances. I can see North Korea using it, as they seem totally unconcerned with how they are perceived by the rest of the world [1]. As for battlefield applications, such a system would be less lethal to the enemy and potentially more dangerous to your own troops, than convention weapons. It's only advantage is killing with stealth, from a distance. As for dosage, enough so the person dies days or weeks later of radiation sickness would allow the attackers time to escape (the victim would likely feel tingling during the attack, but would be unlikely to know what was happening). It would take some time for medical authorities to identify it as radiation poisoning and then for police to look for the culprits. A lower dosage could also be used, in the hopes of causing cancer, but then that could take years to kill the victim. Assassins aren't usually that patient.

As for using it to attack protesters, the usual goal is disperse them quickly, before the crowd grows to a size they can't control. So, using a weapon that doesn't show any effects until later wouldn't work for this goal. However, I can see a repressive government using it secretly, to reduce their opponent's numbers over time. They could appear to welcome protesters for the cameras, while secretly poisoning them. StuRat (talk) 21:46, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

You "believe somebody was assassinated using such a weapon"? Even 007 would laugh at such an elaborately expensive means of killing. There are so many much more economical, easier ways of going about it. As for the theoretical possibility, of course you could dispatch someone that way. You could kill someone with talcum powder as well. What's the point? (Mandatory quote from Footfall: "Eat hot gamma rays, foolish Centauran.") Clarityfiend (talk) 22:39, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

For murder, the unusual method can make it difficult to find the culprit. That's the advantage. There need be no contact between victim and perp, and the exact time and location of the attack can also remain unknown, making it very difficult to investigate. StuRat (talk) 22:43, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Here's a similar device which was built, but not the one I believe was actually used in an attack: [2]. StuRat (talk) 22:47, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Are you interested only in radioactive-related radiation? If electromagnetic radiation (beyond gamma rays) is in your purview, the answer is yes; see raygun#Real-world development and Active Denial System for a couple of examples. Nyttend (talk) 02:26, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

I was dissing a gamma ray weapon, but upon rereading the OP's original question, I see that that was just an example. Clarityfiend (talk) 04:50, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

• Anecdatum: My father once told me (and just confirmed by email) that he met a man in the 1950's while he was working in the Philadelphia shipyards who had been standing in front of an active but non-moving radar and received severe burns from a wrench heated by induction in his back pocket. The man later died of cancer at a young age, but my father could give no details on the cancer (which should not be directly induced by non-ionizing radiation) and did not witness the original incident, but says he believes the man was reliable. μηδείς (talk) 03:12, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

If he was a more clever man, he could have invented the microwave oven (or at least known what happens when you stand in front of a radar dish). Matt Deres (talk) 12:07, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

At the beginning of Arthur C Clarke's autobiographically based 1963 novel Glide Path the protagonist, who is working on the development of talk-down radar landing systems during WW2 (as Clarke actually did) is admiring the view from a high platform supporting a radar dish:

"The parabolic bowl looming above him gave a premonitory creak and twisted towards the south, as if tired of staring so long in one direction. There was no danger that it would start spinning at full speed – Sergeant Campbell knew that he was up here – but Alan thought he had better move.

The big dish was aimed straight at him, and he was sitting in a radar beam of a frequency and strength no one would have dreamed possible only a few years ago. It might be imagination, but he felt that he was already starting to cook."

{The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.200.129.108 (talk) 17:42, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

See: Directed-energy weapon. --69.159.60.50 (talk) 21:49, 25 May 2017 (UTC)