Talk:Bhangmeter

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Bhangmeter article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Physics Low‑importance

	Physics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Military history: Technology / Weaponry / North America / United States

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion not met

Associated task forces:
/
	Military science, technology, and theory task force
	Weaponry task force
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force

No false positives?[edit]

The Vela Incident is considered by some scientists to be a false positive. Certainly it was not conclusive. Socrates2008 (Talk) 14:39, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why the double flash?[edit]

Can somebody improve on the explanation of why there is a double flash? I think the present explanation is rather confusing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.109.210.162 (talk) 02:46, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's all theoric[edit]

Everything about nuclear weapons is confusing, because it's almost all theory. Most of the numbers are suppositions based on calculations on paper. This "device" may as well not exist at all. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.70.168.170 (talk) 19:21, 12 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No, as the article says, these are real instruments, actually installed on Earth-facing satellites. Arlo James Barnes 23:03, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]