超级军网国际社会质疑朝鲜氢弹试验成功
来源：百度文库 编辑：超级军网 时间：2024/05/02 16:46:27
朝鲜官方周三宣布，已经成功进行了氢弹试验，但一些国家和专家都对此提出了质疑。
韩国国家情报院表示，根据监测到的地震规模，朝鲜此次核试验可能不是氢弹试验。
金正恩说谎？
Image copyright AFP
Image caption 美国兰德研究机构分析员本内特认为，要不就是金正恩说谎，明明没有进行氢弹试验，却说成是氢弹试验。又或者核试中的一部分有氢气，但根本不太成功。
韩国国家情报院指出，朝鲜此前进行第三次核试验时的体波震级为4.9，当量为7.9千吨。这次核试验的当量为6.0千吨，体波震级为4.8。若是氢弹试验，当量应该达到数百千吨，试验即使失败，当量也会达到数十千吨。
美国兰德研究机构分析员本内特也指出，如果真的是氢弹试验的话，朝鲜核试产生的震动至少要比他们宣称的多出10倍才行。
因此，本内特认为，要不就是金正恩说谎，明明没有进行氢弹试验，却说成是氢弹试验。又或者核试中的一部分有氢气，但根本不太成功。
欧盟及俄国均有保留
Image copyright EPA
Image caption 欧盟外交事务主管莫盖里尼在其声明中也使用了“如果证实的话”这样地字眼。
有意思的是，随后欧盟及俄国官方发表的声明也都间接对朝鲜是否氢弹试验成功提出了质疑。
俄国外交部发言人的声明表示，俄国正在仔细研究有关声明及分析技术资料。声明还特别使用了“如果这一试验获得确认的”字眼。
此外，欧盟外交事务主管莫盖里尼在其声明中也使用了“如果证实的话”这样地字眼。
或许还需要数天或者数个星期才能通过第三方的独立测试才能确定朝鲜是否真的进行了氢弹试验。
无论如何，联合国安理会将在周三（6日）召开紧急会议，讨论如何对朝鲜最新的核试验做出反应。
（撰文：李文/责编：欧阳诚）
分享此项报道 关于分享
http://www.bbc.com/zhongwen/simp ... korea_bomb_question朝鲜官方周三宣布，已经成功进行了氢弹试验，但一些国家和专家都对此提出了质疑。
韩国国家情报院表示，根据监测到的地震规模，朝鲜此次核试验可能不是氢弹试验。
金正恩说谎？
Image copyright AFP
Image caption 美国兰德研究机构分析员本内特认为，要不就是金正恩说谎，明明没有进行氢弹试验，却说成是氢弹试验。又或者核试中的一部分有氢气，但根本不太成功。
韩国国家情报院指出，朝鲜此前进行第三次核试验时的体波震级为4.9，当量为7.9千吨。这次核试验的当量为6.0千吨，体波震级为4.8。若是氢弹试验，当量应该达到数百千吨，试验即使失败，当量也会达到数十千吨。
美国兰德研究机构分析员本内特也指出，如果真的是氢弹试验的话，朝鲜核试产生的震动至少要比他们宣称的多出10倍才行。
因此，本内特认为，要不就是金正恩说谎，明明没有进行氢弹试验，却说成是氢弹试验。又或者核试中的一部分有氢气，但根本不太成功。
欧盟及俄国均有保留
Image copyright EPA
Image caption 欧盟外交事务主管莫盖里尼在其声明中也使用了“如果证实的话”这样地字眼。
有意思的是，随后欧盟及俄国官方发表的声明也都间接对朝鲜是否氢弹试验成功提出了质疑。
俄国外交部发言人的声明表示，俄国正在仔细研究有关声明及分析技术资料。声明还特别使用了“如果这一试验获得确认的”字眼。
此外，欧盟外交事务主管莫盖里尼在其声明中也使用了“如果证实的话”这样地字眼。
或许还需要数天或者数个星期才能通过第三方的独立测试才能确定朝鲜是否真的进行了氢弹试验。
无论如何，联合国安理会将在周三（6日）召开紧急会议，讨论如何对朝鲜最新的核试验做出反应。
（撰文：李文/责编：欧阳诚）
分享此项报道 关于分享
http://www.bbc.com/zhongwen/simp ... korea_bomb_question
韩国国家情报院表示，根据监测到的地震规模，朝鲜此次核试验可能不是氢弹试验。
金正恩说谎？
Image copyright AFP
Image caption 美国兰德研究机构分析员本内特认为，要不就是金正恩说谎，明明没有进行氢弹试验，却说成是氢弹试验。又或者核试中的一部分有氢气，但根本不太成功。
韩国国家情报院指出，朝鲜此前进行第三次核试验时的体波震级为4.9，当量为7.9千吨。这次核试验的当量为6.0千吨，体波震级为4.8。若是氢弹试验，当量应该达到数百千吨，试验即使失败，当量也会达到数十千吨。
美国兰德研究机构分析员本内特也指出，如果真的是氢弹试验的话，朝鲜核试产生的震动至少要比他们宣称的多出10倍才行。
因此，本内特认为，要不就是金正恩说谎，明明没有进行氢弹试验，却说成是氢弹试验。又或者核试中的一部分有氢气，但根本不太成功。
欧盟及俄国均有保留
Image copyright EPA
Image caption 欧盟外交事务主管莫盖里尼在其声明中也使用了“如果证实的话”这样地字眼。
有意思的是，随后欧盟及俄国官方发表的声明也都间接对朝鲜是否氢弹试验成功提出了质疑。
俄国外交部发言人的声明表示，俄国正在仔细研究有关声明及分析技术资料。声明还特别使用了“如果这一试验获得确认的”字眼。
此外，欧盟外交事务主管莫盖里尼在其声明中也使用了“如果证实的话”这样地字眼。
或许还需要数天或者数个星期才能通过第三方的独立测试才能确定朝鲜是否真的进行了氢弹试验。
无论如何，联合国安理会将在周三（6日）召开紧急会议，讨论如何对朝鲜最新的核试验做出反应。
（撰文：李文/责编：欧阳诚）
分享此项报道 关于分享
http://www.bbc.com/zhongwen/simp ... korea_bomb_question朝鲜官方周三宣布，已经成功进行了氢弹试验，但一些国家和专家都对此提出了质疑。
韩国国家情报院表示，根据监测到的地震规模，朝鲜此次核试验可能不是氢弹试验。
金正恩说谎？
Image copyright AFP
Image caption 美国兰德研究机构分析员本内特认为，要不就是金正恩说谎，明明没有进行氢弹试验，却说成是氢弹试验。又或者核试中的一部分有氢气，但根本不太成功。
韩国国家情报院指出，朝鲜此前进行第三次核试验时的体波震级为4.9，当量为7.9千吨。这次核试验的当量为6.0千吨，体波震级为4.8。若是氢弹试验，当量应该达到数百千吨，试验即使失败，当量也会达到数十千吨。
美国兰德研究机构分析员本内特也指出，如果真的是氢弹试验的话，朝鲜核试产生的震动至少要比他们宣称的多出10倍才行。
因此，本内特认为，要不就是金正恩说谎，明明没有进行氢弹试验，却说成是氢弹试验。又或者核试中的一部分有氢气，但根本不太成功。
欧盟及俄国均有保留
Image copyright EPA
Image caption 欧盟外交事务主管莫盖里尼在其声明中也使用了“如果证实的话”这样地字眼。
有意思的是，随后欧盟及俄国官方发表的声明也都间接对朝鲜是否氢弹试验成功提出了质疑。
俄国外交部发言人的声明表示，俄国正在仔细研究有关声明及分析技术资料。声明还特别使用了“如果这一试验获得确认的”字眼。
此外，欧盟外交事务主管莫盖里尼在其声明中也使用了“如果证实的话”这样地字眼。
或许还需要数天或者数个星期才能通过第三方的独立测试才能确定朝鲜是否真的进行了氢弹试验。
无论如何，联合国安理会将在周三（6日）召开紧急会议，讨论如何对朝鲜最新的核试验做出反应。
（撰文：李文/责编：欧阳诚）
分享此项报道 关于分享
http://www.bbc.com/zhongwen/simp ... korea_bomb_question
中国当年核试爆，美苏等国都能采集到空气样本分析确认，朝鲜是真是假，相信这些有能力做相应分析数据采集的国家，都心知肚明，不过都为了各自的小算盘，现在在一起商量怎么统一口径罢了
2016-1-6 22:50 上传
韩政府痛批朝鲜核试 情报部门称或非氢弹
韩联社首尔1月6日电 韩国政府将朝鲜第四次核试验视为严重事件，将采取强有力的措施予以应对。但鉴于爆炸当量小于第三次核试验，朝鲜试爆的所谓“氢弹”可能是助爆型裂变武器（又称加强型原子弹）。
韩国保障室第一次长（副主任）赵太庸6日下午在青瓦台发表政府声明，强烈谴责了朝鲜不顾韩国和国际社会的一再警告执意进行第四次核试验，公然违反联合国安理会决议的做法。赵太庸强调，正如韩国所警告的那样，为使朝鲜对进行核试验付出应有的代价，将采取一切必要措施，包括与盟友、六方会谈成员国以及国际社会紧密合作促成由联合国安理会出面的额外制裁。
联合国安理会即将着手讨论针对朝鲜进行第四次核试验采取新的制裁措施。朝鲜进行前三次核试验招致联合国第1718号、1874号和2094号制裁决议，已经受到多重制裁，而新的制裁措施将比以往力度更大。
韩朝去年达成“8·25协议”后形成的政治对话气氛很可能被军事对抗气氛所取代。朝鲜还有可能以安理会额外制裁为由试射远程导弹或进行第五次核试验。预计最近出现修复迹象的朝中关系将再度陷入僵局，韩半岛局势恐将急转直下。
外界评价，朝鲜第四次核试验的爆炸当量若按人工地震释放的能量估算，小于第三次核试验的爆炸当量。据韩国气象厅分析，核试验引发的地震震级为里氏4.8级，小于第三次核试验时的4.9级。韩国情报部门据此认为，朝鲜使用处于氢弹前一阶段的助爆型裂变武器进行第四次核试验的可能性更大，而非货真价实的氢弹。政府有关负责人就朝鲜所谓氢弹试验的真伪表示，有待进一步分析研究。
朝鲜电视台于平壤时间中午（北京时间上午11点半）在“特别重大报道”中宣布，“于主体105年1月6日10时成功进行了主体朝鲜的第一次氢弹试验。”朝鲜宣称，百分百依靠自己的智慧、自己的技术和自己的力量完全确证新研制试验用氢弹技术参数的准确性，小型化氢弹的威力得到科学验证。朝鲜自评，此次核试验代表着“朝鲜核武力量更高的发展阶段”。朝鲜还辩称，核试有理，自卫无罪，由不得任何人说三道四。
1月6日，朝鲜两江道白岩郡附近发生人工地震。1月6日，朝鲜两江道白岩郡附近发生人工地震。）
据了解，与以往三次核试验不同，这次朝鲜进行核试验前未事先通知中美两国，也没有直接预告或间接暗示核试计划。外界在监测到两江道白岩郡附近发生人工地震后，才怀疑朝鲜进行了一次突然袭击式的核试验，而朝鲜在地震发生2个小时后公布了核试消息。（完）
韩联社首尔1月6日电 韩国政府将朝鲜第四次核试验视为严重事件，将采取强有力的措施予以应对。但鉴于爆炸当量小于第三次核试验，朝鲜试爆的所谓“氢弹”可能是助爆型裂变武器（又称加强型原子弹）。
韩国保障室第一次长（副主任）赵太庸6日下午在青瓦台发表政府声明，强烈谴责了朝鲜不顾韩国和国际社会的一再警告执意进行第四次核试验，公然违反联合国安理会决议的做法。赵太庸强调，正如韩国所警告的那样，为使朝鲜对进行核试验付出应有的代价，将采取一切必要措施，包括与盟友、六方会谈成员国以及国际社会紧密合作促成由联合国安理会出面的额外制裁。
联合国安理会即将着手讨论针对朝鲜进行第四次核试验采取新的制裁措施。朝鲜进行前三次核试验招致联合国第1718号、1874号和2094号制裁决议，已经受到多重制裁，而新的制裁措施将比以往力度更大。
韩朝去年达成“8·25协议”后形成的政治对话气氛很可能被军事对抗气氛所取代。朝鲜还有可能以安理会额外制裁为由试射远程导弹或进行第五次核试验。预计最近出现修复迹象的朝中关系将再度陷入僵局，韩半岛局势恐将急转直下。
外界评价，朝鲜第四次核试验的爆炸当量若按人工地震释放的能量估算，小于第三次核试验的爆炸当量。据韩国气象厅分析，核试验引发的地震震级为里氏4.8级，小于第三次核试验时的4.9级。韩国情报部门据此认为，朝鲜使用处于氢弹前一阶段的助爆型裂变武器进行第四次核试验的可能性更大，而非货真价实的氢弹。政府有关负责人就朝鲜所谓氢弹试验的真伪表示，有待进一步分析研究。
朝鲜电视台于平壤时间中午（北京时间上午11点半）在“特别重大报道”中宣布，“于主体105年1月6日10时成功进行了主体朝鲜的第一次氢弹试验。”朝鲜宣称，百分百依靠自己的智慧、自己的技术和自己的力量完全确证新研制试验用氢弹技术参数的准确性，小型化氢弹的威力得到科学验证。朝鲜自评，此次核试验代表着“朝鲜核武力量更高的发展阶段”。朝鲜还辩称，核试有理，自卫无罪，由不得任何人说三道四。
1月6日，朝鲜两江道白岩郡附近发生人工地震。1月6日，朝鲜两江道白岩郡附近发生人工地震。）
据了解，与以往三次核试验不同，这次朝鲜进行核试验前未事先通知中美两国，也没有直接预告或间接暗示核试计划。外界在监测到两江道白岩郡附近发生人工地震后，才怀疑朝鲜进行了一次突然袭击式的核试验，而朝鲜在地震发生2个小时后公布了核试消息。（完）
当量比上次次还小，第二次是5级以上，这次又跌回4.9
当量比上次次还小，第二次是5级以上，这次又跌回4.9
就是个核裂变弹，根本不是核聚变弹。
伊朗：“我没有，我没有，我真的没有”
国际：“你就是有”
三胖：“我有了，我射了！”
国际：“哄谁呢？”
国际：“你就是有”
三胖：“我有了，我射了！”
国际：“哄谁呢？”
kira99 发表于 2016-1-6 22:44
中国当年核试爆，美苏等国都能采集到空气样本分析确认，朝鲜是真是假，相信这些有能力做相应分析数据采集的 ...
当年 美 苏中 第一颗氢蛋都是几百万吨的。
还是三胖厉害第一颗就小型花了。
中国当年核试爆，美苏等国都能采集到空气样本分析确认，朝鲜是真是假，相信这些有能力做相应分析数据采集的 ...
当年 美 苏中 第一颗氢蛋都是几百万吨的。
还是三胖厉害第一颗就小型花了。
原子弹也够用了，一颗到东京或者汉城基本解决问题
估计这次金三胖是有夸大其蛋蛋的嫌疑
这位置飘忽不定啊
这位置飘忽不定啊
kira99 发表于 2016-1-6 22:44
中国当年核试爆，美苏等国都能采集到空气样本分析确认，朝鲜是真是假，相信这些有能力做相应分析数据采集的 ...
中苏美的第一次核试验都是露天起爆自然可以采集到空气样本分析，而北棒一直都是在山里挖洞的地下核爆，你去哪里采集空气样本？自己去那边挖洞？
中国当年核试爆，美苏等国都能采集到空气样本分析确认，朝鲜是真是假，相信这些有能力做相应分析数据采集的 ...
中苏美的第一次核试验都是露天起爆自然可以采集到空气样本分析，而北棒一直都是在山里挖洞的地下核爆，你去哪里采集空气样本？自己去那边挖洞？
中苏美的第一次核试验都是露天起爆自然可以采集到空气样本分析，而北棒一直都是在山里挖洞的地下核爆， ...
可以收买朝鲜军人或者平民，在核爆区外围取井水。中美俄实验的都是无人区，朝鲜地太小，做不到无人。
可以收买朝鲜军人或者平民，在核爆区外围取井水。中美俄实验的都是无人区，朝鲜地太小，做不到无人。
還是冷處理 估計不太想迎合三胖
美國的方式 把三胖推回中國穩定局面
美國的方式 把三胖推回中國穩定局面
如果确定是氢弹只有一种可能，有人在我们背后搞鬼，想想三胖这一爆谁最高兴？有人忘恩负义，但愿不是我想的那样。
美国道长 发表于 2016-1-7 03:18
可以收买朝鲜军人或者平民，在核爆区外围取井水。中美俄实验的都是无人区，朝鲜地太小，做不到无人。
实施的可能性和可靠性都很低，另外北棒的核试验区是有重兵把守的，到现在外国也只有卫星照片而没有现场拍
可以收买朝鲜军人或者平民，在核爆区外围取井水。中美俄实验的都是无人区，朝鲜地太小，做不到无人。
实施的可能性和可靠性都很低，另外北棒的核试验区是有重兵把守的，到现在外国也只有卫星照片而没有现场拍
冷却！冷却！不搭理曹县才是正道！你要是理他你就输了！
不承认朝鲜是拥核国家，是最好的处理方式。因为承认了美国东亚战略就完蛋了，因为朝鲜有了蛋蛋，日本韩国也要有蛋蛋，那还要美国啥保护伞呢？保护伞没了，那美国的驻军还有必要么？这种崩溃式战略美国是无论如何都不能接受的！所以，打死都不能承认三胖有蛋蛋！有也没有。这下真难道三胖了。朝鲜没有沙漠没地投啊！
楼上对 还有 有个历史淘汰机制
淘汰弱者 保留强者总是符合历史进城
关于朝鲜2006年核试验的报道 -- BBC: USA confirms North Korea nuclear test
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/6056370.stm
Last Updated: Monday, 16 October 2006, 18:58 GMT 19:58 UK
USA confirms North Korea nuclear test
Air samples from North Korea confirm that a nuclear explosion was carried out a week ago, USA intelligence officials say.
Director of National Intelligence John Negroponte said the findings came after analysis of radioactive debris detected at the site of the test.
This the first official USA confirmation that a nuclear detonation took place.
The UN Security Council has unanimously voted to impose sanctions against Pyongyang in response to the test.
Shortly after the confirmation, USA Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice warned North Korea against conducting a second test.
'Radioactive debris'
A USA military aircraft collected air samples on 11 October, two days after Pyongyang made its announcement of a successful test.
The apparently small size of the explosion had led to doubts over the veracity of North Korea's claim.
But the short statement from Mr Negroponte's office confirmed that a nuclear explosion with a yield of "less than a kiloton" took place.
This is less than a tenth of the size of the bomb dropped on Hiroshima in 1945.
Russia had previously been the only country to confirm the test, saying within only a few hours of North Korea's announcement that it was "100% certain" a nuclear test had been carried out.
Ms Rice, who leaves on Tuesday for talks in Japan, South Korea and China, told reporters that she hoped Pyongyang would not conduct a second test.
"That would further deepen the isolation of North Korea, and I hope they would not take such a provocative act," she said.
Ms Rice said that during her trip she planned to reassure leaders in Tokyo and Seoul that the USA would stand by its security commitment to them.
'Different ways'
The confirmation of the test comes as key nations try to agree on how to implement the sanctions agreed by the Security Council on Saturday.
The measures target Pyongyang's weapons and missile programmes, as well as luxury goods.
They also permit cargo coming from or going to North Korea to be inspected for banned items.
But disagreements have emerged between the members of the Security Council over this part of the resolution, with China concerned that inspecting cargo at sea could further elevate tensions and lead to naval clashes.
Top USA officials have urged China to comply with the resolution, and US Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns told American television that there were signs Beijing was implementing the sanctions.
"We have some indications that the Chinese are also stopping trucks and inspecting them across that 800-mile border this morning," he said.
But Beijing's envoy to the UN Wang Guangya appeared to rule out stopping North Korea ships at sea, known as interdiction.
"Inspections yes, but inspections are different from interception and interdiction," he told journalists. "I think different countries will do it in different ways."
USA envoy Christopher Hill, meanwhile, has arrived in Tokyo for talks on how to enforce the sanctions. He will also hold talks in South Korea.
Japan has already banned North Korean ships from its ports, as has Australia, and is looking at whether it can provide logistical support for USA vessels if they start trying to inspect cargo ships going to or from North Korea.
http://lt.cjdby.net/forum.php?mod=attachment&aid=NDEzMDA5MXxmNTI5OTY4YjIwNTRmNDJkNmMyOWI4NTdkMmZhY2ZiZnwxNDcyMzg2NzM3&request=yes&_f=.png
关于朝鲜2006年核试验的报道 -- BBC: USA confirms North Korea nuclear test
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/6056370.stm
Last Updated: Monday, 16 October 2006, 18:58 GMT 19:58 UK
USA confirms North Korea nuclear test
Air samples from North Korea confirm that a nuclear explosion was carried out a week ago, USA intelligence officials say.
Director of National Intelligence John Negroponte said the findings came after analysis of radioactive debris detected at the site of the test.
This the first official USA confirmation that a nuclear detonation took place.
The UN Security Council has unanimously voted to impose sanctions against Pyongyang in response to the test.
Shortly after the confirmation, USA Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice warned North Korea against conducting a second test.
'Radioactive debris'
A USA military aircraft collected air samples on 11 October, two days after Pyongyang made its announcement of a successful test.
The apparently small size of the explosion had led to doubts over the veracity of North Korea's claim.
But the short statement from Mr Negroponte's office confirmed that a nuclear explosion with a yield of "less than a kiloton" took place.
This is less than a tenth of the size of the bomb dropped on Hiroshima in 1945.
Russia had previously been the only country to confirm the test, saying within only a few hours of North Korea's announcement that it was "100% certain" a nuclear test had been carried out.
Ms Rice, who leaves on Tuesday for talks in Japan, South Korea and China, told reporters that she hoped Pyongyang would not conduct a second test.
"That would further deepen the isolation of North Korea, and I hope they would not take such a provocative act," she said.
Ms Rice said that during her trip she planned to reassure leaders in Tokyo and Seoul that the USA would stand by its security commitment to them.
'Different ways'
The confirmation of the test comes as key nations try to agree on how to implement the sanctions agreed by the Security Council on Saturday.
The measures target Pyongyang's weapons and missile programmes, as well as luxury goods.
They also permit cargo coming from or going to North Korea to be inspected for banned items.
But disagreements have emerged between the members of the Security Council over this part of the resolution, with China concerned that inspecting cargo at sea could further elevate tensions and lead to naval clashes.
Top USA officials have urged China to comply with the resolution, and US Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns told American television that there were signs Beijing was implementing the sanctions.
"We have some indications that the Chinese are also stopping trucks and inspecting them across that 800-mile border this morning," he said.
But Beijing's envoy to the UN Wang Guangya appeared to rule out stopping North Korea ships at sea, known as interdiction.
"Inspections yes, but inspections are different from interception and interdiction," he told journalists. "I think different countries will do it in different ways."
USA envoy Christopher Hill, meanwhile, has arrived in Tokyo for talks on how to enforce the sanctions. He will also hold talks in South Korea.
Japan has already banned North Korean ships from its ports, as has Australia, and is looking at whether it can provide logistical support for USA vessels if they start trying to inspect cargo ships going to or from North Korea.
http://lt.cjdby.net/forum.php?mod=attachment&aid=NDEzMDA5MXxmNTI5OTY4YjIwNTRmNDJkNmMyOWI4NTdkMmZhY2ZiZnwxNDcyMzg2NzM3&request=yes&_f=.png
关于朝鲜2006年核试验的报道 -- New York Times: North Korean Fuel Identified as Plutonium
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/17/world/asia/17diplo.html
North Korean Fuel Identified as Plutonium
By THOM SHANKER and DAVID E. SANGER
Published: October 17, 2006
WASHINGTON, Oct. 16 -- American intelligence agencies have concluded that North Korea's test explosion last week was powered by plutonium that North Korea harvested from its small nuclear reactor, according to officials who have reviewed the results of atmospheric sampling since the blast.
The officials, who would not speak for attribution because it was an intelligence matter, were responding to specific questions about what had been learned about the nature of the weapon.
As administration and intelligence officials watched for indications that the North might be preparing a second test, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice warned North Korea on Monday that it risked even further isolation if it took such a provocative action.
American officials have reported recent activity at the test site, leading some to believe that another test might be carried out soon.
The intelligence agencies' finding that the weapon was based on plutonium strongly suggested that the country's second path to a nuclear bomb - one using uranium - was not yet ready. The uranium program is based on enrichment equipment and know-how purchased from Pakistan's former nuclear chief.
Nuclear experts said that the use of plutonium to make the bomb was important because it suggested that North Korea probably had only one nuclear program mature enough to produce weapons.
"This is good news because we have a reasonably good idea of how much plutonium they have made," said Siegfried S. Hecker, the former chief of the Los Alamos National Laboratory and now a visiting professor at Stanford University. Mr. Hecker, who has visited North Korea and is one of the few foreigners to have seen parts of its nuclear infrastructure, said that it was his guess that "they tried to test a reasonably sophisticated device, and they had trouble imploding it properly."
The supply of plutonium materials is known from the days when international inspectors kept tabs on the fuel rods in the North's reactor, and intelligence analysts estimate that North Korea has enough material to make 6 to 10 plutonium bombs.
Politically, the results of the test may revive last week's finger-pointing about who is more responsible for the Korean test: Bill Clinton or President Bush.
As president, Mr. Clinton negotiated a deal that froze the production and weaponization of North Korea's plutonium, but intelligence agencies later determined that North Korea began its secret uranium program under his watch. The plutonium that North Korea exploded was produced, according to intelligence estimates, either during the administration of the first President Bush or after 2003, when the North Koreans threw out international inspectors and began reprocessing spent nuclear fuel the inspectors had kept under seal.
Unlike the Clinton administration in 1994, the current Bush administration chose not to threaten to destroy North Korea's fuel and nuclear reprocessing facilities if they tried to make weapons.
That threat in 1994 - which was ultimately resolved with an agreement to freeze the weapons program - was made by William J. Perry, who was the defense secretary then. In an interview on Monday, Mr. Perry said: "There was a brief window to catch this plutonium before it was made into bomb fuel. It's gone. It's out of the barn now."
After a week of some lingering doubt about whether the test had indeed been a nuclear detonation, the office of John D. Negroponte, director of national intelligence, confirmed that much in a statement issued Monday.
"Analysis of air samples collected on Oct. 11, 2006, detected radioactive debris which confirms that North Korea conducted an underground nuclear explosion in the vicinity of Punggye on Oct. 9, 2006," said the statement, putting on the record a conclusion that officials first disclosed Friday, the night before the United Nations Security Council voted on sanctions. "The explosion yield was less than a kiloton," the statement added.
It gave no further details, and the officials who described the early findings did not disclose more beyond the conclusion that plutonium, not uranium, was the device's core.
The determination that the blast was nuclear was announced a day before Secretary Rice was to depart for a trip to Japan, South Korea, China and Russia. She will go to the capitals of the nations that have been engaged in the six-party talks over North Korea's nuclear program except, of course, North Korea.
The unanimous resolution adopted by the Security Council last week imposing sanctions on military material and luxury goods was proof of "a strong and firm hand and strong and firm response," Ms. Rice said Monday during a State Department news conference. She said the international community wanted "to leave open a door for North Korea to take a different course if it wishes to do so."
Pressed to respond to analysts' assessment that desires by China and South Korea for continued economic and business exchanges with North Korea might trump demands for a stiff sanctions and inspections regime, Ms. Rice said her goal was to work out the details of putting the Council resolution into effect.
The Associated Press reported Monday from Dandong, China, that customs officials were examining trucks at the North Korean border as China complied with the United Nations sanctions.
However, China's ambassador to the United Nations, Wang Guangya, indicated that his nation would not conduct similar searches at sea.
Mr. Wang made clear that China would not halt ships and board them to search for ballistic missiles or for bomb-making equipment or material that can be used to manufacture nuclear, chemical and biological arms.
"This is a resolution we have to implement," he told reporters at the United Nations. "The question was raised whether China will do inspections. Inspections yes, but inspection is different than interdiction and interception. I think different countries will do it different ways."
During the news conference on Monday, Ms. Rice said she was "not concerned that the Chinese are going to turn their backs on their obligations. I don't think they would have voted for a resolution if they did not intend to carry through on it."
Mark Mazzetti contributed reporting.
A version of this article appeared in print on October 17, 2006, on page A11 of the New York edition with the headline: North Korean Fuel Identified as Plutonium.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/17/world/asia/17diplo.html
North Korean Fuel Identified as Plutonium
By THOM SHANKER and DAVID E. SANGER
Published: October 17, 2006
WASHINGTON, Oct. 16 -- American intelligence agencies have concluded that North Korea's test explosion last week was powered by plutonium that North Korea harvested from its small nuclear reactor, according to officials who have reviewed the results of atmospheric sampling since the blast.
The officials, who would not speak for attribution because it was an intelligence matter, were responding to specific questions about what had been learned about the nature of the weapon.
As administration and intelligence officials watched for indications that the North might be preparing a second test, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice warned North Korea on Monday that it risked even further isolation if it took such a provocative action.
American officials have reported recent activity at the test site, leading some to believe that another test might be carried out soon.
The intelligence agencies' finding that the weapon was based on plutonium strongly suggested that the country's second path to a nuclear bomb - one using uranium - was not yet ready. The uranium program is based on enrichment equipment and know-how purchased from Pakistan's former nuclear chief.
Nuclear experts said that the use of plutonium to make the bomb was important because it suggested that North Korea probably had only one nuclear program mature enough to produce weapons.
"This is good news because we have a reasonably good idea of how much plutonium they have made," said Siegfried S. Hecker, the former chief of the Los Alamos National Laboratory and now a visiting professor at Stanford University. Mr. Hecker, who has visited North Korea and is one of the few foreigners to have seen parts of its nuclear infrastructure, said that it was his guess that "they tried to test a reasonably sophisticated device, and they had trouble imploding it properly."
The supply of plutonium materials is known from the days when international inspectors kept tabs on the fuel rods in the North's reactor, and intelligence analysts estimate that North Korea has enough material to make 6 to 10 plutonium bombs.
Politically, the results of the test may revive last week's finger-pointing about who is more responsible for the Korean test: Bill Clinton or President Bush.
As president, Mr. Clinton negotiated a deal that froze the production and weaponization of North Korea's plutonium, but intelligence agencies later determined that North Korea began its secret uranium program under his watch. The plutonium that North Korea exploded was produced, according to intelligence estimates, either during the administration of the first President Bush or after 2003, when the North Koreans threw out international inspectors and began reprocessing spent nuclear fuel the inspectors had kept under seal.
Unlike the Clinton administration in 1994, the current Bush administration chose not to threaten to destroy North Korea's fuel and nuclear reprocessing facilities if they tried to make weapons.
That threat in 1994 - which was ultimately resolved with an agreement to freeze the weapons program - was made by William J. Perry, who was the defense secretary then. In an interview on Monday, Mr. Perry said: "There was a brief window to catch this plutonium before it was made into bomb fuel. It's gone. It's out of the barn now."
After a week of some lingering doubt about whether the test had indeed been a nuclear detonation, the office of John D. Negroponte, director of national intelligence, confirmed that much in a statement issued Monday.
"Analysis of air samples collected on Oct. 11, 2006, detected radioactive debris which confirms that North Korea conducted an underground nuclear explosion in the vicinity of Punggye on Oct. 9, 2006," said the statement, putting on the record a conclusion that officials first disclosed Friday, the night before the United Nations Security Council voted on sanctions. "The explosion yield was less than a kiloton," the statement added.
It gave no further details, and the officials who described the early findings did not disclose more beyond the conclusion that plutonium, not uranium, was the device's core.
The determination that the blast was nuclear was announced a day before Secretary Rice was to depart for a trip to Japan, South Korea, China and Russia. She will go to the capitals of the nations that have been engaged in the six-party talks over North Korea's nuclear program except, of course, North Korea.
The unanimous resolution adopted by the Security Council last week imposing sanctions on military material and luxury goods was proof of "a strong and firm hand and strong and firm response," Ms. Rice said Monday during a State Department news conference. She said the international community wanted "to leave open a door for North Korea to take a different course if it wishes to do so."
Pressed to respond to analysts' assessment that desires by China and South Korea for continued economic and business exchanges with North Korea might trump demands for a stiff sanctions and inspections regime, Ms. Rice said her goal was to work out the details of putting the Council resolution into effect.
The Associated Press reported Monday from Dandong, China, that customs officials were examining trucks at the North Korean border as China complied with the United Nations sanctions.
However, China's ambassador to the United Nations, Wang Guangya, indicated that his nation would not conduct similar searches at sea.
Mr. Wang made clear that China would not halt ships and board them to search for ballistic missiles or for bomb-making equipment or material that can be used to manufacture nuclear, chemical and biological arms.
"This is a resolution we have to implement," he told reporters at the United Nations. "The question was raised whether China will do inspections. Inspections yes, but inspection is different than interdiction and interception. I think different countries will do it different ways."
During the news conference on Monday, Ms. Rice said she was "not concerned that the Chinese are going to turn their backs on their obligations. I don't think they would have voted for a resolution if they did not intend to carry through on it."
Mark Mazzetti contributed reporting.
A version of this article appeared in print on October 17, 2006, on page A11 of the New York edition with the headline: North Korean Fuel Identified as Plutonium.
关于朝鲜2016年核试验的报道 -- NBC: North Korea Likely Lying About Hydrogen Bomb Test, Experts Say
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/north-korea-likely-lying-about-hydrogen-bomb-test-experts-say-n491401
North Korea Likely Lying About Hydrogen Bomb Test, Experts Say
Jan 6 2016, 1:57 pm ET
by Robert Windrem
It will take a couple of days for the USA to determine if North Korea's claim it detonated a hydrogen bomb is a big lie or a big problem - but experts already think it's more likely the event was just a blast from the past.
While the hermit kingdom may have been trying out a "boosted" nuclear device - more powerful than what it's detonated before but far less dangerous than an H-bomb - the evidence so far points to a repeat of previous tests.
Seismic data from Tuesday night's event would have shown a much greater force yield if hydrogen was involved, experts said. Instead, it was identical to the data collected after North Korea's tests in 2006, 2009 and 2013.
Air samples collected by drone should soon give analysts an idea of what happened, a senior USA military official said. But for the moment, the North Korean boast is being treated with skepticism.
"On balance, it is not believed that North Korea tested a two-stage H-bomb," said David Albright, president of the Institute for Science and International Security and author of "Solving the North Korean Nuclear Puzzle," an early history of the program.
"What could it have tested? On one side, North Korea may be bluffing about this test, meaning it tested a fission implosion device similar to the ones it previously detonated."
Joseph Cirincione, president of the global security firm Ploughshares Fund, was equally dubious about the announcement out of Pyongyang.
"Even a failed hydrogen bomb test would have a yield of 10, 20, 50 kilotons of force. This is a 6-7 kiloton yield, smaller than the last test," he said.
"What we're speculating is they tried to do a boosted nuclear device, which is an atomic bomb that has a little bit of hydrogen, an isotope in it called tritium, " added Cirincione.
Before it gave up its nuclear weapons program under Nelson Mandela, South Africa had worked on a boosted device, Albright noted. But South Africa had access to tritium, which North Korea has been trying to get, he said.
"You should be worried but you shouldn't be freaked out," Cirincione said.
American estimates of North Korea's nuclear stockpile are hazy, and there is disagreement on whether Kim Jong-Un's regime has miniaturized weapons enough to put them atop missiles.
USA officials said North Korea may have up to "a few dozen" nuclear weapons that could be fit on its vast fleet of ballistic missiles, which are capable of hitting targets in Japan, South Korea or elsewhere in the northern Pacific, including U.S. military bases as far south as Guam.
The senior military official told NBC News that the USA was aware of test preparation for two weeks and launched drones to get a baseline air sample near the site. It sampled the air again on Wednesday and will test for traces of tritium that would indicate North Korea has something more than a standard nuclear weapon.
"It's bad enough they have a crude nuclear device, but an H-bomb would be much, much worse," Cirincione said. "The good news is it looks like they don't have a hydrogen bomb. The bad news is they are still testing. They are the only country that has tested since 1998 and they will learn something even from a failed test."
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/north-korea-likely-lying-about-hydrogen-bomb-test-experts-say-n491401
North Korea Likely Lying About Hydrogen Bomb Test, Experts Say
Jan 6 2016, 1:57 pm ET
by Robert Windrem
It will take a couple of days for the USA to determine if North Korea's claim it detonated a hydrogen bomb is a big lie or a big problem - but experts already think it's more likely the event was just a blast from the past.
While the hermit kingdom may have been trying out a "boosted" nuclear device - more powerful than what it's detonated before but far less dangerous than an H-bomb - the evidence so far points to a repeat of previous tests.
Seismic data from Tuesday night's event would have shown a much greater force yield if hydrogen was involved, experts said. Instead, it was identical to the data collected after North Korea's tests in 2006, 2009 and 2013.
Air samples collected by drone should soon give analysts an idea of what happened, a senior USA military official said. But for the moment, the North Korean boast is being treated with skepticism.
"On balance, it is not believed that North Korea tested a two-stage H-bomb," said David Albright, president of the Institute for Science and International Security and author of "Solving the North Korean Nuclear Puzzle," an early history of the program.
"What could it have tested? On one side, North Korea may be bluffing about this test, meaning it tested a fission implosion device similar to the ones it previously detonated."
Joseph Cirincione, president of the global security firm Ploughshares Fund, was equally dubious about the announcement out of Pyongyang.
"Even a failed hydrogen bomb test would have a yield of 10, 20, 50 kilotons of force. This is a 6-7 kiloton yield, smaller than the last test," he said.
"What we're speculating is they tried to do a boosted nuclear device, which is an atomic bomb that has a little bit of hydrogen, an isotope in it called tritium, " added Cirincione.
Before it gave up its nuclear weapons program under Nelson Mandela, South Africa had worked on a boosted device, Albright noted. But South Africa had access to tritium, which North Korea has been trying to get, he said.
"You should be worried but you shouldn't be freaked out," Cirincione said.
American estimates of North Korea's nuclear stockpile are hazy, and there is disagreement on whether Kim Jong-Un's regime has miniaturized weapons enough to put them atop missiles.
USA officials said North Korea may have up to "a few dozen" nuclear weapons that could be fit on its vast fleet of ballistic missiles, which are capable of hitting targets in Japan, South Korea or elsewhere in the northern Pacific, including U.S. military bases as far south as Guam.
The senior military official told NBC News that the USA was aware of test preparation for two weeks and launched drones to get a baseline air sample near the site. It sampled the air again on Wednesday and will test for traces of tritium that would indicate North Korea has something more than a standard nuclear weapon.
"It's bad enough they have a crude nuclear device, but an H-bomb would be much, much worse," Cirincione said. "The good news is it looks like they don't have a hydrogen bomb. The bad news is they are still testing. They are the only country that has tested since 1998 and they will learn something even from a failed test."
不管是氢弹还是爆了个原子弹 你看看爆炸那位置离中国有多近 就绝对不是一个我们可以置若罔闻的事 如果不是地下核试验呢 那个位置爆炸的核弹很有可能我边民成为朝鲜原子弹爆炸试验杀伤力的牺牲品 你不要以为他们干不出这种事 他们可以在试爆前撤离那个地区的所有百姓 我们呢 我们难道也要被他们绑架 我大量边民难道要为他们的核试爆背井离乡吗
美《防务新闻》1月6日发表文章称，专家表示，关于朝鲜的核试验是否是氢弹，“几星期内美国将可以得到一些结论”。不过大部分专家对朝鲜宣称氢弹试验成功表示怀疑，这次核试验的当量小于氢弹的一般当量，但真正完全确定仍需搜集到空气中的放射性粉尘并进行全面分析。
美《防务新闻》网站发表《今日美国》记者吉姆·迈克尔斯文章称，美国及其盟友应该在未来几周内通过检验和测量手段确认朝鲜的核试验是否如其宣布的那样涉及氢弹，或者只是威力远逊的原子弹。
“它们（监控手段）基本上围绕着北朝鲜部署”，前美国国务院军控委员会情报分析员格雷格·蒂尔曼说，“我估计几周内美国将可以得出一些结论。”
专家将可以通过两方面确认，一是爆炸的规模，而是监测爆炸产生的放射性粒子，蒂尔曼和其他观察家表示。
氢弹的制造远比原子弹复杂，因为它需要涉及聚变，也就是原子核的聚变，而不是原子弹的裂变，原子核裂变是原子弹的主要能量来源。
专家们大多怀疑朝鲜引爆的是氢弹，尽管平壤如此宣告。
报告显示朝鲜的核试验当量约为6000吨，这显然要比典型的氢弹要小得多，美国传统基金会（一家位于华盛顿的智库）的分析员麦凯拉·道奇说，这一当量和朝鲜上一次的原子弹试验相近。
目前，在全世界范围内有根据国际全面禁止核试验条约部署的地震台网系统。
全面禁止核试验条约组织敦促各国允许在其境内部署这一监控系统，这一系统可用于测定核试验的当量。
此外，美国有自己独立的技术监控系统，专门设计用来测量相关实验，包括间谍卫星，以及用于搜集核爆炸造成的放射性粒子的飞机。
“通过爆炸所放出的放射性粒子，我们可以发现很多东西，”蒂尔曼说，“这将有助于大国分析所监控到的试验炸弹的构造。”
美《防务新闻》1月6日发表文章称，专家表示，关于朝鲜的核试验是否是氢弹，“几星期内美国将可以得到一些结论”。不过大部分专家对朝鲜宣称氢弹试验成功表示怀疑，这次核试验的当量小于氢弹的一般当量，但真正完全确定仍需搜集到空气中的放射性粉尘并进行全面分析。
美《防务新闻》网站发表《今日美国》记者吉姆·迈克尔斯文章称，美国及其盟友应该在未来几周内通过检验和测量手段确认朝鲜的核试验是否如其宣布的那样涉及氢弹，或者只是威力远逊的原子弹。
“它们（监控手段）基本上围绕着北朝鲜部署”，前美国国务院军控委员会情报分析员格雷格·蒂尔曼说，“我估计几周内美国将可以得出一些结论。”
专家将可以通过两方面确认，一是爆炸的规模，而是监测爆炸产生的放射性粒子，蒂尔曼和其他观察家表示。
氢弹的制造远比原子弹复杂，因为它需要涉及聚变，也就是原子核的聚变，而不是原子弹的裂变，原子核裂变是原子弹的主要能量来源。
专家们大多怀疑朝鲜引爆的是氢弹，尽管平壤如此宣告。
报告显示朝鲜的核试验当量约为6000吨，这显然要比典型的氢弹要小得多，美国传统基金会（一家位于华盛顿的智库）的分析员麦凯拉·道奇说，这一当量和朝鲜上一次的原子弹试验相近。
目前，在全世界范围内有根据国际全面禁止核试验条约部署的地震台网系统。
全面禁止核试验条约组织敦促各国允许在其境内部署这一监控系统，这一系统可用于测定核试验的当量。
此外，美国有自己独立的技术监控系统，专门设计用来测量相关实验，包括间谍卫星，以及用于搜集核爆炸造成的放射性粒子的飞机。
“通过爆炸所放出的放射性粒子，我们可以发现很多东西，”蒂尔曼说，“这将有助于大国分析所监控到的试验炸弹的构造。”
http://www.igg.cas.cn/xwzx/kyjz/201601/t20160107_4515052.html
2016-01-07 | 作者：科技处 | 【大 中 小】【打印】【关闭】
研究快报：2016年1月6日朝鲜核试验定位、识别和当量估计的初步调查结果
赵连锋1 谢小碧2 王卫民3 郝金来1 姚振兴1
1.中国科学院地质与地球物理研究所，中科院地球与行星物理重点实验室，北京，100029
2.美国加州大学圣克鲁兹分校地球物理与天体物理研究所，圣克鲁兹，CA95064
3.中国科学院青藏高原研究所，大陆碰撞与高原隆升重点实验室，北京，100085
据媒体和监测部门报道，北京时间2016年1月6日上午9时30分，朝鲜境内发生一次里氏震级5.0左右的地震事件，震源深度为0公里。随后朝鲜政府宣布成功进行第一次氢弹试验。
根据中国国家地震台网和全球地震台网的区域波形资料，我们对此次朝鲜核试验进行了快速定位、识别、震级计算和当量估计的研究。利用来自45个台站的59个Pn波数据的互相关，采用相对定位方法，确定了朝鲜2016年核爆的位置是[41.3001±0.0007°N, 129.0716±0.0012°E]， 位于2009年和2013年核爆的西北方向，距离均为0.88±0.13 km（图1）。
为了区分核爆和天然地震，我们比较了朝鲜地下核试验与邻近区域的4次天然地震的振幅特征。根据大陆路径台站的垂直位移记录，计算了Pg/Lg，Pn/Lg和Pn/Sn的傅立叶频谱比，并用其台网平均值作为区分地震和核爆事件的依据。图2所示为Pg/Lg，Pn/Lg和Pn/Sn谱比值与核爆和地震事件的对应关系。其中红色和黑色分别为核爆和地震数据。结果表明，2016年1月6日发生在朝鲜的事件明显落入爆炸震源的群组，是一次人为爆炸事件。
为了确定此次朝鲜核爆的地震学当量，我们使用中国东北及邻近地区宽频带高分辨率的Lg波衰减模型（Zhao et al., 2010）计算Lg波震级。然后选择完全耦合的震级与当量关系式，得到2016年1月6日朝鲜核试验的Lg波体波震级mb为4.67，相应的地震学当量为3.58千吨（图3）。
http://www.igg.cas.cn/xwzx/kyjz/201601/t20160107_4515052.html
2016-01-07 | 作者：科技处 | 【大 中 小】【打印】【关闭】
研究快报：2016年1月6日朝鲜核试验定位、识别和当量估计的初步调查结果
赵连锋1 谢小碧2 王卫民3 郝金来1 姚振兴1
1.中国科学院地质与地球物理研究所，中科院地球与行星物理重点实验室，北京，100029
2.美国加州大学圣克鲁兹分校地球物理与天体物理研究所，圣克鲁兹，CA95064
3.中国科学院青藏高原研究所，大陆碰撞与高原隆升重点实验室，北京，100085
据媒体和监测部门报道，北京时间2016年1月6日上午9时30分，朝鲜境内发生一次里氏震级5.0左右的地震事件，震源深度为0公里。随后朝鲜政府宣布成功进行第一次氢弹试验。
根据中国国家地震台网和全球地震台网的区域波形资料，我们对此次朝鲜核试验进行了快速定位、识别、震级计算和当量估计的研究。利用来自45个台站的59个Pn波数据的互相关，采用相对定位方法，确定了朝鲜2016年核爆的位置是[41.3001±0.0007°N, 129.0716±0.0012°E]， 位于2009年和2013年核爆的西北方向，距离均为0.88±0.13 km（图1）。
为了区分核爆和天然地震，我们比较了朝鲜地下核试验与邻近区域的4次天然地震的振幅特征。根据大陆路径台站的垂直位移记录，计算了Pg/Lg，Pn/Lg和Pn/Sn的傅立叶频谱比，并用其台网平均值作为区分地震和核爆事件的依据。图2所示为Pg/Lg，Pn/Lg和Pn/Sn谱比值与核爆和地震事件的对应关系。其中红色和黑色分别为核爆和地震数据。结果表明，2016年1月6日发生在朝鲜的事件明显落入爆炸震源的群组，是一次人为爆炸事件。
为了确定此次朝鲜核爆的地震学当量，我们使用中国东北及邻近地区宽频带高分辨率的Lg波衰减模型（Zhao et al., 2010）计算Lg波震级。然后选择完全耦合的震级与当量关系式，得到2016年1月6日朝鲜核试验的Lg波体波震级mb为4.67，相应的地震学当量为3.58千吨（图3）。