this post was submitted on 19 Sep 2024
239 points (98.0% liked)
NonCredibleDefense
6623 readers
57 users here now
A community for your defence shitposting needs
Rules
1. Be nice
Do not make personal attacks against each other, call for violence against anyone, or intentionally antagonize people in the comment sections.
2. Explain incorrect defense articles and takes
If you want to post a non-credible take, it must be from a "credible" source (news article, politician, or military leader) and must have a comment laying out exactly why it's non-credible. Low-hanging fruit such as random Twitter and YouTube comments belong in the Matrix chat.
3. Content must be relevant
Posts must be about military hardware or international security/defense. This is not the page to fawn over Youtube personalities, simp over political leaders, or discuss other areas of international policy.
4. No racism / hatespeech
No slurs. No advocating for the killing of people or insulting them based on physical, religious, or ideological traits.
5. No politics
We don't care if you're Republican, Democrat, Socialist, Stalinist, Baathist, or some other hot mess. Leave it at the door. This applies to comments as well.
6. No seriousposting
We don't want your uncut war footage, fundraisers, credible news articles, or other such things. The world is already serious enough as it is.
7. No classified material
Classified ‘western’ information is off limits regardless of how "open source" and "easy to find" it is.
8. Source artwork
If you use somebody's art in your post or as your post, the OP must provide a direct link to the art's source in the comment section, or a good reason why this was not possible (such as the artist deleting their account). The source should be a place that the artist themselves uploaded the art. A booru is not a source. A watermark is not a source.
9. No low-effort posts
No egregiously low effort posts. E.g. screenshots, recent reposts, simple reaction & template memes, and images with the punchline in the title. Put these in weekly Matrix chat instead.
10. Don't get us banned
No brigading or harassing other communities. Do not post memes with a "haha people that I hate died… haha" punchline or violating the sh.itjust.works rules (below). This includes content illegal in Canada.
11. No misinformation
NCD exists to make fun of misinformation, not to spread it. Make outlandish claims, but if your take doesn’t show signs of satire or exaggeration it will be removed. Misleading content may result in a ban. Regardless of source, don’t post obvious propaganda or fake news. Double-check facts and don't be an idiot.
Join our Matrix chatroom
Other communities you may be interested in
Banner made by u/Fertility18
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Fire in the hole!
(Credibly speaking, those weren't battery explosions)
Ya know that for sure? I don't mean some lithium chemistry. The simpler solution is obviously to use a traditional chemistry. I've been speculating recently that it is likely possible to make a single use battery from an explosive. A battery is just exploiting oxidation like reactions with the galvanic potential of metals. Explosives are basically unstable stuff with lots of potential combined with a rapid oxidiser. The two uses have quite a lot in common. I bet there is a bunch of untapped potential in this space where little research is done in the public sphere.
I suspect explosions from battery chemistry would be too slow compared to what was seen with these pagers, and power derived from an explosive compound that would be this deadly with such a small footprint wouldn't be good for a pager (and probably not effectively rechargeable at least). Not to say if they wanted to hide things, they could install a smaller battery with the rest of the volume made up by some form of plastic explosive. I just don't think there's a battery chemistry in use right now that will both generate a suitable amount of power and also go from stable to boom in the speeds we saw with this attack.
I find it far more likely they had a small amount of plastic explosive (perhaps hidden as part of the battery).
But who knows in reality? Well except Mossad :P
The trick is that explosives react to form pretty much exclusively gasses. That's where the boom comes from - suddenly you have gasses at the density of a solid, and clearly that corresponds to a lot of pressure by PV=nRT, as well as just common sense about how heavy gas normally is. Batteries tend to be full of stuff that doesn't like to be gas, so you get more of a firey, sparky effect than "poof".
The explosions pictured look very clean, and at this point it has pretty much come out how they made booby trapped devices seem like a legit product that Hezbollah should buy.