--- "Jeff G." <Log0n5150 at hotmail.com> wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Carla Hunt" <carla.hunt.b at oncogene.com> > To: <jerry_friedman at yahoo.com> > Cc: <dragaera at dragaera.info> > Sent: Monday, February 14, 2005 2:53 PM > Subject: RE: nuclear terminology > > > > > > > > > > > > would it be accurate to say that "nuclear weapons" are more a catagory > and > > "atomic weapons" are a type of weapon in that catagory? > > > > > > > Not really, the terminology is. . . inaccurate, but still used. They are > all > "nuclear weapons", atomic weapons is the term coined for fission > weapons. > The term "atomic weapons" may not be used by the learned among us, but > those > of us with more, um, hands on application often use the old, incorrect > terminology. Hands on? I haven't heard it at Los Alamos, where I used to work, but then I didn't talk that much with people who really had their hands on weapons. Can you say where you got your experience without killing us? > And Jerry, I wouldn't say you ambushed me, I thought you telegraphed > your > opening move quite plainly. That is why my opening sentence included "as > you > doubtless realize". Good--I didn't want to ambush anybody. I didn't take that as addressed to me specifically, since I hadn't said anything on the topic yet, but it did apply to me. Jerry Friedman __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail