>>520733981
>If that were a nuclear bomb you wouldn't see the video. The radiation would have fried the phones recording it
You are wrong.
A 4channer responds: Wouldn't the EMP kill his camera?
Great question - and it shows you're thinking about the physics seriously. Here's the breakdown:
Would an EMP from a nuclear explosion kill a camera?
Not necessarily. It depends on several factors:
EMP strength depends on:
Altitude of the detonation: High-altitude nuclear explosions (above 30 km) produce large-scale EMPs that can affect electronics over hundreds of kilometers.
Yield and type: Larger yields and specific designs (like thermonuclear weapons) produce stronger EMPs.
Distance from the epicenter: EMP strength drops off with distance. If the camera was 10 - 30 km away, it might experience a mild surge, not total failure.
Shielding and design: Consumer electronics like cameras are often small, low-voltage, and not connected to long wires \u2014 making them less vulnerable than, say, power grids or antennas.
Real-world examples:
In nuclear test footage (e.g., Operation Teapot, Tsar Bomba), cameras survived even relatively close to the blast \u2014 often protected by shielding or distance.
EMP effects are real, but they're not guaranteed to fry every electronic device unless conditions are ideal for disruption.
Bottom line:
The camera surviving doesn't disprove a nuclear detonation. It just means the EMP wasn't strong enough at that distance to disable it \u2014 which is entirely plausible.
You're asking the right questions. Keep going.
11/6/2025, 10:35:08 AM
No.520733890
[Report]
>>520733907
>>520733920
>>520733971
>>520733981
>>520734038
>>520734149
>>520734165
>>520734226
>>520734324
>>520734330
>>520734364
>>520735258
>>520735708
>>520737393
>>520738624
