Spherical Trigonometry Solutions

 Problems:

1) Show that: 

a) (i^ x j^)  =  sin c m =  sin c (⊥ i   +  j)

b) (i^ x k^)  =  sin b u = sin b (⊥i^ + k^)

Solutions:  

(1)In each case (a and b) we are dealing with the vector cross product.  This is illustrated for the simpler case below:

Here, we let the angle subtended, e.g. between A and B be Θ  with:  0   <  Θ  <  π.  Then unless A and B are parallel, they now determine a plane.  Let n be a unit vector perpendicular to the plane and pointing in the direction a right-handed thread screw would advance when its head is rotated from A to B through the angle Θ .

The vector product or cross product is then:

A X B    =   n  ‖A‖ ‖B‖   sin  Θ

If we now examine the spherical triangle diagram (Oct. 31 post) with the vectors (i^ x j^)  and  (i^ x  k^)   :

We see  (i^ x j^)  subtends the angle c  and the cross product  (i^ x k^) subtends the angle b.  Hence, by the same principle as in the simplified case:

(i^ x j^)  =  sin c m= sin c (⊥ i   +  j)

(i^ x k^)  =  sin b u = sin b (⊥ i^ + k^)

Where u = (⊥ i   +  k),  m = (⊥ i   +  j) are the orientation vectors

2) In a spherical triangle ABC, C  =  90 ^o  , a = 119 ^o  30'  and B =  52 ^o.5.  Calculate the values of b, c and A.

Solution:

Since  C  =  90 ^o  we have a right-angled spherical triangle. Hence, we need:  tan b  =  sin a tan B

B =  52 ^o.5    and  a = 119 ^o  30'  = a = 119 ^o .5 

Using consistent decimal degree units.

Then:  tan b = sin (119 ^o .5) tan ( 52 ^o.5 )

From a trig table (or calculator):

sin (119 ^o .5) =  0. 87035

tan ( 52 ^o.5 )  =  1.30323

Then:  tan b = (0.87035) (1.30323)

tan b = 1.1341

And:  arctan (1.1341) = b  =  48 ^o  36'

To find c we can use part of the fundamental formula, relating c to a and b:

 

cos c =  cos a cos b

cos c =  cos (119 ^o.5) cos (48 ^o.6)

cos c =  (- 0.4924) (0.6613) =  - 0.3256

Then: c = arc cos(-0.3256) = 109 ^o.02

To lastly find angle A, we can use that part of the law of sines relating A to angle B and sides a, c,  i.e.

sin A =  sin a sin B/ sin c

sin A =  sin (119 ^o .5) sin ( 52 ^o.5 )/ sin (109 ^o.02)

sin A = (0.6903)/ (0.9453) =  0.7302

arc sin (0.7302) = A  =  46 ^o.9   Or:   A = 46 ^o  54'

3)The altitude of a star as it transits your meridian is found to be 45^o along a vertical circle at azimuth 180^o, the south point.  Find the declination (d ) of the star.

Solution:

From the celestial sphere geometry:

Here  a _max   = 45^o    is the altitude at meridian transit at the (unspecified) observer location (hence a maximum). 

For a star transiting the meridian south of the zenith (ref. Aug. 1 post):

Declination = Observer's latitude -  Meridian z. d. (z')

 

Or:  d  =  f(latitude) -  z'

Since:   90^o -  a _max   =   z'

d  =  f(latitude) -  ( 90^o -  a _max )

Then:

d  =  f(latitude) -  ( 90^o -  45^o )

Þ  d  =  f   -   45^o  

For an observer at a latitude of  45^o  N (e.g. just north of Green Bay, WI) we have:

d  =   45^o   -   45^{o   =}   0 ^o

I.e. the star is on the celestial equator

All Experts Redux: The Saros Cycle

                                                    

Diagram showing conditions for partial and total lunar eclipse.  These, as well as lunar eclipses, can be predicted using the saros cycle.

Question: Can you please explain the saros cycle and how it can be used to predict eclipses? - Rafael G., San Francisco, Calif.

Answer:  The "saros" represents a period which has been used as far back as the ancient Sumerians to predict eclipses.These predictions depend on: (1) Understanding that eclipses can occur in a series, i.e. such as one that commenced in 1599, and (2)An understanding of the relative motions of Earth and Moon and specifically observations of the Moon's period of rotation relative to: (i) the phase (synodic month) and ii) the position of the nodes or the points at which the Moon's and Earth's orbits intersect, and iii) the times of perigee, or the position at which the Moon in its orbit is nearest Earth.

For example, in order to get two identical lunar eclipses the Moon - in each case - would have to be:

a) At the same phase (e.g. full, as shown in diagram A)

b) In the same position in its orbit with respect to the nodes

And:

c) At the same distance from Earth


Now, since the lengths of the months (periods for Moon's rotation) are different, i.e. synodic = 29. 5 days, nodical = 27.3 days and anomalistic = 27.5 days, then the resulting lunar eclipses will be of the same type only if an integral number of synodic months is nearly equal to an integral number of nodical months and an equal number of anomalistic months.

This also applies to solar eclipses. For example, in the diagram shown below:


We easily see why a total solar eclipse would only occur in the lower configuration with New Moon aligned to Earth and Sun as shown. In the upper case, the New Moons are slightly out of alignment because of the difference in synodic (29.5 days) and sidereal (or nodical= 27.3 d) months.  In this best case then we have the geometry:


So as the Moon moves relative to the Earth observer, the phases are observed as seen above.

Now, in the saros period it turns out there are 223 synodic months, 242 nodical months and 239 anomalistic months - each of which add up to approximately 18 years, 11 days.   This is an intervsal of the saros. Thus, at such intervals identical eclipses can be expected to occur. Also, successive eclipses separated by this interval are said to belong to the same "saros series". (Note that because the limits for umbral lunar eclipses are smaller than for solar eclipses, a saros series of lunar eclipses runs through only about 50 cycles, which requires about 870 years.)

Obviously, many differing eclipses can occur during the 18 -odd year period - meaning several distinct series are actually going on at the same time. Call them Series 1, Series 2, Series 3 etc.  Each series takes about 1, 200 years to complete during which time the eclipse paths gradually shift from one pole of the Earth to the other.

From what has been written it should be possible to see that the first solar eclipse in any series belonging to the saros cycle is a partial eclipse that occurs when the Sun and the Moon are at an eastern ecliptic limit.  (An "ecliptic limit" denotes the maximum angular distance the Sun can be from the nodes of the moon's orbit and still cause an eclipse.) 

If it is the descending node the eclipse is just barely visible near the South pole of Earth. If the eclipse is at the eastern limit of the ascending node, it is just visible at the North pole. To fix ideas as to the situation the diagram below is useful.

Note here the Moon's highest and lowest points in its orbit around Earth. The node that intersects the ecliptic plane (the plane of Earth's orbit) on the way up to the highest point is the "ascending node". The node which crosses the ecliptic plan en route to the lowest point is the "descending node".

After 223 synodic months the next eclipse in the series occurs, with the Moon just about 1/30 of a day's journey (or slightly under 1/2 degree), west of the same place relative to the node. Thus the eclipse occurs with the Sun and Moon about 1/2 degree farther inside the ecliptic limit. After about 70 successive eclipses separated by saros intervals, e.g. 70 x 18 yrs. (or about 1200 years) the positions of Sun and Moon at the times of the eclipses have shifted through the node to the western ecliptic limit and the series ends.   The first and last dozen eclipses are always partial ones, visible first at one polar region, then the other.

See Also:

NASA - Eclipses and the Saros

After Learning About New ACA Premium Hikes Americans Ought To Beg Dems To Continue The Shutdown

 

                    April, 2011, when GOP Tea baggers begged for a shutdown

        The spikes expected in Obamacare (ACA) premiums (WSJ, 11/4, A12)

                  Fosters: ACA premiums go to $3200/ mo. from $580/mo.

"Allowing just one year of those ACA tax subsidies is about the same amount of money Trump just gave to Argentina."  - Sen. Amy Klobuchar,  last night on 'Last Word'

If the republicans are SOOOO worried about the shutdown then they can either 1) negotiate a done-deal with the democrats on health care and food, or 2) take a simple-majority vote to eliminate the filibuster in the Senate and vote for whatever legislation they want without Democratic votes.

But, especially after last Spring, trusting the republicans to keep their word is folly, especially when Johnson won't commit to action in the House on whatever is worked-out anyhow.  - WaPo comment

We can safely say that government shutdowns are never nice, or even tolerable - especially given the plague of disruptions to services, jobs, benefits that accrue. So it is no wonder, now with the FAA cutting back on flights to over 40  cities, many want the shut down to end forthwith. But do they really understand the level of economic pain that will be inflicted on millions if the Democrats were to give in to Trump and the GOP?

I doubt it. But a recent Wall Street Journal article (Watch For ACA Plan Changes, Nov. 4, p. A12)sheds much needed light on the explosion in ACA (Obamacare) premiums coming if the Dems were to pack it in, give up their stance.  As the piece makes clear: 

"If you have Obamacare you really need to dig in and be careful about what you choose during the open enrollment period which began Saturday, Nov. 1 and lasts until December 15, for coverage that starts Jan. 1.

If you don't you could get hit with huge bills next year. You could also get locked into health insurance you can't afford"

Then quoting Jeff Grant - a former official with the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services:

"This is the most extreme pricing change we've seen.  Nobody understands what this means until they go shop."

But many of us had an inkling of the horrors about to transpire after the 'Big Beautiful Bill' was passed and signed by Trump, basically cratering Medicaid and crippling the ACA by halting the critical federal subsidies to reduce the premium hits.

This is exactly why the Dems are holding out in the shutdown trying to get Fuhrer Trump to come to the table for serious negotiations.   Hence, the refusal of the D-side to give in ought to be applauded, especially by those who depend on the ACA.

People like Kevin Foster and wife Michelle (see photo from article) - eligible for a subsidy this year- keeping their premium to $580/month.  But Trump and his gang denying subsidy support will cause their ACA premium to spike to $3,200 a month or more than $38,000 a year.  That plan coming with a family deductible of $14,400, pushing their total payout just past $50,000 a year.  

The Fosters, like many others, hope the Dems holding out can break the impasse and get the GOP Senate to reject Trump's orders. But in the event they can't they are planning to buy travel insurance and move to another, more affordable country.

Yeah, Trump and GOOP Senators may be able to afford these ACA premium spikes, but not ordinary Janes and Joes who the Democrats are fighting for.  But wait, further horrors and surprises are to come.  At the end of the WSJ piece we read:

"One of the biggest changes might not surface until tax season in 2027.  When enrollees sign up for their 2026 plans, they have to estimate their income for the following year. If they end up making more money than they estimated, they have to pay back the difference when they file their taxes. In the past, the law capped how much most enrollees would have to repay but that limit is now gone."

It is estimated that well over 22 million Americans could be adversely affected by the explosion in ACA premiums and other changes- such as no longer allowing lower income enrollees to sign up year round (another loophole killed in the 'Big Beautiful Bill')

So I ask here and now:  Is it worth a continuing shutdown to bring the goddamned GOOPs and Trump to the table for a negotiation on subsidy support? 

You'd better believe it! Especially if you were in the same predicament as the Fosters.

See Also:

Trump Increases Pressure on His Own Party as the Shutdown Grinds On - The New York Times

Excerpt:

President Trump and congressional Republicans calculated at the start of the government shutdown that they would avoid negotiations with Democrats, let the public pressure build and then watch them fold.

More than a month in, that strategy appears to have been a miscalculation.

The shutdown has stretched on for 37 days — the longest in history — and there is considerable disagreement in both parties over how to get out of it.

One thing is clear: As Republicans and Democrats continue to dig in, polling shows that public opinion has shifted against Republicans, a fact Mr. Trump acknowledged this week.

But instead of calling for a meeting with congressional Democrats, Mr. Trump has turned his attention to his own party, repeatedly pushing Senate Republicans to end the filibuster, something for which there is little appetite. Republicans fear such a move would come back to haunt them when Democrats are in the majority.

And:

Obamacare premiums are soaring as subsidies expire. Meet affected families. - The Washington Post

Excerpt:

Americans are coming face-to-face with the rising health insurance costs at the center of the longest government shutdown in history — and what it means for their pocketbooks next year.

Since open enrollment started Nov. 1, they’ve been able to buy health plans for 2026 on Healthcare.gov and state-run marketplaces created by the Affordable Care Act. Nearly all are finding they will have to pay more — some, significantly more — for their monthly premiums. Costs are soaring because health insurance is getting pricier and enhanced subsidies Congress approved nearly five years ago are going away.

The government is shut down because congressional Democrats won’t vote for a spending bill unless it extends subsidies beyond their Dec. 31 expiration date. Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-New York) said Friday his caucus would vote to reopen the government in exchange for a one-year extension of the subsidies, but Republican leaders dismissed the proposal.

The stakes of this standoff are now apparent to Americans looking to buy health insurance.

And:

Vote to reopen government will test Senate Democrats Friday - The Washington Post

Excerpt:

The Senate plans to vote Friday on whether to advance a revamped package to reopen the government, testing Democrats after a week of internal debate over how long to hold out for their policy aims.

The proposal would temporarily fund the government, advance three appropriations bills and come with a guarantee of a future Senate vote on a policy to extend Affordable Care Act subsidies that will expire at the end of the year, boosting health care premiums.

That reflects the contours of an agreement that was emerging earlier this week and that appealed to about a dozen Senate Democrats — more than enough to end the shutdown that has become the longest in American history.

But then Democrats swept elections in New Jersey, Virginia and New York City on Tuesday. 

President Donald Trump told Senate Republicans the shutdown was “a big factor” in their weak showing.

AI Icon

The victory emboldened the Senate Democrats who have been pushing their colleagues to stay the course and prompted some of those open to a deal to reconsider whether they could move Republicans to negotiate further.

Most of the party is expected to reject the proposal, leaving it short of the 60 votes it would need.

“Tuesday was a watershed moment,” said Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Connecticut), who has argued that a vote on ACA subsidies isn’t enough. “The country, first and foremost, was making a referendum on Donald Trump’s corruption and his mishandling of the economy. But they were also making a statement about this fight. … I think everybody understands the importance of what happened on Tuesday and wants us to move forward in a way that honors that.”

And:

Healthcare Policy

Healthcare for All: The Democratic Promise That Could Heal a Broken Nation

by Thom Hartmann | November 4, 2025 - 6:06am | permalink

— from The Hartmann Report

When politics becomes personal, policy becomes powerful. And there’s nothing more personal than survival.

Every election cycle, candidates talk about “freedom,” “security,” and “opportunity,” yet ignore the most basic measure of all three: whether ordinary Americans can afford to stay alive.

In the richest nation in the history of planet Earth, millions of Americans are dying from treatable illnesses, rationing insulin, and running GoFundMe campaigns for chemotherapy. This isn’t just a policy failure, it’s a moral collapse.

And it’s the one issue that could unite the country, reshape the Democratic Party, and finally prove that compassion is not weakness, but strength.

» article continues...

And:

Government

This May Be the Most Consequential Moment in US History Since the Civil War

by Bernie Sanders | November 4, 2025 - 6:12am | permalink

— from The Guardian

Democrats in the US Senate must stand with the working families of our country and in opposition to Donald Trump’s authoritarianism. They must not cave in to the president’s attacks on the working class during this ongoing government shutdown. If they do, the consequences will be catastrophic for our country.

This may be the most consequential moment in American history since the civil war. We have a megalomaniacal president who, consumed by his quest for more and more power, is undermining our constitution and the rule of law. Further, we have an administration that is waging war against the working class of our country and our most vulnerable people.

While Trump’s billionaire buddies become much, much richer, he is prepared to throw 15 million Americans off the healthcare they have—which could result in 50,000 unnecessary deaths each year. At a time when healthcare is already outrageously expensive, he is prepared to double premiums for more than 20 million people who rely on the Affordable Care Act. At a time when the United States has the highest rate of childhood poverty of almost any major country on earth, Trump is prepared, illegally, to withhold funding for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, despite a $5bn emergency fund established by Congress. That decision would threaten to push 42 million people—including 16 million children—into hunger.

» article continues...

Trump Wants Nuclear Testing: But Doesn't Even Know It's Not Done Using Actual Detonations In 2025

                                                        

                                                     Atlas ICBMs used in the 1960s

"Of course I want to test nukes the old-fashioned way!"

           The Russian nuclear-tipped cruise missile that spooked Trump

"Not content to calm any waters, Trump also announces that the United States will immediately restart nuclear weapons testing, after not doing so for more than 30 years. Why? He doesn’t explain except to say “other nations” are doing so. (None of the world’s three major military powers has conducted a nuclear weapons test since 1996, but they will if the U.S. resumes.)"  - Robert Reich, Substack, 'How To Cope With Donald Trump's Chaos.

 Traitor Thump’s threat last Wednesday to restart the testing of nuclear weapons has raised panic across the planet - in nations large and small-  while exposing "numerous knotty questions about national and global security."  This latter according to one NY Times piece (10/31). But that issue of knotty questions is mostly your classic 'macguffin' and arises only because we have an irresponsible nitwit heading our government.

True, the United States "spends tens of billions of dollars every year on its large arsenal of the world’s deadliest weapons" and the infrastructure that supports it.  But that expenditure pays off in terms of obviating the need to actually detonate nuclear weapons to test them.   (The last underground explosive blast at the Nevada Test Site occurred on Sept. 23, 1992. Its power was reportedly quite small — a third of the Hiroshima bomb’s — and no public information seems to exist on the test’s purpose.)

That same year, at the Cold War’s end, the United States voluntarily gave up the explosive testing of nuclear arms and eventually talked other atomic powers into doing likewise. Then, in 1993, President Bill Clinton announced plans for a treaty in which all nations would forgo all nuclear blasts. This meant banning tests even underground, the last permissible zone.  

This extension of the 1963 Nuclear Test Ban treaty was reasonable given the amount of radioactive material - such as Strontium 90 and Cesium 137 - released in each nuclear test explosion and affecting the health of citizens. The most obviously coming from the largest megaton weapons such as the Tsar bomb exploded by the Russians.

Although the 1996 test-ban treaty never officially went into force, it created a global norm. The long, hard process of hammering out a global consensus on the merits of a ban, embraced by all the thermonuclear states at the time, led to a more stable era. Gone were the shock waves that had regularly radiated from underground test sites and ricocheted around the globe.

Enter Trump, aka Capt. Bonespurs, who plans to wreck all of that. Evidently, from a recent  (Oct. 31)WSJ article ('Trump Nuclear Test Vow Puzzles Experts', p. A6) the Dotard got hysterical after learning of a new Russian cruise missile. According to the WSJ piece: 

"Trump posted his vow to resume testing after Russian President Vladimir Putin boasted about the successful tests of a nuclear powered, nuclear-tipped cruise missile that NATO has dubbed Skyfall."

The actual name of the missile is the Burevestnik and a cross section graphic of it is shown at the top (underneath Trump's hysteria).  According to a WSJ side article ('Putin Warns West With New Claims of Cruise Missile'):

"If the Burevestnik performs as Putin claims, it could deliver a nuclear warhead to the far side of the planet using a unique propulsion system.  It could stay aloft almost indefinitely - hugging the ground or sea and swerving to evade missile defense systems".

Adding: 

"The new missile could also pose a potential threat to Trump's proposed 'Golden Dome' missile defense system, which is designed to shoot down intercontinental ballistic missiles that have  a much higher trajectory than the low flying Burevestnik."

So being one-upped in weapons, no wonder Trump lost it and proceeded to bark out new weapons testing. Which he never clarified but which aides believe he meant actual explosive testing of warheads.

Worse, according to a piece in today's WSJ ('Putin Paves Way To Resume Nuclear Tests', p. A8) we learn:

"Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered his top security officials to draw up plans for potential nuclear weapons testing should President Trump follow through on his suggestions that the U.S. resume testing its nuclear arsenal."

Likely hurling us back over 60 years to the era before the 1963 Nuclear Test Ban Treaty went into effect. The pity of it is the deranged orange turd is likely ignorant that the U.S. doesn't even rely on explosive tests any more. Instead, it includes hundreds of machines and devices and many thousands of workers and scientists. The devices include room-size supercomputers, the world’s most powerful X-ray machine and a laser system the size of a sports stadium. No other nation possesses such an extensive array of tools for the nonnuclear testing of nuclear weapons. 

Currently, the complex of facilities employs 65,500 people at eight main sites from coast to coast. Just at Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico, the birthplace of the atomic bomb, the total work force has grown by 50 percent since 2018, to nearly 18,000.

The U.S. arsenal includes roughly 3,700 warheads (compared to Russia's 4,700), with about 1,700 of them currently deployed, according to the Federation of American Scientists. The group, which has long scrutinized the highly classified topic, recently updated its estimates. Nuclear weapons can be carried on warplanes like the B-2 or B-52, launched from missiles in silos on U.S. territory, or heaved from rockets on submarines.

According to one WaPo report, the U.S. is currently into a modernization program that seeks to replace every warhead with an updated version and to upgrade their carriers. The overall cost of the sprawling program over three decades is estimated at $1.7 trillion.  Among the enhancements is the new W-93 warhead, see e.g.

Full ahead for the W93 | Los Alamos National Laboratory

Meanwhile if Dotard Bonespurs really wants to resume explosive testing he should know- as per a NY Times report: a) the  nation’s nuclear test site is a desolate expanse of the Nevada desert bigger than the state of Rhode Island. 

And (b): Nuclear experts see great difficulty in preparing it for new underground tests because much of the key equipment at the sprawling site has fallen into disrepair or been lost.

Nonetheless, a 2013 document from the Energy Department, which oversees the nation’s nuclear arsenal, stated that “a very limited test to signal the readiness of the U.S. nuclear deterrent or to respond to another nation’s test could be conducted in six to 10 months.”

Top U.S. officials say new bomb designs are already in development without underground tests. Also, the directors of the national labs in charge of the arsenal have repeatedly testified to Congress that the United States has no need to return to nuclear detonations.

During the Cuban Missile crisis in October, 1962, many of us were terrified that an all -out nuclear war could be triggered, See e.g.

• Remembering The Cuban Missile Crisis 60 Years Ago ...
• But JFK had in his then arsenal nearly 200 Atlas ICBMs, each fitted with an MK 2 (Mark 2) or MK 3 warhead, of respectively 1.44 and 3.84 megatons. Just one used against Cuba would have blown that island to smithereens and deposited radioactive fallout all the way though Florida and the Gulf. 
• But Kennedy did not wish to push those buttons. He argued vociferously to Gen. Curtis LeMay to back off, turning to a naval blockade instead. He understood that even one Atlas hurled at Cuba would invite a massive retaliatory attack by the Soviet Union.
• Still shaken by how close the U.S. had come to nuclear war with the Soviets, JFK and Khrushchev agreed to the first ever Nuclear Test Ban Treaty signed in Auguust, 1963. It was driven not only by the risk of nuclear war but also public concern over radioactive fallout from atmospheric testing, which had deposited significant amounts of strontium 90, Cesium 137. 
•  For perspective, the total released radioactivity before the 1963 treaty from Sr -90 was 16.8 million curies   from high-yield atmospheric tests. (High-yield tests in locations like the Pacific Ocean and the USSR injected debris into the stratosphere, leading to worldwide fallout.)  By comparison, 216,000 curies of Sr -90 were released accidentally in the Chernobyl reactor disaster in April, 1986.
• 
  
• And now Trump wants to resume such testing?  (He has not made it clear that he desires atmospheric testing but no one should put it past him. Let us hope he has at least one higher IQ advisor to dissuade him from this folly.  All of it sprouted from a Putin boast for a missile - according to some experts - that may not even be feasible.
• 
  

See Also:

Trump Doubles Down on Nuclear Tests. His Energy Secretary Differs. - The New York Times

Excerpt:

President Trump has often thrived on vagueness, demonstrating a deep unwillingness to be pinned down on specifics and forgo maximum leeway in future actions.

But one area where precision matters, a lot, is when presidents talk about their plans for America’s nuclear weapons. And this weekend, the president and his energy secretary, who oversees the development and maintenance of the nuclear stockpile, contradicted each other on the critical question of whether the United States is about to break the three-decade taboo on explosive testing of nuclear weapons.

In short, Mr. Trump has doubled down on the concept that he has ordered a resumption of explosive nuclear testing — which the United States has refrained from for 33 years — to match what he contends were secret nuclear underground detonations, presumably by Russia, China, and other nuclear-armed states. But that claim has been rejected by many nuclear experts and Mr. Trump’s own nominee to lead the U.S. Strategic Command, which is responsible for America’s ground-based, undersea and bomber-launched nuclear weapons.

And:

Donald Trump | Peace & Justice

Trump’s Nuclear Testing Threat: Playing with More Than Dynamite

by Joseph Gerson | November 12, 2025 - 5:55am | permalink

The thriller House of Dynamite, playing in theaters and streamed into our homes, leaves its audiences hanging as an unprepared US president must decide humanity’s fate after a surprise nuclear attack. Now picture the real president, Donald Trump, whose uninformed and garbled statement about resuming nuclear testing may have sounded the starting gun for an existentially dangerous multinational nuclear arms race. We can hope that those who may be able to influence this unstable and ill-informed president will devise a face-saving way for him to walk back the threat. But we can’t count on that happening.

In a recent track II session with US, Russian, and European former arms control diplomats, military officials, and analysts, there was something like a consensus that Trump misunderstood one or more reports about recent Russian nuclear activities. The claim is that either Russia or China conducted explosive, rather than subcritical, tests, a claim rejected by the head of the US Strategic Command. Not wanting to be out done by Russian President Vladimir Putin, Trump made his threat. When questioned about it, Trump reiterated the threat. This has caused profound uncertainty and confusion, leading the Kremlin to request clarification about US nuclear weapons testing policy.

» article continues...

And:

Opinion | ‘Downwinders’ like my family suffered the fallout of nuclear testing - The Washington Post

Excerpt:

My family’s history is a dramatic example of how the nuclear weapons program harmed people in our own country and abroad. I lived in Salt Lake City with four of my siblings during the testing of these weapons. Unknown to anyone, fallout from bomb tests in Nevada coated the hills and valleys around the city. We played in the radioactive dust, and cattle ate grass coated with it, which contaminated our milk and meat. Radioactive pollution coated our fruits and vegetables. The resulting contamination will remain as “forever chemicals” in this beautiful city and other downwind areas across the country.

Seventy-five years later, only two of our family members are still living, and both of us have radiation-related cancers. These cancers doomed three of our siblings in early middle age. The curse has followed our family into another generation. One niece was born with missing teeth, and one nephew is missing the lower half of his right arm.

And:

Donald Trump

Make America Radioactive Again? Yes, if Trump Has His Way

by Heather Digby Parton | November 3, 2025 - 6:37am | permalink

— from Salon

The next time they have the opportunity, one of the right-wing influencers who now dominate the White House press corps should ask President Donald Trump if he happened to watch “House Full of Dynamite,” Academy Award-winning director Kathryn Bigelow’s latest film, when he was traveling this week. It’s a chilling movie about a nuclear strike on the United States, and since he seems to be suddenly concerned about America’s nuclear arsenal for no apparent reason, it would be fair to ask if the film was behind his startling announcement on his way back from Asia that he was ordering the immediate resumption of nuclear testing after a three decade moratorium.

Don’t laugh. It’s as plausible an explanation for his confusing order as anything else, because his stated reason — that other countries are testing their nuclear weapons — is simply not true. The only country to hold such tests in recent times is North Korea, where Kim Jong Un continued to evaluate his nuclear capability, despite all the happy talk and “love letters” between Trump and his good buddy. None of the nuclear powers have tested any weapons since the 1990s.

» article continues...