Poll: The Nuclear bomb and The hydrogen bomb

[AwesomePabloGetsHigh]

Please read all the way through and you will need a basic understanding of atoms.

First I will explain what a nuclear bomb is and what a hydrogen bomb is with the best of my understanding.

A nuclear bomb is also known as a nuke or an atom bomb. An atom bomb has plutonium in its core with TNT surrounding it. The plutonium is radioactive and it decays naturally in smaller atoms that are more stable. Each time it decays it releases energy and extra neutrons which is radiation. This makes the plutonium heat up. Though because of the TNT casing the TNT will explode and force the plutonium in a denser state to where it reaches a state that it so dense that the radioactive material can not escape with out bombing into another atom. When these atoms bump into each other they decay releasing energy even if it is not ready to decay. This chain reaction of atoms splitting and bumping causes a huge amount of energy which leads to a very big explosion.
This is called nuclear fission.

Now a hydrogen bomb is a bit like this but instead of TNT it is atomic bombs and the core is made up of trillions of isotopes of hydrogen named deuterium and tritium. Normally hydrogen is one proton and one electron but these isotopes have one or two extra neutrons. The explosion of the atomic bomb forces these two isotopes, deuterium and tritium together to make helium. Now helium needs less energy to stay together. So this excess energy and extra neutron is radioactive and cause an enormous explosion. This is called nuclear fusion.
What?s even more interesting is how a hydrogen bomb is made. The core is made of these hydrogen isotopes surrounded by atomic bombs and the warhead casing is made of uranium. So these atomic bombs make nuclear fission that causes nuclear fusion which cause another nuclear fission caused by the warhead casing.
This is all happen at the same time which is equal to many millions of tons of TNT or 1000 atomic bombs.


Now that being said we have so much destruction power can we really trust ourselves to not kill ourselves?

North Korea have atomic bombs but they are nothing compared to the power of a hydrogen bomb or the amount of nukes that the united states have so aren?t we asking much to destroy their nukes when the states have much more power?

With all this radioactive material fallout is much more probable.


Just post what you think about this and if you have any related thoughts.


I got this information from a site. If you want to have more knowledge in detail of this subject look at this great site.
http://www.worsleyschool.net/science/files/nuclear/bomb.html

 

[BonsaiK]

It doesn't matter if any countries have nukes, how many, or what sort. They will never be used. Those weapons are obsolete, conventional weapons get the job done better, cheaper, faster and with less of a stain on the country's PR record. The big mondo nuclear war will never happen now or at any time in the future of human history.

And don't give me that "what about terrorists" nonsense. If 9/11 taught anybody anything it should have taught people that terrorists are very good at doing cost/benefit analysis. While everyone was worried about nukes in suitcases or some fancy-ass Tom Clancy bullshit, they snuck a few guys on some planes with $5 box cutters and a bit of flight training. Radioactive material is unneccesary when a sharp stick gets the same result for 1/100000th of the price.

 

[e2density]

How about no nukes? I know a bunch of manly "ERRBODY NEEDS NUKES NAO" people are going to flame me, just until they are watching the flesh literally melt away from the bones on their bodies, but I'd rather have a nice peaceful life without such pointless apocalypse starters.

 

[Jedoro]

Give 'em to the superpowers to maintain peace. If every country has them, the unstable or weak ones are taken over by insurgents, who then have nukes and will bomb something.

 

[AwesomePabloGetsHigh]

It doesn't matter if any countries have nukes, how many, or what sort. They will never be used. Those weapons are obsolete, conventional weapons get the job done better, cheaper, faster and with less of a stain on the country's PR record. The big mondo nuclear war will never happen now or at any time in the future of human history.

And don't give me that "what about terrorists" nonsense. If 9/11 taught anybody anything it should have taught people that terrorists are very good at doing cost/benefit analysis. While everyone was worried about nukes in suitcases or some fancy-ass Tom Clancy bullshit, they snuck a few guys on some planes with $5 box cutters and a bit of flight training. Radioactive material is unneccesary when a sharp stick get the same result for 1/100000th of the price.

You can not say that nuke will never be used because alot of muslim extremist want death to Isreal and they said it and might do so any means nesseceary includeing a nuke and north Korea has nukes and they say that their war against south korea is a holy war which gives an excuse for them to move their moral standards and use their nukes. (in their point of view.)

 

[Grand_Arcana]

Mutually Assured Destruction prevents the more "mature" superpowers from using them recklessly, which also prevents total war (apparently). So long as people who don't understand M.A.D. don't have them there's no problem. Unfortunately, North Korea isn't in on it and we can't screw over those asshats with a Twitter revolt.

 

[e2density]

How about no nukes? I know a bunch of manly "ERRBODY NEEDS NUKES NAO" people are going to flame me, just until they are watching the flesh literally melt away from the bones on their bodies, but I'd rather have a nice peaceful life without such pointless apocalypse starters.

The problem arises if one country makes them in secret & then holds the world ransom.
We need the threat of Mutually Assured Destruction, even if we're never going to fire the nukes, even if it costs billions of dollars to make the nukes.
We need them in the global dick-waving contest.

^^^
It's these kind of people when I'm referring to when I say a bunch of manly "ERRBODY NEEDS NUKES NAO" people.

 

[Grand_Arcana]

How about no nukes? I know a bunch of manly "ERRBODY NEEDS NUKES NAO" people are going to flame me, just until they are watching the flesh literally melt away from the bones on their bodies, but I'd rather have a nice peaceful life without such pointless apocalypse starters.

The problem arises if one country makes them in secret & then holds the world ransom.
We need the threat of Mutually Assured Destruction, even if we're never going to fire the nukes, even if it costs billions of dollars to make the nukes.
We need them in the global dick-waving contest.

^^^
It's these kind of people when I'm referring to when I say a bunch of manly "ERRBODY NEEDS NUKES NAO" people.

I don't know. I like the fact that there hasn't been a large scale war in more than fifty years. M.A.D. is good.

 

[e2density]

^^^
It's these kind of people when I'm referring to when I say a bunch of manly "ERRBODY NEEDS NUKES NAO" people.

You know that's not an argument right?

Not trying to argue with you.

 

[DefunctTheory]

How about no nukes? I know a bunch of manly "ERRBODY NEEDS NUKES NAO" people are going to flame me, just until they are watching the flesh literally melt away from the bones on their bodies, but I'd rather have a nice peaceful life without such pointless apocalypse starters.

The problem arises if one country makes them in secret & then holds the world ransom.
We need the threat of Mutually Assured Destruction, even if we're never going to fire the nukes, even if it costs billions of dollars to make the nukes.
We need them in the global dick-waving contest.

^^^
It's these kind of people when I'm referring to when I say a bunch of manly "ERRBODY NEEDS NUKES NAO" people.

What, you mean people with half a brain?

There are legitimate reasons to have nukes. Just because your a hippy pacifist, does not negate those reasons.

 

[Brett Alex]

^^^
It's these kind of people when I'm referring to when I say a bunch of manly "ERRBODY NEEDS NUKES NAO" people.

Uh-huh, point made, you can anticipate arguments that will be levelled against you, but what's the alternative though?

 

[Grospoliner]

Hydrogen bombs are nuclear weapons. Fission and fusion are both nuclear reactions.

 

[e2density]

Not trying to argue with you.

You're painting me in a bad light when I want what's safest, what gives us the most peace, for every country.

Hey, I'm not trying to start a flame war. Go right ahead, just don't include me.

 

[AwesomePabloGetsHigh]

^^^
It's these kind of people when I'm referring to when I say a bunch of manly "ERRBODY NEEDS NUKES NAO" people.

Uh-huh, point made, you can anticipate arguments that will be levelled against you, but what's the alternative though?

The alternative is up to debate but i believe our situation now is pretty good becaue america is handling it well. Think about it, they are very powerfull with their military but they have the resposibility with it. They have troops helping other nations with their problems take example Isreal, north Korea eygpt and other countries thats im not sure about.

 

[WarCorrespondent]

We have much cooler things coming around the corner. Railguns, railgun-based bombs, microwave guns, that pain ray.

I think we can survive without nuclear fallout.

 

[AwesomePabloGetsHigh]

Hydrogen bombs are nuclear weapons. Fission and fusion are both nuclear reactions.

Like i said nuclear fission and nuclear fusion but fusion realeses alot more energy