nuclear bomb theory

[Jaged]

I was thinking, what if in the long run, the invention of the nuke will save lives. For one it acts as a major deterrent to war. We already saw this once in the cold war. Nukes probably prevented major military actions between US and Russia. This could same effect will very likely repeat itself in history. Also, in WW2, what if dropping those 2 bombs saved Japanese and american lives in the long run? Japan made it very clear at the time that they would never surrender and would fight to the last man. With out the nukes we would of had to invade and loose many many people on both sides. It is quite possible that that invasion would of taken a far larger body count then those 2 nukes.

Just idle speculation. Whats your opinion on this?

[JetRaiden]

:random:

[Jaged]

lol yeah it is kinda random. But it is a very interisting question, at least to me.

[FearTheAtlas]

It's a gift, and it's a curse.

It's a gift because from that bomb we've been able to make power planets that use the same energy to power our country, which is always good. On the bad side, people have developed/stolen/bought nuclear weapons in many different, and usually hostile nations. Yes, they CAN prevent a war, but if showing each other's army power dosen't simmer things down things will get ugly. Quickly.

[JetRaiden]

nuclear weapons are more for diplomatic purposes then actual mass destruction.

[Everay]

wasnt it Clausewitz that said, War is a extention of politics?

[Jaged]

nuclear weapons are more for diplomatic purposes then actual mass destruction.
Precisely

[StrangeFellow]

nukes are a curse when in the wrong hands, and a gift when placed in the right
the same goes for any thing that has the potential to affect lives. (ie guns, leadershlip)

[Spider]

Well I'm gonna make a wild reference to the battletech universe here and say:

Maybe it did save lives... but in the long run it's gonna fuck us up the ass. In battletech what happened is once the wars started instead of fighting those wars on the field they just nuked the fuck out of each other. This resulted in loss of technology and lives. The clans destroyed most of the records and scientists from the inner-sphere (explaining their loss of tech) and then a bill was passed and everyone signed it.

This bill involved the ban of nuclear weapon use. Some houses and clans still have some but they are unused...

Think 50+ years in the future.... I think that's probly what's going to happen just one big boom.

[ChewyLSB]

Also, in WW2, what if dropping those 2 bombs saved Japanese and american lives in the long run?

Of course it did. Dropping Little Boy and Fat Man on Hiroshima and Nagasaki saved lives, I don't think anyone contests that.

[Hezzy]

Let's just say nukes will do more wrong than they have done good.

[Jaged]

unfortunately hezzy is probably right.

[Hezzy]

There's no stopping a nuclear winter. It's going to happen sooner or later.

[JetRaiden]

There's no stopping a nuclear winter. It's going to happen sooner or later.

Well, yea, but nuclear winter and global warming will probably cancel eachother out, so we're essentially in the clear. :cool:

[Jaged]

What if it is preventable... Its not like its in anyone's intrest to stop nuclear winter.

[Rayder]

Let's just launch a nuke into the sun, end of story.

[JetRaiden]

Let's just launch a nuke into the sun, end of story.

:lol: I doubt it would do anything

[Jaged]

The sun would be tickled.

[Hezzy]

The nuke would melt before it got anywhere near.

[SDM]

Let's just launch a nuke into the sun, end of story.It would vaporize before it even got close, or went off.










edit:damn you Hezzy

[Rayder]

:lol: I doubt it would do anything
A nuclear explosion inside of a star? That would only cause it to explode, that's all, nothing too big.

[Jaged]

how the hell would you get a nuke inside of the sun? impossible.

[SDM]

This is the dumbest thread evar.

[Hezzy]

A nuclear explosion inside of a star? That would only cause it to explode, that's all, nothing too big.

Let's just say the nuke got to the center of the sun and exploded.

The sun would do some funky stuff and go supernova, destroying everything. :groovy:

[Rayder]

Let's just say the nuke got to the center of the sun and exploded.

The sun would do some funky stuff and go supernova, destroying everything. :groovy:
:nod:

[Jaged]

This is the dumbest thread evar.
No, this (http://www.planetside-universe.com/forums/showthread.php?t=13706) is the dumbest thread evar.

[SDM]

Wtf do you tards think the Sun is? A big lava ball? The Sun IS a nuclear reaction. Adding a man made bomb to it would be like throwing bricks in the Grand Canyon. :doh:

[Jaged]

Yeah SDM is right. Man could not destroy the sun if we wanted to. Hell we probably couldnt even take the moon out.

[Rayder]

Wtf do you tards think the Sun is? A big lava ball? The Sun IS a nuclear reaction. Adding a man made bomb to it would be like throwing bricks in the Grand Canyon. :doh:
SDM, the sun does nuclear fusion all the time, yes, but if we were to send a nuke into it so that it explodes, how do you think the sun would react? You'd be throwing so much concentrated energy into one section of it causing the rest to basically collapse on it making the sun go boom and wiping out everything within billions of miles.

[Dharkbayne]

Do you know how HUGE the sun is? It wouldn't matter. :doh:

[Everay]

there is more power in a "unconsentrated" protion of the sun than there is in one of our nukes.

then again i think our nukes hit 1 million degrees, F i guess, i dunno, i know parts of the sun, like the core, hits higher than that, but i know other parts of the sun are less hot.

[MrPaul]

Doesn't the sun burn the equivalent of something like 1x10^10 truckloads of petroleum (gasoline) every hour (but in nuclear form)? So that means that a nuke would do fuck all...

And back on topic: Yes, they have saved lives, and will save many more. But with the invention of more localised, but still huge weapons (Daisy Cutter?) I think that they are less of a deterrent that said other weapons. Why? Because a nuke screws us all over, whereas these new(er) weapons simply wipe out the target and besides leaving nothing, there is no long term damage.

[Spee]

If we launched our most powerful bomb at the sun and somehow managed to get into the the core and detonate, the sun would MAYBE flinch.

You dont fuck with a giant nuclear power plant floating in space.

[Jekz]

I'm sure Doc Ock's tentacles could cook up something supernova-ish.

[Mr1337Duck]

I personally believe that no weapon is inherently good or evil, it is in the hands of the user that the tool picks up that association. A gun can be used by a bank robber to kill people at the place he's sticking up, but somebody could pull a gun on the robber and shoot him, saving the lives that would have been lost. The weapons weren't good or evil, it was the users that dictated what was done.



Nobody is interested in nuclear war. NOBODY. Well, maybe Harris and Klebold liked the concept, but they were fuckups.

[_-Gunslinger-_]

Yes nuclear bombs have saved lives. I think that, while they pose IMO the single greates threat to world stability, they arent going to just go away. Especially when you can find out how to make one in like 10 min.

We could easily take out the moon, it would just kill us all :). The moon ALREADY is in a desabalized orbit around earth, and in a very long time (5000+ years) it will slam into earth. We could just accelerate that that process.

The sun uses fusion while most nuclear bombs use fission. The difference being that one smashes atoms togather while the other splits them apart. Fusion requires extreamly high temeratures and preasures, they are needed to overcome the natural repulsion of like-charged atoms. When the two atoms collide thier kenetic energy is released.

A fission reaction is the opposite. It splits atoms and that energy is released.

The question is that if you introduced unstable plutonium into the sun would it A) Cause a nuclear FISSION reaction? and B) Would the ensuing explosion desabalise the suns carfully balanced fusion?

The answer to A is yes it would. The sun has the heat and required pressure to cause plutonium to go into super-critical mass. B is still up to speculation as no one has ever been able (or even tried to my knowledge) to get plutonium into the sun. I would think that the sun WOULD go into supernova. Seeing as fusion reactions are very volitile, my guess would be that it would destabalyze the reaction. Proof of how unstable the fusion reaction is would be solar flares, and sun spots. Solarflares are an excess of energy and sun spots are the lack there of.

I did a google search and found little on what would happen if you introduced plutonium into the sun, anyone else find some info?

[Sputty]

Nuclear weapons are necessary, but problematic. The creation of low yield nuclear weapons could blur the lines, and allow for a far too potent/problematic weapon to be used, and obviously MAD doesn't work when the leader doesn't care about the loss of life, but just getting revenge
Nuclear weapons have allowed the created of power plants though, which are relatively cheap and effective way of getting power, while remaining clean to the environment.
Nukes are something that are stuck in this world, and cannot be rid of, so they must be used only when absolutely necessary, or to help society, as in with power

[Rbstr]

launching a nuke(a-bomb not H) into the sun would do absolutly nothing, as even if you could get it to the surface, it would be like a bactietium falling from 200,000 feet in the sky and landing on your head, nothing.

now a hydrogen bomb uses fission and acts like a mini-sun(just withought the gravity to hold it together) so that would do even less.

the surface of he sun is like 10^1,000,000,000(in reality more probably) Hbombs going off all the time so one more is not going to make any difference

[Sputty]

Haven't you watched Superman? Nuclear weapons into the sun would do nothing
It's like throwing a match into a blazing, gas fed, fire. It won't add to it, or subtract from it

[SDM]

An H-bomb on the sun is like wasting a perfectly good H-bomb. Just like drinking beer while on acid is a waste of beer.

[Jekz]

Wouldn't you rather H-bomb Luna and watch the subsequent fatal meteor shower?

[Everay]

hmmm, the moon is in a orbit that leads it further away from the earth at a rate of 2 inches a year.

[MrPaul]

Especially when you can find out how to make one in like 10 min.
Yeah, if you happen to have an explicit knowledge of electronics, nuclear physics and the likes... I'd be much more worried about anything from this site (http://isuisse.ifrance.com/emmaf/anarcook/indanarcook.html)..

Even more of a trouble is getting the ingredients..

Re: the moon. Save the moon! We need our tides.

[Mr1337Duck]

What a bunch of freaks, teaching people how to create explosives, drugs, firearms, how to kill hand-to-hand, etc. The narco-terrorist's handbook, if you ask me.

[MrPaul]

The narco-terrorist's handbook, if you ask me.
Close. Anarchists Cookbook.

[Thunder_Hawk]

Nuclear Fission startest when you shoot an electron into Urianium atom. The Urianium changes into 2 other atoms (can't remember what they are) and 2 Electrons. those electrons hit 2 more Urianuim atoms and starts the chain reaction. The Threat of a Nuclear War stopped NATO and WARSAW from attacking each other. Nuclear Weapons are just a Deterance. countries know we have the ability to attack with nuclear weapons so they know they can't mess around with america

[Rbstr]

man i can have hours of fun with the anarchist cookbook(never destroying anything thats no my own of course /covering ass form patriot act)

[Bighoss]

its a bit premature to say if they save lives or not. Lets say they've saved 50 million lives from simply preventing war... However, if you ever have the Nuclear powers pissed off enough those 50 million lives will become daily casulties. A huge Nuclear war could easily do 1billion and leave the world in a chaotic period for a few years before countries were able to reorganize and reconstruct.

[Rbstr]

nuclear war would also have the dual effect of enviormental damage, and TEchnology loss, as big cities would be targeted and thats were technological info is stored we would loose lots of stuff like computers (how to build them and the ones opperating, do to EMP) amd manufacturing, it could put us back to dark ages

[JetRaiden]

nuclear war would also have the dual effect of enviormental damage, and TEchnology loss, as big cities would be targeted and thats were technological info is stored we would loose lots of stuff like computers (how to build them and the ones opperating, do to EMP) amd manufacturing, it could put us back to dark ages

shit son....I need to get a lead case for my computer or something. Im not gettin my harddrive fried because some asshats decide that they dont like eachother.

[Mr1337Duck]

No, while it would take a while, the world isn't centralized. It might throw us into something like the collapse from Deus Ex 2. We'd be there until we managed to rebuild. There's plenty of people who know how to manage economic functions, and books where it can be learned. The net would be toast for a few years, but it'd come back on soon enough.

[Rbstr]

you wouldn't have power for it to work though...

[Mr1337Duck]

There's power plants in every state. It would take a few years, but the same info is stored in so many places that it wouldn't take us more than a decade or two really effectively start rebuilding.

[MrPaul]

Nuclear Winter for teh lose. We'd be back on track soon enough, but the economical/ ecological loss would be enormous.

[MrVicchio]

Nukes kept the peace for 50 years. They continue to do so. Be glad we invented them

[Spider]

Nukes kept the peace for 50 years. They continue to do so. Be glad we invented them

I just hope when they stop keeping the peace that I won't be alive.

[JetRaiden]

Nukes kept the peace for 50 years. They continue to do so. Be glad we invented them


/me agrees. if MrVicchio says it, it must be right!

[MrVicchio]

Well think about it, what kept the USSR and NATO from going to war? MAD.

What keeps China from going into Siberia and taking the natural resources? MAD.

Whats kept arab countries from over running Isreal? Nukes.

What has kept NK from invading SK? Nukes.

Granted in areas like Vietnam, Iraq and the like where two nuclear powers do not face off there have been wars, the really BIG nasty fighting has not occured because no one is crazy enough to gamble thier country into ashes.

[Bighoss]

thats ONLY 50 years vich, an all out nuke war would make the rest of the wars avoided look like childs play. They have saved lifes but who knows how many they could take in return.

[OfaLoaf]

Has anyone here ever read "A Canticle for Leibowtz"? It has some... interesting ideas about what would happen after nuclear war.

[Jekz]

Can I move to Mars before this radioactive winter thing?

[EarlyDawn]

Wtf do you tards think the Sun is? A big lava ball? The Sun IS a nuclear reaction. Adding a man made bomb to it would be like throwing bricks in the Grand Canyon. :doh:Exactly. There's very little you could do to throw off the balance of Hydrogen and Helium, causing any kind of abnormal effect like supernova or black hole.

[SDM]

http://www.zvis.com/nuclear/nukimgs.shtml

[OfaLoaf]

http://www.zvis.com/nuclear/nukimgs.shtml

:scared:


"What do you do when you see the flash?"
"DUCK-- AND COVER!!"

[Infernus]

I cant find that really nice picture that you can see the face of god in the cloud... :(

[TheRegurgitator]

If we were to launch nukes at someone we should probably aim for their nuke stockpile first, then civilian areas.

[JetRaiden]

If we were to launch nukes at someone we should probably aim for their nuke stockpile first, then civilian areas.

if you aimed it nuke stockpiles, their nukes wouldnt detonate. Detonating such an advanced explosion is very complex. you cant just smack a hammer on it and expect it to blow up.

Target major cities, then the largest military installations.

[MrPaul]

if you aimed it nuke stockpiles, their nukes wouldnt detonate. Detonating such an advanced explosion is very complex. you cant just smack a hammer on it and expect it to blow up.
Yes, but it'd stop them firing nukes back.

[TheRegurgitator]

well I'd expect the area around the nukes to be radioactive for a while.

But the most important thing to hit is the civilian areas, oh and the people who know how to use nukes... And powerplants

[JetRaiden]

Yes, but it'd stop them firing nukes back.

touche...but we dont know ALL of their stockpiles or launch facilities, and if we miss just a few it could spell disaster for us. however their weapons network would probably be in so much chaos they probably couldnt even get one out of a silo.


whoa, I just asked my mom about this and she told me my great grandfather worked on the Manhattan Project. cool.

[TheRegurgitator]

or we could just launch all the nukes at just the right positions so the explosions would cover all civilization in Iraq. Of course were trying to help them but.. oh well

[UncleDynamite]

The question is that if you introduced unstable plutonium into the sun would it A) Cause a nuclear FISSION reaction? and B) Would the ensuing explosion desabalise the suns carfully balanced fusion?

The answer to A is yes it would. The sun has the heat and required pressure to cause plutonium to go into super-critical mass. B is still up to speculation as no one has ever been able (or even tried to my knowledge) to get plutonium into the sun. I would think that the sun WOULD go into supernova. Seeing as fusion reactions are very volitile, my guess would be that it would destabalyze the reaction. Proof of how unstable the fusion reaction is would be solar flares, and sun spots. Solarflares are an excess of energy and sun spots are the lack there of. BLAH BLAH BLAH

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v138/Superwizard4/roflmao.jpg

Stars 101

The sun is big. How big? The commonly quoted figure is that about 1,300,000 Earths could fit inside the sun. Now tell me, how do you figure that detonating a nuclear weapon on the sun would even remotely affect it? If the sun is so unstable that it can't stand a trifling little explosion, then too bad for us. All it would take is the collision of a sizeable cosmic body to make the thing go boom. But things like comets DO hit the sun, and with considerable force I might add.

Another good example are the solar flares you just mentioned. These things are huge! They're larger than planets and flare out across thousands of miles. A nuclear explosion is a fart compared to the energy of a solar flare. A single flareup can disrupt satellite communications here on Earth for crying out loud. If the sun can handle numerous solar flares on the surface, I'm pretty sure a nuke will be a welcome respite.

Anyway, back to the question. Yes, nuclear weapons save lives. No one doubts the importance of the atomic bombs in saving American lives in World War II. No one doubts the power of nuclear deterance. And no one doubts that world leaders not only understand the power of nuclear weapons, but understand that their use would be catastrophic. However, why there is still concern about nuclear weapons is the potential of terrorists acquiring such devices. They have no qualms of detonating one, and analysts note that there is a significant chance of terrorists using a nuclear device within the decade.