Nuclear Armageddon 4th August?

[Tom Allen]

we're cool. its 20 past 5 and im back from a drunken night out, were all OK!!!

Are you sure, you may be that drunk you just haven't noticed..???..

 

[maximumbob69]

its 20 past 5 and im back from a drunken night out

If there's ever a case of addiction to these boards - that's it right there

 

[Mario]

If there's ever a case of addiction to these boards - that's it right there

true that.

 

[Dark Stranger]

Yeah...kinda instantaneous really...

You know...the advances that have been made since the creation and subsequent use of the bombs on Hiroshima...have been quite dramatic and very clever.

You see...Atomic bombs, arent very efficient...they tend to blow most of teh reactive "Fuel" elements of themselves apart and hence are unuseable in teh reaction...what they have done now...is refined the the things quite nicely...they use a Fusion reaction initially...which provides fuel etc for a bigger Fission reaction...also, to try and contain the thing as long as possible...they create something called a Tamper, which, is also made of a fuel yielding material, which further increases the reaction...which all in all gives massivly greater yields (in kilo tonnes) than teh original bombs did those few years ago...typical warheads are actually capable of 5000 times the yeild of Little Boy.


Frightening, but fascinating...

That would make the intial radius of the blast (from the centre) would be 7500miles. Are you sure Skeet?

If this is so then God help us when someone pushes the button!

 

[Buddha 3]

That would make the intial radius of the blast (from the centre) would be 7500miles. Are you sure Skeet?

If this is so then God help us when someone pushes the button!

Doesn't work as simple as that.

But indeed, the two bombs dropped on Japan were measured in Kilotons, the big nukes we got now are measured in Megatons. For those who don't know, 1 Megaton = 1000 Kiloton.

 

[Skeet]

That would make the intial radius of the blast (from the centre) would be 7500miles. Are you sure Skeet?

If this is so then God help us when someone pushes the button!

Well no, for teh exact same reason as I described earlier.

Nuclear weapons, explode...naturally...and when they do that...they spread potential fuel all over teh place, so it doesnt react.

Thats why they are so inefficient...by using modern methods, they have been able to improve its destructive power and efficiency, but not to that extent...besides, even if they could, I very much doubt they would build a weapon that could wipe out an area 7500 miles across....you would only need one and that would be the end of Planet Earth...due to teh sheer force applied in one place.

 

[Bob]

Well no, for teh exact same reason as I described earlier.

Nuclear weapons, explode...naturally...and when they do that...they spread potential fuel all over teh place, so it doesnt react.

Thats why they are so inefficient...by using modern methods, they have been able to improve its destructive power and efficiency, but not to that extent...besides, even if they could, I very much doubt they would build a weapon that could wipe out an area 7500 miles across....you would only need one and that would be the end of Planet Earth...due to teh sheer force applied in one place.

It would destroy the orbit of the earth, every volcano would erupt, earthquakes, tsunamis . . . in general big boo.

 

[Raffles]

So why do two of the best posts we've had in ages get nuked by the Gods of Mods - only to leave this ****e here?

BTW - I'm typing this from my cell in hell - as the world ended - but only I noticed

 

[Buddha 3]

It's the seventh now....and, ah crap, you're all still here!
Damn, have to use more dynamite next time.

Anyway, which two threads are you on about, Raffles?