Discussion»Questions»Death and Dying» If the atomic bomb hadn't been invented would the nuclear bomb also not have existed? What is relationship t'wixt the two if there is one?
Your bedside manner sucks. You could have eliminated the patronizing condescending arrogant insults and simply answered the question helpfully and thoughtfully. You didn't.
Boohoo How does it feel when your own methods are turned on you? Sucks, huh?
In point of fact, I did indeed answer your fatuous query and, as is typical, you were so busy getting indignant you failed or refused to recognize it. Your problem.
I thought I disabused you of expecting sunshine and rainbows to shower upon you from every response. You got and will continue to get exactly what you merit.
This post was edited by Don Barzini at October 15, 2017 5:33 PM MDT
Two names for the same thing. The A-bomb is a fission weapon, the H-bomb a fusion one. Both involve atomic nuclei. Fission weapons derive energy from splitting the nuclei of heavy elements (uranium or plutonium), fusion weapons combine hydrogen nuclei to form helium and release an ENORMOUS amount if energy - that's how the sun works.
So Hydrogen is the same as nuclear Sbf? Thank you for your reply. How much more damage can nuclear weapons do than atomic weapons? Or are they same? Don't we fear nuclear fallout more than we do atomic fallout.
Okay, words of one syllable. They. Are. The. Same. Thing.
"Nuclear" refers to the atomic nucleus. So does "atomic", the two terms are interchangeable when referring to weapons or reactors. There are two kinds, fission and fusion. Fusion weapons are more powerful - in fact they require bigger fission bombs than the ones that destroyed Hiroshima as PRIMERS, to generate deuterium plasma which then fuses into helium. It's why we don't have fusion reactors yet, we can't safely create and contain said plasma in sufficient quantity to make it a viable energy source.
A slight dig, m'dear, because you didn't read my first answer properly and continued to refer to them as different things. They're not. Sometimes a teacher throws chalk to wake up an inattentive student. If I got you in a sore spot, I apologize.
This post was edited by Slartibartfast at October 15, 2017 5:23 PM MDT
The question is flawed and makes no sense. An atomic bomb is a type of nuclear bomb. They aren't synonymous though, Atomic is just one type, hydrogen is another. Then there are other theoretical nuclear weapons that work on paper and in principle but have not been made into practical and/or functional prototypes. Fusion and fission as Slart said.
Don Barzini 