PDA

View Full Version : A bomb with over 1 percent of the power of the SUN




Rael
05-14-2009, 08:47 PM
YouTube - Tsar Bomba - Largest Nuclear Device Ever Tested (50MT) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H9AMtUeyDP0&mode=related&search=)

Athan
05-14-2009, 09:00 PM
Damn.

RSLudlum
05-14-2009, 09:03 PM
All that power, and it's implimented for destruction. :(

Rael
05-14-2009, 09:04 PM
All that power, and it's implimented for destruction. :(

Well, what the hell else would you expect them to use all that power for? An alternative to petroleum products? PUHLEASE!








:D

nate895
05-14-2009, 09:06 PM
The one thing government is good at is creating new ways to blow up things.

Original_Intent
05-14-2009, 09:23 PM
Amazing, but where do you get 1% of the power of the sun?

I mean, I am pretty sure that 1% of the power of the sun would obliterate earth many times over...

nate895
05-14-2009, 09:24 PM
Amazing, but where do you get 1% of the power of the sun?

I mean, I am pretty sure that 1% of the power of the sun would obliterate earth many times over...

This is from Wikipedia:


Since 50 Mt is 2.1×1017 joules, the average power produced during the entire fission-fusion process, lasting around 39 nanoseconds, was about 5.4×1024 watts or 5.4 yottawatts. This is equivalent to approximately 1.4% of the power output of the Sun.[9]

TheConstitutionLives
05-14-2009, 09:50 PM
we're going to kill ourselves

Carole
05-14-2009, 11:13 PM
This military-government complex weaponizes everything it gets its hands on.

Think Tesla, weather, food, space, etc. on and on and on...instead of using it for the good of people and earth. They just do care about people at all. We are expendable ants to them.

tangent4ronpaul
05-15-2009, 02:26 AM
look up TEA/TEM - I saw a truck hauling the former on the highway and got the hell away from it ASAP!

-t

Brooklyn Red Leg
05-15-2009, 02:37 AM
Actually, the Tsar Bomba isn't that good of a nuke. It may be 50mT in power, but nuclear explosions don't actually scale the way people think. Just because its circa x425 that of the Hiroshima bomb (13kT), its not going to produce a fireball or blast pattern thats 435 times greater. Its sadly why MIRVs were invented because they figured out that pasting a city with one big bomb didn't get the job done like alot of much smaller bombs. Thats why the standard Russian MIRV warhead had a variable yield up to 500kT.

The one thing the Tsar Bomba did that was incredibly bad was spread LOTS of radioactive shit everywhere. IIRC, the heart of the bomb itself had a depleted uranium jacket that not only increased the overall yield, it ensured lots of deadly crap went everywhere. Despite beliefs to the contrary, most nuke detonations would not have produced lots of fallout. Its only those nukes that were targeted for ground-bursts (to take out hardened targets like missile silos and bases) that would have royally fucked any survivors that were unlucky enough to be where fallout landed.

Objectivist
05-15-2009, 02:46 AM
Not sure where you get "power" levels at above 1% of the Sun, as the Suns energy is many times the energy levels of a nuclear device. No real comparison.
Here's a little idea of the size for scale.
http://www.co-intelligence.org/newsletter/comparisons.html

Objectivist
05-15-2009, 02:54 AM
Actually, the Tsar Bomba isn't that good of a nuke. It may be 50mT in power, but nuclear explosions don't actually scale the way people think. Just because its circa x425 that of the Hiroshima bomb (13kT), its not going to produce a fireball or blast pattern thats 435 times greater. Its sadly why MIRVs were invented because they figured out that pasting a city with one big bomb didn't get the job done like alot of much smaller bombs. Thats why the standard Russian MIRV warhead had a variable yield up to 500kT.

The one thing the Tsar Bomba did that was incredibly bad was spread LOTS of radioactive shit everywhere. IIRC, the heart of the bomb itself had a depleted uranium jacket that not only increased the overall yield, it ensured lots of deadly crap went everywhere. Despite beliefs to the contrary, most nuke detonations would not have produced lots of fallout. Its only those nukes that were targeted for ground-bursts (to take out hardened targets like missile silos and bases) that would have royally fucked any survivors that were unlucky enough to be where fallout landed.

Specifically what "deadly crap" are you referring to?

Brooklyn Red Leg
05-15-2009, 03:38 AM
Specifically what "deadly crap" are you referring to?

In the case of the Tsar Bomba and other 3-stage nukes, whatever particulate matter got irradiated from the initial explosion (in this case, whatever miniscule particles of depleted uranium that were all of a sudden given a huge dose of rads). I wanna say some isotope of Cesium is also an end result. I'll admit its been a while since I read up on nukes, I could be wrong.

nobody's_hero
05-15-2009, 03:51 AM
And to think there are some idiots who want to repeat the Cold War with Russia, like it was some sort of game.

Objectivist
05-15-2009, 03:56 AM
In the case of the Tsar Bomba and other 3-stage nukes, whatever particulate matter got irradiated from the initial explosion (in this case, whatever miniscule particles of depleted uranium that were all of a sudden given a huge dose of rads). I wanna say some isotope of Cesium is also an end result. I'll admit its been a while since I read up on nukes, I could be wrong.

I read that it was a relatively clean weapon and only used a half blast level of 50MT, not 100.

When you state DU or Depleted Uranium it presented a paradox. DU is what's left when you extract the .71% of U235 from U238, U238 is normal out of the ground Uranium that you could carry around in your pocket if you wanted. The U235 is the cream used for weapons or fuel. SO DU actually has less harmful material than standard U238 as it was processed to take the "good stuff" out. Also removed from U238 to reduce it to DU are other isotopes of radioactive material. So reality is that DU isn't even as hot as U238.

sailor
05-15-2009, 04:40 AM
This is from Wikipedia:

Since 50 Mt is 2.1×1017 joules, the average power produced during the entire fission-fusion process, lasting around 39 nanoseconds, was about 5.4×1024 watts or 5.4 yottawatts. This is equivalent to approximately 1.4% of the power output of the Sun.[9]


So if we blew up 100 of these at the same moment we could for 39 nanoseconds rival the sun? :eek:

Brooklyn Red Leg
05-15-2009, 05:42 AM
SO DU actually has less harmful material than standard U238 as it was processed to take the "good stuff" out. Also removed from U238 to reduce it to DU are other isotopes of radioactive material. So reality is that DU isn't even as hot as U238.

No, no. I'm not talking about depleted uranium in a conventional sense (such as a depleted uranium APFSDS round). They take a NUKE, made with fissile material, and to turn it into a 3-Stage weapon (fission-fusion-fission hydrogen bomb capable of greater than 1mT) and place a depleted uranium jacket around it. While depleted uranium is 'inert' in that you can't regularly use it for fissile material, it can most certainly make a nuke more powerful.


Fission-fusion-fission bomb are dirty, but they have superior "bang for the buck" and "pow per pound". They generate a large amount of fission fallout since fission accounts for most of their yield. The 5 Mt Redwing Tewa test (20 July 1956 GMT, Bikini Atoll) had a fission fraction of 85%. If the emphasis is on cheapness depleted or natural uranium is usually used for the jacket. If the emphasis is on yield per weight (like nearly all modern strategic weapons) enriched uranium is used.

Actually, I was wrong. According to this, the Tsar Bomba was clean (well, relative would be the word).

Combined Fission/Fusion Bombs (http://www.cartage.org.lb/en/themes/sciences/chemistry/NuclearChemistry/NuclearWeapons/FirstChainReaction/TypesofNuclear/CombinedFission.htm)

Anti Federalist
05-15-2009, 06:47 AM
we're going to kill ourselves

It won't be with a bang, but with a whimper.

Someone is going to slip up, accidentally or on purpose, and release an engineered bio-weapon, something with 99% airborne communicability and 99% mortality.

tangent4ronpaul
05-15-2009, 10:14 AM
It won't be with a bang, but with a whimper.

Someone is going to slip up, accidentally or on purpose, and release an engineered bio-weapon, something with 99% airborne communicability and 99% mortality.

Eliot was referring to the black plague, something those of us of European or Asian decent can thank for a level of natural immunity against HIV/AIDS (yes, they are related). I'm not sure if he was quoting an actual children's song from that era, or created the lyrics.

When that scenario happens, it will probably be for a profit motive, say some vaccine manufacturer and the tame nuisance in spring comes back with a bite in fall... - yeah right, like when "pigs fly"... ;) 1918 redux.

-t

Objectivist
05-15-2009, 05:35 PM
No, no. I'm not talking about depleted uranium in a conventional sense (such as a depleted uranium APFSDS round). They take a NUKE, made with fissile material, and to turn it into a 3-Stage weapon (fission-fusion-fission hydrogen bomb capable of greater than 1mT) and place a depleted uranium jacket around it. While depleted uranium is 'inert' in that you can't regularly use it for fissile material, it can most certainly make a nuke more powerful.



Actually, I was wrong. According to this, the Tsar Bomba was clean (well, relative would be the word).

Combined Fission/Fusion Bombs (http://www.cartage.org.lb/en/themes/sciences/chemistry/NuclearChemistry/NuclearWeapons/FirstChainReaction/TypesofNuclear/CombinedFission.htm)

Thanks for the information, much appreciated.:cool: