0
No, once it detonates it no longer exists.
Wiki User
∙ 12y ago
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
What would happen to the planet if all the nuclear bombs detonated at once?
To the planet very little. To life an awful lot.
How could nuclear energy make long space trips more practical?
Nuclear energy could provide power for long periods, and the energy necessary for advanced high-speed propulsion in space. However, chemical rockets would still be needed to reach Earth orbit, because nuclear engines are space drives: they do not have the lift-to-weight ratio needed to achieve escape velocity. (This was once proposed as a use for nuclear bombs, but the launch system would create massive radioactive pollution.)
What is the goal of the B-52 bomber in Dr Strangelove?
Once launched and the proper codes received, the goal is to drop nuclear bombs on Russia.
Is there a bomb worse than nuclear bombs?
Not at this time, the yield of hydrogen bombs (a type of nuclear bomb) has no theoretical limit. However usable bombs no matter what type they are have practical limits and we have already built and tested successfully bombs with yields far higher than can be militarily practical (nobody ever had a real military use for the 50 megaton bomb the USSR tested in 1961 called the Tsar Bomba!). Edward Teller once proposed building gigaton range hydrogen bombs, but the plan was promptly rejected as the vast majority of the blastwave of such high yield explosions would only blow the atmosphere above the point of detonation off into space (the military wants surface damage not removal of atmosphere!) producing less surface damage than lower yield less expensive bombs. The trend since the middle 1970s has actually been lower and lower yield hydrogen bombs that when employed as several explosions spaced across an area produce greater damage more economically than one higher yield yield bomb could. ========== In terms of long term damage there are different types of nuclear bombs. Those which spread large quantities of persistent high-level radiation materials could be argued as "worst" - but they are still considered nuclear weapons. A "dirty bomb" which simply uses a conventional explosive to spread radioactive materials over a wide area to contaminate it could possibly be considered equally bad.
Why used nuclear bombs at war time?
They're very destructive and last for a long time, In other words, once you've blown up a nuclear bomb somewhere, it will still be dangerous after the initial explosion has taken place. When a nuclear bomb is used there would be nuclear radiation that would still be present where the bomb hit for quite a while
What is the renewable energy source of nuclear?
Nuclear energy is not renewable. There is a fixed amount of potential fuel on the earth. Once it is used, there will be no more.
What is a cluster of bombs?
a flock of birds a gaggle of geese a shoal of fish a cluster of bombs ..he he!.. nah, a 'cluster bomb' is actually a nasty bomb that once it explodes it releases more mini bombs (the clusters) all over the place which then explode as ancilliary explosions.
Why nuclear energy is non renewable?
once we use the Earth's supply of uranium, there will not be any more
What is nuclear energy if it is not nonrenewable and not a fossil fuel?
It is nonrenewable!! Once we burn up all the Uranium we have no more.
What radiation do atomic bombs give of?
The radiation levels of atomic bombs vary according to the amount of radioactive elements put into the bombs or missiles and if they are actually used. Once the radioactive matter is inside the bomb housing the radiation levels are negligible but once one of the nuclear bombs is used then the variables come into play. (see related link below to see how complex it is) Consider this: the atomic bombs dropped on Japan in 1945 are 1/10th the killing power of today's nuclear missiles. If one modern nuclear missile were to be used today the bomb would be able to kill about a third of the world with the initial bomb blast and radiation fallout. The radiation level after Hiroshima and Nagasaki was not really measured until after the US occupied Japan. The Japanese leaders did not really understand the radiation fallout and poisonous danger and they did not use radiation detectors right after the blast. It is rumored the radiation levels were 100 times today's acceptable levels of radiation.
Why did the cold war result in an arms race?
Because there was no true defense against nuclear weapons. Once both sides had nuclear weapons, the only way to "protect" themselves from the other side was to have so many more nuclear weapons that even if their enemies used all of their nuclear weapons, there would still be nuclear weapons to shoot back with. That way, nobody would use nuclear weapons, because they could never actually "win" that way. This thought process was referred to as Mutually Assured Destruction, or MAD.
How much was the first nuclear bomb that costed the US?
It is not possible to say exactly how much the first nuclear bombs cost. The Manhattan Project cost $2,000,000,000; but most of that was to build the industrial infrastructure needed to enrich uranium, produce plutonium, fabricate bomb parts, and deliver the bomb to the target. Once setup the incremental cost per bomb produced is relatively small.I estimate that the Trinity Gadget MK-III, Hiroshima Little Boy MK-I, and Nagasaki Fat Man MK-III bombs cost well under$1,000,000 each.We had in production or scheduled for production a total of 23 nuclear bombs to be dropped on Japan in 1945 should she fail to surrender, only the first two of these were used.August three bombs, 1 MK-I & 2 MK-IIISeptember three bombs, 3 MK-IIIOctober three bombs, 3 MK-IIINovember seven bombs, 7 modified MK-III using new composite plutonium/uranium coreDecember seven bombs, 7 modified MK-III using new composite plutonium/uranium core
