I'm not quite sure how to answer your question, it is a bit ambiguous:
JUST CHIMING IN TO ADD: A nuclear bomb has to have exactly the right amount of regular explosives rigged and timed to go off just the right way in the exact correct position to make the fissionable material explode with a nuclear blast. If you abuse the bomb by smashing it, burning it and melting the insides, shooting it, blowing it up with explosives applied to the outside, you'll probably mess up the way the internal explosive charges are supposed to work. So you get a small conventional explosion that might blow up a house, but not a nuclear explosion that would blow up an entire city.
It did explode, but this was due to a surge in steam pressure which blew off the top of the reactor, it was not a nuclear explosion as in a nuclear weapon.
The uses of nuclear weapons are to end life. They are used as a very last resort weapon because of they totally demolish any thing in their way.
No. LLNL even tested several Uranium-Hydride bombs in the 1950s. Even though their computer models said the devices should explode, none gave a nuclear yield. One could use the waste from the reactor as a Radiological Weapon, but the reactor itself is not useful as a weapon.
Maybe. If ABM was nuclear itself, it will probably cause fratricide in the warhead causing it to dud. If ABM is conventional it might detonate conventional explosives in warhead. Whether this produces yield or not depends on how safe the warhead was designed against one point detonation nuclear yield.
No, a nuclear weapon needs a specific geometry to detonate, and it has to be held in this position by very high explosives to keep it in this shape. In a nuclear reactor, if the reactor core goes critical then the force of the expanding coolant will blow the reactor apart, preventing a nuclear blast.
The meaning of the word nuclear weapon, is a weapon that has a nuclear warhead on it.
potentially, but not likely. the US has repeated performed "safety tests" of nuclear weapon designs and the test fails and the device redesigned if any nuclear yield is detected. also the US puts a Permissive Action Link (PAL) on each weapon, this is a cryptographic lock that without receiving the correct key directly from the president, the bomb arming mechanism will fail to operate. other countries, who knows?
No, a cookie-induced nuclear power plant cannot explode like a nuclear weapon. Nuclear weapons rely on a controlled chain reaction to release an explosive amount of energy, whereas nuclear power plants use a controlled chain reaction to generate electricity. The mechanisms and processes of these two systems are fundamentally different.
Because ww3 is around the corner and they dont want to be without any weapons. Nuclear weapons are a weapon but also a very good deterant
This nuclear weapon is called an atomic bomb or a nuclear bomb
Nuclear weapon detonations
If by "bomb" you mean a conventional explosive weapon, then the nuclear weapon is more powerful.