If by "bomb" you mean a conventional explosive weapon, then the nuclear weapon is more powerful.
Yes, the conventional explosives would trigger an explosion of the conventional explosives inside the nuclear bomb which would blow apart the nuclear components of the nuclear bomb, causing significant alpha emitter radiological contamination but no nuclear yield.
About as dangerous as conventional weapons of the same yield, plus the radiation effects.
No, a dirty bomb is a radiological weapon. It simply uses conventional explosives to scatter radioisotopes over an area.
theoretically the yield of nuclear weapons is unlimited.
The term precision nuclear weapon may be a misnomer, but it is generally used to describe a low yield nuclear weapon (perhaps a few kilotons) that can be delivered with great accuracy on a specific target.The idea is to use this device, which is very small compared to an equivalent conventional weapon, in applications like busting deeply buried bunkers or other large below ground installations. Using a nuclear weapon in this type of application would gain a more assured result than the use of conventional explosives. The catch is that if you have this wonderfully effective weapon with all these superior characteristics, you may be tempted to use it.It may or may not be helpful to compare the precision nuclear weapon to what we call a tactical nuclear weapon. This nuclear device has a low yield (about a kiloton or so) that was designed to be delivered by conventional large-bore cannon or a small missile. The limited blast could be directed in a way that it could destroy something like a concentration of armored vehicles or troops that it would be difficult to do with conventional explosives. Consider that a small tactical nuclear weapon that could fit inside a 155 mm cannon shell would do damage that a thousand tons of TNT would be needed to accomplish.
The meaning of the word nuclear weapon, is a weapon that has a nuclear warhead on it.
An explosive device that uses massive conventional explosives to split radioactive atoms and cause a MASSIVE release of energy by nuclear fission or fusion. A BIG BOOM!!!!
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.
Since this never happened, nothing changed.
A fire bomb is a conventional incendiary bomb: magnesium, napalm, etc. A nuclear bomb uses fission and/or fusion and is mostly a blast effect weapon.
The weapons used in World War II had a power of 20,000 kilotons - that means they are equivalent to an explosion of 20,000 tons of conventional explosives (TNT is used for comparison). More recent nuclear weapons have a power measured in megatons (millions of tons of conventional explosives).