Leo Szilard in 1933, he patented them the next year in the UK. But he could not build them by himself. It took 12 more years and a huge investment in industrial infrastructure before the US built the first bombs and usable nuclear power had to wait until after the war.
both obtain their power from the atomic nucleus, that is about where the similarity ends.
A nuclear power plant uses a slow, controlled nuclear chain reaction to heat water and generate electricity. A nuclear bomb uses a very rapid uncontrolled nuclear chain reaction in order to generate a massive explosion.
the hydrogen bomb, is a nuclear bomb
A nuclear bomb and an atomic bomb are virtually synonymous. The two terms are both used to refer to a nuclear weapon. Even Wikipedia agrees. The use of either term as a search argument redirects the answer to the article Nuclear Weapon. A link is provided. from benjaminmarkiewicz that dont make any sense a nuclear bombs blow travels 100s of miles and is more powerful cause its the newly invented bomb and the atomic bombs blow travel is under a nuclear bombs travel rate
A bomb can be either conventional or nuclear.
No president invented any nuclear bomb.
Leo Szilard invented the fission bomb. Edward Teller invented the fusion bomb. Both were from Hungary.
The power of a nuclear bomb is a very tiny fraction of the power of the sun.
he invented it with metal
It was a nuclear bomb. Everyone was afraid of a nuclear bomb. The nuclear power plant malfunctioned. The Cold War was about fear of nuclear attack.
nuclear energy is the sun not a bomb
There were no nuclear weapons in WW1. The nuclear bomb was not invented until WW2.
I don't believe that Iran should have nuclear power because they threaten to bomb the USA if they do get nuclear power.
Yes he was.
None. The fission bomb was invented in 1933 by the physicist Leo Szilard. The staged fusion bomb was invented in 1949 by the mathematician Stan Ulam and the physicist Edward Teller.
both obtain their power from the atomic nucleus, that is about where the similarity ends.
No. A lahar carries far less power than a nuclear bomb. However, large explosive eruptions, which can lead to lahars, can be as strong as or stronger than a nuclear explosion.