because it is small is fusable and fissable.
Further answer
It's not used for all atom bombs. In fact the first ones weren't. Uranium and plutonium were the elements used. They were fissile, i.e. capable of sustaining a chain reaction when they split into other elements.
More recently hydrogen was used but this time is fuses to form another element (helium) with a very large release of energy.
both r useless Sometimes "atom" bomb is also used to describe a hydrogen bomb. Strictly, historically speaking, the atom bomb works via the energy released when a heavy atom nucleus such as uranium is split (called nuclear fission). This is also the energy source for nuclear power stations. A hydrogen bomb works via the energy released on fusing (called nuclear fusion) two light atoms (such as hydrogen) together - the huge pressure needed is derived from an atom bomb. This situation arises because the atoms towards in the middle of the periodic table are more stable, than those nearer the ends. A lot of electricity is derived nowadays from nuclear fission (nuclear power stations) but no significant power has yet been derived from nuclear fusion, though a lot of work is being done on it.
Hydrogen bombs, or thermonuclear explosives, are one form of nuclear weapon, gaining a tremendous increase in explosive power from the fusion of atoms. This is the opposite of the fission reaction, which generates energy by splitting a larger atom into smaller ones. But the fusion bombs currently used require a fission trigger, which means they still produce radioactive fallout, just less for the equivalent energy yield.
Einsteinium-253, a radioactive isotope, is used in hydrogen bombs as a component in the initiation system. It helps to start the nuclear reaction by emitting neutrons when subjected to a high-energy source like conventional explosives. Its properties make it suitable for triggering the fusion reaction in thermonuclear weapons.
Actinium itself is not used in bombs. However, it can be a byproduct of nuclear reactions and may potentially be used in the initiation systems of certain types of nuclear weapons.
The question that you are asking in itself is quite broad as there are many types of nuclear weapons and bombs.. However, there are certain similarities to all of these weapons that are necessary to become nuclear. The materials themselves have to be able to produce a high amount of energy to be able to create that amount of destruction. If you have a chance to look at a periodic table, you'll notice the Hydrogen atom at the very beginning. The most popular type of nuclear bomb is the Hydrogen bomb, in which you take a hydrogen atom, and split it up into smaller parts.. However, this in itself takes huge amounts of energy and the energy released from this exothermic (energy-releasing) reaction is why it's so devastating. There's not really much materials used in a nuclear weapon other than a shell to hold the parts together upon needed release, and a machine or something of that nature to bombard the hydrogen atoms to make them split and a supply of hydrogen atoms themselves in order to make a hydrogen bomb. Now that's just one type of bomb...
They never used hydrogen bombs in Japan. They used nuclear bombs which produces gamma rays not the lethal doses of x-rays produced by the hydrogen bomb.
Atomic bombs use nuclear fission to cause near perpetual chains of reactions. Nuclear warheads (Nukes) just sums up all the different types, including hydrogen bombs (which use nuclear fusion, a much more potent type of power) and atomic bombs. So yes, they are the same.
Basically, nuclear energy is used in two ways: * In nuclear reactors, to generate electricity. * In nuclear bombs (atom bombs) to cause destruction on a large scale.
plutonium and uranium
An atom bomb is a type of nuclear weapon that relies on nuclear fission, while "nuke" is a colloquial term used to refer to any type of nuclear weapon, including both fission and fusion bombs. So, all atom bombs are nukes, but not all nukes are atom bombs.
No hydrogen bombs were dropped on Vietnam. No nuclear weapons of any kind were used in Vietnam.
Yes. Later, the Hydrogen Bomb used fission/fusion.
Nuclear. At the time it was called an atom bomb.
Yes, the hydrogen bomb is more destructive than the atom bomb. This is because it relies on nuclear fusion, which releases much more energy than nuclear fission, the process used in atomic bombs. The sheer power of the hydrogen bomb makes it capable of causing significantly greater devastation.
both r useless Sometimes "atom" bomb is also used to describe a hydrogen bomb. Strictly, historically speaking, the atom bomb works via the energy released when a heavy atom nucleus such as uranium is split (called nuclear fission). This is also the energy source for nuclear power stations. A hydrogen bomb works via the energy released on fusing (called nuclear fusion) two light atoms (such as hydrogen) together - the huge pressure needed is derived from an atom bomb. This situation arises because the atoms towards in the middle of the periodic table are more stable, than those nearer the ends. A lot of electricity is derived nowadays from nuclear fission (nuclear power stations) but no significant power has yet been derived from nuclear fusion, though a lot of work is being done on it.
The terms "atomic bomb" and "nuclear bomb" are general terms and can pretty much be used interchangeably. That said, there isn't any difference between them, and one is not more powerful than the other in that light.
No. Atomic bombs were used during WW2 in Japan, but they were "fission" weapons, which derived their destructive power from splitting apart the nucleus of an atom. Hydrogen bombs derive their destructive power from "fusion" reactions, or the merging of two Hydrogen atoms. This is the same chemical reaction that powers the sun. Hydrogen bombs were tested for the first time on November 1, 1952.