No, there aren't enough countries with nuclear warheads to cause an apocalypse and no country even matches up to the United States nuclear bombs besides Russia and they have nukes from the 1960 so they don't even really pose a threat because they probably won't even work. Honestly though you don't have to work because if a nuke was fired the U.S. would stop take care of it. I am not saying that were almighty but we are the world SUPERPOWER! and we take of stuff like that. Thats why Iran won't wipe Israel of the map because they know they would be screwed like wise with Israel.
No, a bomb is not necessarily a nuclear reaction. A bomb can be any device that is designed to explode and cause destruction, whereas a nuclear reaction involves the splitting or combining of atomic nuclei to release energy. Nuclear bombs, also known as atomic bombs, utilize nuclear reactions to produce a very powerful explosion.
The term atom bomb (or atomic bomb) usually refers to a bomb that obtains its energy solely through the process of nuclear fission.However technically the term is considered interchangeable with nuclear bomb, and can refer to any bomb obtaining its energy through either nuclear fission, nuclear fusion, or any combination of the two processes.
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
Highly unlikely if not altogether impossible. In a core meltdown, you might see a steam explosion if the core melts and breaches the containment structure and hits say cooling water. But even a runaway chain reaction in a reactor would not cause a nuclear explosion like a bomb.
A hydrogen bomb (thermonuclear bomb) is more destructive than a regular nuclear bomb (fission bomb). Hydrogen bombs release much larger amounts of energy and have the potential to create significantly more devastation and damage.
a nuclear one.
alot
some
No, a bomb is not necessarily a nuclear reaction. A bomb can be any device that is designed to explode and cause destruction, whereas a nuclear reaction involves the splitting or combining of atomic nuclei to release energy. Nuclear bombs, also known as atomic bombs, utilize nuclear reactions to produce a very powerful explosion.
Nuclear bombs can be dangerous as during a atomic bomb explosions, it produces radiation. The effects of radiation could be that it can cause permanent damage to cells and can cause mutation. Along with this, it could cause severe burns to the skin.
The atom bomb is a type of nuclear weapon. Nuclear weapons can kill entire cities, make air quality unsafe, and kill plants and animals.
The term atom bomb (or atomic bomb) usually refers to a bomb that obtains its energy solely through the process of nuclear fission.However technically the term is considered interchangeable with nuclear bomb, and can refer to any bomb obtaining its energy through either nuclear fission, nuclear fusion, or any combination of the two processes.
A nuclear bomb is any bomb with any nuclear or atomic material inside it, while a plutonium bomb is a specific type of nuclear bomb. Plutonium could be the nuclear material inside the bomb, and if it is, it's a plutonium bomb.
yes, you can use it in a sentence, for example:the apocalypse of nuclear war.
The best nuclear bomb is the Tsar bomba
Germany has not made a nuclear bomb.
Robert Oppenheimer is the father of nuclear bomb.