A nuclear weapon is any explosive weapon that gets its destructive force from atomic nuclei. There are two ways to do this: nuclear fission and nuclear fusion. Fission is the easier to achieve, it takes large already unstable atoms and splits them into smaller atoms with a fast neutron chain reaction. Fusion is harder to achieve, it requires heating and compressing small atoms forcing them to join into larger atoms.
Few modern nuclear weapons are pure fission or fusion designs. Early ones were all pure fission, but now they optimize the design for size, cost, mission, etc. by using various mixtures of fission and fusion in different places in the weapon.
From your question I am not sure how much explanation you want, or if you are interested more in general operation, design, safety systems/testing, effects, or what specifically. An encyclopedia is a good source for many of these answers. However remember that many of the important details are classified Top Secret-Q Restricted Data.
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.
The biggest nuclear weapon ever tested was the Tsar Bomba, a hydrogen bomb detonated by the Soviet Union in 1961. It had a yield of 50 megatons, making it the most powerful nuclear weapon ever detonated.
A nuclear weapon is one of the most powerful weapons in existence, so it is difficult to say if there is a specific weapon that is definitively stronger. However, some may argue that certain future technologies, such as antimatter weapons or advanced cyber warfare capabilities, could potentially surpass the destructive power of a nuclear weapon.
The amount of radiation produced by a nuclear weapon can vary depending on its size and yield. However, a single detonation of a nuclear weapon can produce tens of thousands to millions of rads within the immediate vicinity of ground zero. This level of radiation exposure can be lethal to humans and cause widespread health effects.
No, a single nuclear weapon is not powerful enough to blow up an entire continent. The destructive power of a nuclear weapon is concentrated in a relatively small area known as the blast radius. The impact would be devastating locally, but the effect would not extend to an entire continent.
The meaning of the word nuclear weapon, is a weapon that has a nuclear warhead on it.
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.
A nuclear accident is the unintended release of nuclear radiation into the environment, such as damage to a nuclear reactor or to a nuclear weapon (plane crash carrying nuclear bombs, etc). The two basic forms of nuclear weapons are fission and fusion weapons.
nuclear chemicals such as plutonium
NO
no
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.
the first nuclear weapon was issued in WW2 created by the americans in a chicargo squash court
plutonium + weapon
yes