0
Atomic Bombs
Atomic bomb is an explosive device in which a large amount of energy is released through nuclear reactions. This makes an atomic bomb, more properly called a nuclear weapon, a much more powerful device than any conventional bomb containing chemical explosives. The first Atomic Bombs were used during World War 2 in 1945 by the US onto 2 Japanese cities.
2,042 Questions
Why was the first atomic bomb named the little boy?
The nickname of the first atomic bomb (the one set off in the Trinity test) was "the gadget".
Little Boy was the first atomic bomb designed but the one detonated; it was the one detonated over Hiroshima (so it was the first one anyone outside the Manhattan Project knew about). Little Boy was called that because of its shape: Fat Man (the third bomb, detonated over Nagasaki) and the gadget were nearly spherical, but Little Boy had a slim roughly cylindrical shape.
The reason the bombs had different shapes was that they were based on different technology. Little Boy used enriched uranium, which allowed for a simpler design but was harder to obtain than the plutonium used in the other devices (plutonium could be produced in breeder reactors from the more common isotope uranium-238, and it's much easier to separate two elements than to separate two isotopes of the same element).
The original plan was to use uranium for all the bombs, but the schedule only allowed time to produce enough enriched uranium for one. Rather than wait for more, they decided to try plutonium instead, and plan B was to make the same kind of bomb but with plutonium. However, testing revealed that wouldn't work: the plutonium started to go prompt-critical too quickly, and it was thought likely that the simple gun-target model used in the slimmer bomb would "fizzle" (go off too soon, with a much weaker explosion) if plutonium was used.
Enter plan C: instead of taking two big pieces of plutonium and shooting one at the other (using a conventional explosive), they took a bunch of pieces and shot them all together at the center. This kept the plutonium below critical mass longer and allowed time for all the plutonium to be assembled before prompt criticality started. However, the design was larger and more complicated and they weren't sure it would even work, hence the Trinity test (the Little Boy design wasn't even tested, at least not as a full-scale assembled bomb; the scientists involved were so sure it would work they didn't consider it necessary to test first).
How is the chain reaction in a nuclear reactor different from one in an atomic bomb?
In a nuclear reactor, the chain reaction is controlled to produce a steady flow of energy by regulating the rate of reactions. In an atomic bomb, the chain reaction happens rapidly and uncontrollably, resulting in a massive release of energy in a short period of time, leading to an explosion.
What is the difference between an atomic bomb and a nuclear weapon?
An atomic bomb is a type of nuclear weapon that releases energy through nuclear fission (splitting of atomic nuclei). Nuclear weapon is a broader term that encompasses atomic bombs, as well as hydrogen bombs which release energy through nuclear fusion (combining atomic nuclei).
Element used in first atomic bomb?
The first bomb exploded, the Trinity test bomb, used plutonium.
The first bomb deployed, dropped on Hiroshima, used uranium 235.
The second bomb deployed, dropped on Nagasaki, used plutonium 239.
How was the atomic bomb transported?
The atomic bomb was transported by air on board a specially modified B-29 Superfortress bomber called the Enola Gay or Bockscar. The bombs were loaded onto the planes at the airbase and flown to their target cities before being dropped.
Who discoverd the atomic bomb?
The atomic bomb was developed during World War II as part of the Manhattan Project. The project was spearheaded by the United States and led by scientists such as J. Robert Oppenheimer, who is often credited as the "father of the atomic bomb."
What is the destructive power of an atomic bomb?
An air burst (detonating a bomb above the surface) would produce far more damage and death via radioactive fallout than one detonating at ground level.
A single 100 megaton air burst would be enough to cause a nuclear winter and pollute the Earth for many many years. Theoretically, a 100 megaton bomb detonated below ground could produce a massive earthquake and the constant explosions of a full blown nuclear war may also cause numerous earthquakes around the globe. But this would not destroy the world nor all human life.
Globally there are not enough nuclear bombs to completely kill every human. The Tsar Bomb (largest bomb ever detonated) had a fallout of 1000 square kilometres, and was 50 MT. The world is close to 150 million square kilometres, and the human population covers close to 18 million square kilometres.
Therefore to get a rough idea we can say hypothetically that the 5000 megatones of nuclear warheads was 100 Tsar Bombs (the same value in megatons). If these bombs were detonated their total radioactive fallout would cover 100,000 square kilometres.
It may be surprising to hear that this covers less than 1% of the area that the human population covers, which should give a general idea of the miniscule size of impact this would have on the total world's surface. Therefore it can be shown that we do not have the capacity at the moment to destory the world with nuclear warheads.
However, there are factors we have overlooked, which include:
- Tsar Bomb has a very small radioactive fallout in comparison with its megatone value
- Nuclear wardheads can be assumed to target densly populated locations, and
- Nuclear winter which would result in the radioactive fallout
To put curiousty to rest, even if we replaced our Tsar Bomb equation with nuclear warheads that had a higher radioactive yield to fulfill the 5000 megatons gloabl nuclear arsenal we would still not come close to the amount of radioactive fallout required to cover the area the human population covers, let alone destroy the world.
If nuclear warheads were targeted at densly populated locations it would increase the fatalities of a nuclear war, however this would still not wipe out humanity, let alone destory the world.
Nuclear winter can in lamer terms be contrasted with the ice age. The ice age did not destory the world, and did not wipe out all life, therefore neither would nuclear winter. Humanity is extremley resilient, and although many of the world's population die due to starvation if they did not die from the initial nuclear war or radiation, life will find a way.
-----------------------------
You forgot to take into account the amount of radiation there would be if more than one detonated at a single time.
My U.S. History teacher told us that if 8 nuclear bombs went off at roughly the same time, it would kill 95% of life in planet Earth.
What does the atomic bomb have to do with Albert Einstein?
He played a role in its creation by sending a letter to convince president Roosevelt to start work on a nuclear weapon, and many of his theories went into the making of it. Einstein himself was a pacifist and regretted for the rest of his life that he had influenced the creation of nuclear weapons.
Why the us should not have dropped the atomic bomb on Japan?
Opinions differ on this.
The bomb did kill a lot of civilians. However, it was an order of magnitude fewer than the official US military predictions of the number of Japanese civilians that would have been killed in a conventional invasion, so in a sort of twisted way, the bomb was actually a more humane choice.
Why is the atomic bomb called Fat Man and Little Boy?
The difference was little boy was droped on Hiroshima in world war 2, it is much smaller than the fat man used on Nagasaki and the little boy uses uranium to compress it. The fat man uses plutonium to detonate.
Did Japanese think the atomic bomb was supernatural?
No, the Japanese did not think the atomic bomb was supernatural. They were aware of its devastating power and understood it as a powerful and destructive man-made weapon used by the United States during World War II.
Why did the US use Atomic bombs?
The US used atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945 during World War II to bring a swift end to the war against Japan and avoid a prolonged and costly invasion of the Japanese mainland. The bombings were intended to show the devastating power of nuclear weapons and to force Japan to surrender unconditionally.
Where did the first atomic bomb land?
The first atomic bomb landed in Switzerland. Most people believe that it landed in Japan but there was actually one before that. >which of course landed in Switzerland
Was Truman right to drop the atomic bomb?
This is a copy of a summer project that I did for my school on why Truman should not have dropped the bomb, which I hope answers your question.
Dear President Truman:
As your most trusted advisor, and having explored all possible options, I have decided to strongly suggest that you NOT DROP the atomic bomb.
First and foremost, the bomb would kill millions of innocent people who do not care about the war. They have not provoked us in any way, and should not be harmed. These people do not participate in the war, even if they reluctantly send their fathers and husbands off to fight in the army. They are forced to do this by their government. The Japanese are not savage people, and should be considered a human being, just like everyone in the United States and the other countries.
Another reason to not drop the bomb is that we can avoid this, which I know you would prefer over dropping it. Through careful examination, I have come to the conclusion that we can show the Japanese what the bomb can do, just like we did in the test. Hopefully, they would surrender. They know that know we know how to build it, and we can make many more before they have a chance to strike.
A third and last reason for you not to drop the bomb is that it would deplete our stores of material, so we could not build any other thing, unless we raised the taxes very, very high. Making this bomb is very taxing on what we have in store, and I don't know how much will be left after it is dropped, if you decide it should be so. The people of the United States are sure to want you out of office if you raise the taxes. I'm sure that you'd like to be reelected for office, and this would make your chances of winning at about zero.
Truly, it would be a wise idea to not drop the atomic bomb for the reasons stated above.
What were the positives and negatives of the atomic bomb?
It could be argued that nuclear weapons provide a deterrent. Many believe that they did. They represent an "or-else scenario" wherein any aggression that is "over the top" will get a nuclear response. Certainly other powers can taunt and even attack a nuclear power on a limited basis, but no "full scale assault" will probably be risked because of the threat of a nuclear response. It is true that some non-nuclear powers have engaged nuclear powers in broad acts of war knowing that the risk of a nuclear response is minimal. But it is different with nuclear powers. They are more careful acting in ways that the other could interpret as overly aggressive. We could go on, but let's go to another aspect of the use of a nuc. There was a program called Plowshare back when, and it posed peaful use of nuclear weapons. A nuc could be used to dig a big hole for, say, a water reservior. The Russians did it as a test, and they set of several devices to try different applications. The U.S. did a small shot (Sedan) to test the application of a nuclear blast for mining. The radiation release, however, is just too great, even with a good shot. Public objection increased, and Congress, who holds the pursestrings, waved off further testing. Under Plowshare, the use of nuclear weapons was suggested as a "pressure reliever" for large, active geologic faults, like the San Andreas in California. If building pressure there could be relieved with a "big hammer" like a nuc, then there'd be less of a chance that a big quake would occur. But it was also pointed out that the nuc might actually trigger a big quake, and no one wanted to pay the freight on something like that. The liability was too great. Using a nuc to relieve pressure along a fault is a good idea, because it is possible that we could avert a really big quake. You know. The one that kills dozens or even hundreds and does billions of dollars in property damage. But the first shot is extremely risky. If we could "get past" that one, we might be able to take action regularly to squash those huge pressure buildups that, when released, cause the big quakes. But we didn't "break through" with that idea. Maybe for the best. Check the links below for more information.
Is it possible for a nuclear power plant to blow up like an atomic bomb?
No.. Entirely impossible. There've been a couple meltdowns such as Chernobyl and Three Mile Island, A few scattered partial meltdowns, and a bunch of Russian Submarines. But the reactor is in no way designed to explode. They have to MAKE it explode for atomic bombs. You can't just pick up some uranium and set it on fire and hope it blows up. Explosions can happen and kick radioactive material around, but there won't be some huge mushroom cloud a mile wide. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_meltdown for more information.
What is the brief description of an atomic bomb?
A supercritical mass of fissile material rapidly assembled with explosives, then triggered by a carefully timed pulse of neutrons from a neutron source. That's about as simple and general as it gets.
What was one of the labs where the atomic bombs were made?
There are 2 main nuclear weapons labs. 1 at Los Alamos, NM (established 1943) and 1 at Livermore, CA (established 1952). Each weapons lab eventually had a nearby branch of Sandia Labs (Los Alamos in Kirkland AFB in Albquequeque, NM and Livermore nearby in Livermore, CA) that designed the non-nuclear parts of the weapons. Once designed and prototypes built and tested production was moved to a factory like PANTEX outside Amarillo, TX. Dozens of facilities across the country supplied these labs and factories with nuclear and non-nuclear components; including Hanford, WA (plutonium metal), Oakridge, TN (enriched uranium metal), Fernald, OH (plutonium and uranium extrusions and machined parts), etc.
What are pros and cons of atomic bombs?
Pros: Highly destructive power can be a strong deterrent against aggression; can potentially end conflicts quickly.
Cons: Mass civilian casualties; long-term environmental impact from radiation; possibility of escalation and use in future conflicts.
How many square miles can a atomic bomb destroy?
The extent of destruction caused by an atomic bomb can vary significantly depending on several factors including the bomb's yield, height of detonation, and surrounding geography. In general, a fairly powerful atomic bomb could potentially cause destruction over an area of several square miles, with severe damage concentrated closer to the detonation point.
What day did Albert Einstein invent the atomic bomb?
Albert Einstein did not invent the atomic bomb. He was a theoretical physicist who played no direct role in the development of the bomb, although his famous equation, E=mc^2, laid the foundation for understanding the energy release in nuclear reactions. The atomic bomb was developed and deployed during World War II as part of the Manhattan Project, primarily by scientists and engineers led by J. Robert Oppenheimer.
Why did Albert Einstein help make the atomic bomb?
Albert Einstein's assistance to the Manhattan Project was in the form of a letter he wrote to FDR, encouraging him to persue research in atomic weapons.
Although Einstein was a pacifist and was strongly opposed to war, he viewed Nazi-Germany as the greater threat and used his prestige as a physicist to encourage atomic research.
As a Jewish-German, Einstein had seen first-hand what the Third Reich was willing to do, and did not want them being the sole owners of atomic weapons.
What is the name of the atomic bomb that invented by albert Einstein?
None, Einstein had no part in either inventing or making atomic bombs except to sign a letter to FDR that Leo Szilard had written. Leo Szilard is the inventor of both the atomic bomb and reactor.
How much did the atomic bomb big boy weigh?
There was no atomic bomb called Big Boy. Perhaps you are confusing it with a restaurant chain that bombed :-)
The two atomic bombs used in combat were Little Boy & Fat Man, their approximate weights were 9,000 pounds & 10,000 pounds respectively.
Who is the first american physicist in charge of the development of the first atomic bomb?
J. Robert Oppenheimer was the first American physicist in charge of the development of the first atomic bomb during the Manhattan Project in World War II.
