Is it possible to shoot down a nuclear missile and what will happen if you explode them all together: answers to interesting questions about atomic weapons

What would happen if all the atomic bombs in the world were detonated at the same time? What is the difference between a nuclear and thermonuclear bomb? Experts gave comprehensive answers to these and other questions about nuclear weapons, reports with the BBC.

Photo: IStock

Once, after World War II, Albert Einstein was talking with friends who asked him what weapons would be used to fight in World War III.

“I don’t know what kind of weapons will be used in the Third World War, but I can definitely tell you what they will use to fight in the Fourth World War,” the scientist answered.
“And what?” asked the friends.

“Stone spears,” said Einstein.

Seventy-five years have passed since then, and today, unfortunately, people have a very good idea of ​​what the battlefield in a new world war might look like.

On the subject: The first batch of weapons from the United States arrived in Israel: what is happening in the war now

Weapons are nuclear and thermonuclear. Already from the name itself you can feel that a thermonuclear bomb is something more powerful than a conventional nuclear one. But more on this later. For now, for simplicity, we will call all weapons nuclear or atomic. In addition, experts will tell you what will happen if you explode all the atomic bombs in the world at the same time, which atomic bomb was the largest in the world, and what will happen if you shoot down a missile with a nuclear warhead in the air - will it explode or not. Experts also asked artificial intelligence why people can’t just give up nuclear weapons.

Is there a bomb more powerful than an atomic bomb?

No. As far as scientists know, the only thing more powerful than an atomic bomb is an even bigger atomic bomb. But why are they so powerful? In short, atomic weapons release powerful energy packed into atoms.

Let's start from the very beginning, with the same Einstein, or more precisely, with his famous equation, which even your grandmother knows. E = mc². Simply put, the formula states that energy is equal to the mass of the object multiplied by the square of the speed of light.

For example, the weight of a phone is about one hundred and fifty grams. This is a huge number squared, meaning the speed of light multiplied by itself. And E is the energy that is tightly packed in this mass. Because from the point of view of physics, energy and mass are simply two sides of the same concept.

Now let’s imagine that some brilliant physicist was found who invented a way to instantly convert any thing into energy.

And he got his hands on a phone and the formula of another brilliant physicist. By converting the mass of an iPhone to the square of the speed of light, you can get thirteen and a half billion megajoules of energy. And this is already like the eruption of a rather large volcano. And you carry all this potentially gigantic power with you in your pocket.

And now two news - good and bad. Let's start with the good one. Material bodies are usually very stable and do not simply turn into energy. Otherwise, using the telephone would be very traumatic, and we ourselves would become wandering nuclear warheads. And you already know the bad news. People have learned to release energy from certain substances, such as uranium, plutonium or hydrogen isotopes.

Why one of them? Because they are less stable from a chemical point of view. That is, their atomic nuclei easily break or, conversely, easily stick together. This releases colossal energy, and this is exactly what is needed for an atomic bomb. For example, during the explosion of the American bomb that destroyed Hiroshima, only zero point seven grams of uranium turned into a terrible destructive force.

Just think about it - less than a gram of silvery-white metal turned into energy that killed about a hundred thousand people.

What is the difference between nuclear and thermonuclear weapons

The difference is that a thermonuclear bomb is as powerful as hundreds or thousands of nuclear bombs. Thermonuclear bombs are also called hydrogen bombs. And, fortunately, they have never been used in wars, but were only blown up at training grounds.

Various physical processes occur in nuclear and thermonuclear bombs. If you ask physicists, they will say that nuclear weapons are the fission of heavy atomic nuclei, such as uranium or plutonium, and thermonuclear weapons are about the fusion or combination of light nuclei, such as certain forms of hydrogen, deuterium or tritium.

Nuclear weapons that are less powerful are easier to create. Hiroshima and Nagasaki were hit with nuclear bombs, but hydrogen bombs require much more complex engineering.

The new bomb is a thermonuclear weapon. But there is such a nuance - this is a mixture of a thermonuclear and a nuclear bomb. Because in order to start this process, you must have a small nuclear bomb, which is amplified accordingly. The thermonuclear reaction itself will not follow.

Initially, nuclear weapons were created. Then it turned out that he had limitations. That is, these are weapons that were used in Hiroshima, Nagasaki. This is practically the limit of what a purely nuclear weapon can be, while thermonuclear weapons have no limits at all.

To see a thermonuclear bomb explode, just raise your head and look at the Sun. In its core, as in other stars, thermonuclear fusion of hydrogen occurs, releasing colossal energy. You are looking at a huge hydrogen bomb that has been continuously exploding in space for billions of years. But let's return to Earth.

Atomic weapons are also divided into tactical and strategic. Tactical rounds are typically smaller, less powerful, and designed for use on the battlefield. Fortunately, this never happened either. Strategic weapons are, for example, missiles with nuclear warheads.

Like the article? Support ForumDaily!?

Some of them are capable of flying from one continent to another and burning down entire cities. Their main task is to scare off and deter a potential enemy. Most tactical weapons are nuclear, while strategic weapons are predominantly thermonuclear. But no matter what kind of weapon we are talking about - tactical or strategic, nuclear or thermonuclear - they all pose a danger to humanity.

There is an opinion that small tactical weapons can be even more dangerous than large strategic weapons, because if they are used even once in battle, it will open the gates to nuclear hell.

What would happen if all the atomic bombs in the world were detonated?

In short, the earth will not break into pieces. And some people even have a chance to survive, although their life after such a thing cannot be called sweet.

But first, how many nuclear weapons are there in the world? Nine countries have such weapons. In total, they have twelve and a half thousand warheads. Russia and America have the most - more than five thousand each. Next come China, France, Great Britain, Pakistan, India, Israel and North Korea. Another six countries have nuclear weapons on their territory that belong to other countries. American missiles are based in Italy, Turkey, Belgium, Germany and the Netherlands. And in Belarus, as we have recently learned, there are Russian nuclear weapons.

So, the researchers calculated that in order to destroy almost the entire urban population of the earth, only a little more than half of the world's stock of nuclear warheads is enough.

But what happens if you collect all the atomic weapons in one pile and detonate them at the same time? There will be about three billion tons of TNT. This is fifteen times more powerful than the deadliest eruption of the Krakatoa volcano in recorded history at the end of the nineteenth century. And this is without even mentioning the deadly radiation.

In general, the level of drama of this explosion is comparable to the asteroid impact that sixty-six million years ago caused a mass extinction, destroyed the dinosaurs and changed the climate. In the first second after the explosion, everything that can be touched within a radius of fifty kilometers simply evaporates like water. The fireball will begin to spread over hundreds of kilometers and burn everything in its path. The sound will be heard around the world, and a giant nuclear mushroom will form in the sky. There will be forest fires and mass death of animals and plants. And the shock wave will continue to walk back and forth over the planet for several more weeks with radioactive dust rising into the sky. Sunlight will not reach the Earth. A nuclear winter will begin, which will last for years. As they say in films about the apocalypse, the living will envy the dead. However, of course, this will most likely never happen. After all, even from a purely technical point of view, detonating all nuclear weapons at the same time is not an easy task.

What happens if you shoot down a nuclear missile in midair?

Let's imagine the worst case scenario, where someone reached out to that nuclear button and pressed it. For example, the leader of a great state orders the launch of an intercontinental ballistic missile with a thermonuclear warhead. The missile bursts out of the silo and heads towards the intended enemy. The defense of which also does not sleep and shoots down this missile high in the sky. What will happen, will there be a nuclear explosion or not? No, there will not be a nuclear explosion, but there will be another threat. As we already know, an atomic bomb works completely differently from ordinary explosives. And if you hit it with all your might or throw it into the fire, fortunately it will not explode.

To start a thermonuclear reaction, you need to carry out a complex and precisely calibrated sequence of actions. Therefore, missile defense can more or less successfully combat a nuclear warhead by simply blowing it into pieces in the air. But at the same time, the danger of radioactive contamination of a vast territory remains.

By the way, about pollution. Interestingly, a huge strategic missile would not necessarily stain a larger area than a tactical warhead would. Why is that? Let us remember that strategic weapons are predominantly thermonuclear, and thermonuclear fusion is much cleaner than nuclear decay. But there is one thing.

The problem is that in order to trigger nuclear fusion, you need a nuclear bomb. So the radioactivity you'll get from strategic weapons and the radioactivity you'll get from tactical weapons is actually not that great.

There was a moment when it was believed that this was a pure bomb. There was even a name that it would only be a weapon in its purest form. That is, you get destruction, but destruction without pollution. This is not true because you are left with the atomic bomb. But it's not as big a difference as you might think.

So it is possible and necessary to shoot down missiles with nuclear warheads in the air. This can save you from an atomic explosion, but not from radiation.

Why America dropped atomic bombs on Japan

Everyone knows this story, but they just tell it differently. For example, in August 1945, when there were a few weeks left before the end of World War II. Bad America dropped two atomic bombs on good Japan, killing hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians. This is approximately the black and white narrative.

In the United States itself, these events are viewed differently. Polls, for example, show that a majority of Americans believe the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were justified, although this support has declined over the years.

A little history. Let us remember that in World War II Japan was an ally of Nazi Germany. And after Germany signed the surrender on May 8, 1945, Japan was going to fight to the end and waged a so-called total war.

After all, for a Japanese warrior to surrender to the enemy is a personal shame, and the surrender of an entire country is a shame on a gigantic scale. To avoid such national humiliation at the end of the war, teenagers and women began to be conscripted into the Japanese army. The Japanese, unlike the Germans, did not plan to surrender. And the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was the only way to stop Japan and finally end the war.

Here are some other arguments that the bombing of Japan made military sense. It was a quick way to end the war with minimal casualties, no matter how cynical it may sound. In the event of a ground operation planned by the United States, the projected death toll on both sides reached a million people, that is, several times more than the death toll in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Every day that World War II lasted meant thousands of new deaths in China, which Japan had invaded in 1937, and in Vietnam, where famine worsened by the Japanese occupation raged. In addition, Japan was also developing atomic weapons in those years, although it did not do it as quickly and successfully as the United States.

It is not our job to assess whether the United States did the right thing by dropping two bombs on Japan. However, if instead of repeating a simplified black and white version of history, we try to better understand the causes of the tragedy in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, then we may be able to prevent something similar from happening again.

What is the biggest bomb in the world

After World War II, the USSR and the USA began to compare bombs. Britain, France, China and other countries joined the club of nuclear powers one after another. And, of course, they all conducted nuclear tests, that is, they exploded their bombs. Otherwise, how can you convince potential rivals that you really have atomic weapons and you shouldn’t be attacked?

Throughout history, atomic bombs have been exploded more than two thousand times. This was done at special training grounds on the ground, underground, in the sky and over the sea. Often the explosions were set at a certain height above the surface. Because then the destructive force is greatest.

You've definitely heard the names of some nuclear test sites, such as the Nevada Desert in the United States or the romantically named Bikini Atoll in the Pacific Ocean. After World War II, the Americans evicted the entire population from Bikini and turned these picturesque coral islands into a giant nuclear test site. This place is still so contaminated with radiation that no one lives there permanently.

But let's return to our question: which explosion was the biggest? This was in sixty-one. Then the Soviet Union exploded in the far North an atomic Tsar Bomb of 58,6 megatons, the creation of which academician Andrei Sakharov worked on.

The power of the Tsar Bomba was somewhere more than three thousand bombs that Hiroshima destroyed. The fireball from the explosion was so large that it could be seen a thousand kilometers away, and the nuclear mushroom penetrated into the stratosphere. The spectacle is terrible and fascinating.

By the way, the name Tsar Bomba appeared only in the nineties, and in the sixties the bomb was called “Product Two” or “John”.

You may be interested in: top New York news, stories of our immigrants, and helpful tips about life in the Big Apple - read all this on ForumDaily New York.

But India in those years gave intricate names to its nuclear tests with hints of black humor - Operation “Smiling Buddha” or “Happy Krishna”. Of course, such tests caused incredible harm to nature and human health. Radioactive fallout contaminates the land, water and air, causing cancer and other diseases. So in the nineties, states agreed not to conduct any more tests, although not all countries officially signed up to this agreement. Therefore, this agreement is to a certain extent a gentleman’s agreement, and only one country violates it - North Korea. The last recorded nuclear explosion there was in 2017.

Why nuclear countries won't give up their weapons

There are several reasons why nuclear-armed countries cannot simply agree to give up nuclear weapons. Artificial Intelligence shared its answers to this question.

• Price. The cost of developing, producing and maintaining nuclear weapons is significant. In some countries, nuclear weapons are an important source of pride and prestige. Abandoning nuclear weapons could have significant political and economic consequences for these countries.
• Mistrust: Countries fear that if they give up their weapons, other countries will take advantage of this to become more aggressive.
• Safety. Some countries believe that nuclear weapons are a necessary security measure. They fear that without nuclear weapons they will be vulnerable to attack by other countries. Complete nuclear disarmament is still a long way off. This will require a lot of time and effort.

Read also on ForumDaily:

Two trains collided in the Moscow metro: the accident occurred due to a driver error

A six-year-old girl had half her brain turned off to relieve her of seizures and pain.

Wine, mountains and lakes: the best small towns in the USA for an unforgettable vacation

Do you want more important and interesting news about life in the USA and immigration to America? — support us donate! Also subscribe to our page Facebook. Select the “Priority in display” option and read us first. Also, don't forget to subscribe to our РєР ° РЅР ° Р »РІ Telegram  and Instagram- there is a lot of interesting things there. And join thousands of readers ForumDaily New York — there you will find a lot of interesting and positive information about life in the metropolis.