the nuke of future
- Thread starter rmxtrax
- Start date
philippe
FYI, I chase trains.
if everyone keeps themselve in check and has the brain to do so, there won't be any use of nukes in the 21th century.
Abaddon
Deity
I doubt they will ever get used in the way you are imagining.
Smaller more controlled nukes however, may see use if they can eliminate the "dirty" part of the bomb (Is this possible of have i dreamt that?)
Smaller more controlled nukes however, may see use if they can eliminate the "dirty" part of the bomb (Is this possible of have i dreamt that?)
philippe
FYI, I chase trains.
you dreamt it.
Abaddon
Deity
n/m then. I say no, it is highly unlikly that "nukes" will ever get used with exception of a terrorist attack.
GuitarHero
Caligula II
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2007
- Messages
- 1,486
Mabye, there would be mini-Death Stars. Or the "Eathquake Bomb" might make a comeback. That'd be cool.
Genocidicbunny
Bug squasher
I very much hope that nukes will never again be used. Although its possible that we could get some tactical usage if there is a large scale war breaking out. But either way, using nukes in the MAD world ( I made teh funny) will lead to nothing good.
death star uses the graviton beam to destroy things. It's quite different from a nuke
however i think we will go ahead developing more powerful nukes like anti-matter nukes. Small, light and powerful. The best.
After i think we will create a big treaty to ban the making nukes and stock them in some hidden places under a military controll
After we will return to conventional wars between nations
Abaddon
Deity
We will not see wars between conventional states. Wars are now fought on ecomonics
carmen510
Deity
Wars will no longer be fought by conventional states, with the exception of maybe the Middle East and Africa.
This is now a global war, of sovereign nations against organizations.
They may not necessarily be terrorists, maybe the nations will be the aggressors while the organizations are the ones terrorized.
This is now a global war, of sovereign nations against organizations.
They may not necessarily be terrorists, maybe the nations will be the aggressors while the organizations are the ones terrorized.
wicshade
crazy, militant farmer
We are unable to make new nuclear weapons, but I recall reading an article about the government remaking/remodeling/revamping most if not all of Americas nuclear arsenol. I'm sure that part of the goal was to make these weapons more effective/modern, but realy the government is only seeking to make nukes safer, less likely to be obtained, and used by terrorists.
I think it is safe to say that no nation will ever launch a nuke unto another. We will always have nuclear weapons, and everyone from now until the end is going to live with that choice. Our situation is kinda of like "The Garden of Eden". now that we have had the forbinden fruit we will never be able to return to the old way.
I think it is safe to say that no nation will ever launch a nuke unto another. We will always have nuclear weapons, and everyone from now until the end is going to live with that choice. Our situation is kinda of like "The Garden of Eden". now that we have had the forbinden fruit we will never be able to return to the old way.
I can only see nukes being used in a few ways:
-Global political/economic meltdown resulting in nuclear exchanges by major powers. Not likely, but the chances will increase depending on how things go with global warming and/or diminishing oil supplies.
-Retaliation for a nuclear terrorist attack. IMO, we will see a "nuclear" terrorist attack (probably a dirty bomb, possibly a true nuke) in the next 10-20 years. If the target nation has the ability, they'll almost certainly respond with a nuclear attack of their own.
-Small nukes used for specific applications, eg destroying bunkers. Highly unlikely though, simply because of the stigma attached to using nukes (even if the explosion were entirely contained underground) and the resulting can of worms it opens.
-Global political/economic meltdown resulting in nuclear exchanges by major powers. Not likely, but the chances will increase depending on how things go with global warming and/or diminishing oil supplies.
-Retaliation for a nuclear terrorist attack. IMO, we will see a "nuclear" terrorist attack (probably a dirty bomb, possibly a true nuke) in the next 10-20 years. If the target nation has the ability, they'll almost certainly respond with a nuclear attack of their own.
-Small nukes used for specific applications, eg destroying bunkers. Highly unlikely though, simply because of the stigma attached to using nukes (even if the explosion were entirely contained underground) and the resulting can of worms it opens.
mrpwn3r
Stereotypical Asian
My friend, that's quite a pessimistic view.
You should watch 24. The US didn't nuke back when it was nuked thanks to Jack Bauer.
I love that show.But, anyways, I agree with rmxtrax. Anti-matter bombs are the future of mass destruction warfare. A small amount could potentially wipe out a city.
MarineCorps
Explosion!
I cant see the US or Russia to allow the other or any nation to respond with nukes.
Aahhhhhh.... anti-matter...
Now that's something. One gram delivers an explosion comparable to a nuke. Only need to store it safely, and a bomb the size of a tin can kill millions. And manufacturing it in large quantities is an issue too. Only some mg have been made thus far, and many, many years will be spent before we can make "a lot" of it.
Personally i think we can't use nukes not for the explosion but for the terrible secondary effects like radio-active fall-out. We have to create a not radio-active nuke
Aahhhhhh.... anti-matter...
Now that's something. One gram delivers an explosion comparable to a nuke. Only need to store it safely, and a bomb the size of a tin can kill millions. And manufacturing it in large quantities is an issue too. Only some mg have been made thus far, and many, many years will be spent before we can make "a lot" of it.
Really a anti-matter bomb can easily destroy the entire world. According to Einstein we can traform matter in energy by e=mc^2 so a bomb with a kilo of antimatter can reach the power of 470 megatons
They tried that. Guess what they invented
Spoiler :
Really a anti-matter bomb can easily destroy the entire world. According to Einstein we can traform matter in energy by e=mc^2 so a bomb with a kilo of antimatter can reach the power of 470 megatons
But we'd need a hideous amount of it. 1000 grams would be only some 10 huge nukes. We'd need tons of it, because Next War is not correct with the "Earth's crust cracking..." unless the nukes will be tuned up a lot.
But if I had to destroy the world, I'd use killer strangelets.
philippe
FYI, I chase trains.
and why would anyone need or even consider using such an bomb?
I certainly wouldn't funnel research in making ZOMG BIG BOMBZ, cause it's just plainly ********. Is this how the Sci/tech subforum has to look like?
I'm very dissapointed in this thread.
I certainly wouldn't funnel research in making ZOMG BIG BOMBZ, cause it's just plainly ********. Is this how the Sci/tech subforum has to look like?
I'm very dissapointed in this thread.
They tried that. Guess what they invented
Spoiler :
Neutron bomb doesn't produce radiations?
Ok you need a little bit of elementary of Physics
neutrons are considered as radiations so if a bomb produces neutrons it produces radiations
ok?
We are only speaking about technology what's the problem? Don't you like nukes ok change simply thread and not offend people here
philippe
FYI, I chase trains.
Neutron bomb doesn't produce radiations?
We are only speaking about technology what's the problem? Don't you like nukes ok change simply thread and not offend people here
Do you even got a clue about how anti-matter works?
Actually, i'll rephrase: do you have any clue?
And what is this obsession from kiddo's for big bombs?
Life isn't a videogame you know.
