is there something more powerful than nuclear bomb? and what do you think?
595862
I don't know what everyone else here is on but we've had fusion (hydrogen) weapons for decades. Fusion weapons are capable of destroying planets as there is no real limit to how powerful they can be. There are more powerful alternatives however. Matter-Antimatter reactions can be made vastly more powerful then fusion reactions since the masses are completely transformed into energy whereas only a small portion of mass is converted into energy in fusion reactions. The problem of course is that anti-matter is annihilated upon exposure to any matter so storing it is the biggest problem in making such an idea practical and it would probably never make it to bomb form let alone the problems people have making 1/1000th of a milligram of the stuff for any sustained period.
102608
They range in power. About 100 megaton of TNT. The radiation from the bomb also kills.
985097
The Daisy Cutter Bomb.\n\nIt weighs 15000 pounds, and because its detonated just before it hits the ground, it leaves no crater, and has a devastating impact, vapourising any thing within a 900 feet radius.\n\nI would happily drop this bomb on any country that supported terrorism.\n\nThis is the bomb which i reckon vapourised Bin Ladin when he hid in the caves.\n\nThe same caves were a safe haven for these scu*mbags in the Russian conflict, but when the USA dropped this bomb nothing came out alive, in fact it was quoted in a local paper as vapourising the occupants of the caves, even though they well hidden very deep in the mountains.
668106
A nuclear weapon is a weapon which derives its destructive force from nuclear reactions of either nuclear fission or the more powerful fusion. As a result, even a nuclear weapon with a relatively small yield is significantly more powerful than the largest conventional explosives... so practically it is.
85380
bomb is an explosive device which, although not containing more energy than ordinary fuel (except in the case of a nuclear weapon), generates and releases its energy very rapidly, as a violent, destructive shock wave. It is usually some kind of container filled with explosive material, designed to cause random destruction when set off. The word comes from the Greek βόμβος (bombos), an onomatopoetic term with approximately the same meaning as "boom" in English.\n\nThese are first and foremost weapons; the term "bomb" is not usually applied to explosive devices used for civilian purposes (such as construction or mining), although the people using the devices may or may not sometimes refer to them as bombs. Note that many military explosive devices are not called "bombs". The military mostly calls airdropped, unpowered explosive weapons "bombs," and such bombs are normally used by air forces and naval aviation. Other military explosive devices are called grenades (such as hand grenades), shells, depth charges, warheads (in missiles), or land mines.\n\nThey have been used for centuries in warfare and are a central part of the terrorist's arsenal. They fall into three distinct categories: conventional (filled with chemical explosives), dispersive (filled with submunitions, chemicals or other disruptive agents which are spread on or shortly before impact) or nuclear (relying on nuclear fission or nuclear fusion for their effect).\n\n \nDevice originally thought to be a pipe bomb, found to be a time bomb. From a U.S. government publication.A distinction is commonly drawn between terrorist and military bombs. The latter are almost always mass-produced weapons, developed and constructed to a standard design out of standard components and intended to be deployed in a standard way each time. By contrast, terrorist bombs are usually custom-made, developed to any number of designs, use a wide range of explosives of varying levels of power and chemical stability, and are used in many different ways. For this reason, they are generally referred to as improvised explosive devices or IEDs.\n\nThe most powerful bomb in existence is the hydrogen bomb, a nuclear weapon. The most powerful bombs ever used in combat were the two nuclear bombs dropped by the United States to attack Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The most powerful non-nuclear bomb is the United States Air Force's MOAB (Massive Ordnance Air Blast).\n\nThe most powerful bomb ever was Tsar Bomba: ca. 50 Mt; it had a mass of 27 tons; it was dropped from a bomber for a test, but was for various reasons not very suitable for combat.\n\nThe first hydrogen bomb Ivy Mike (10.4 Mt) was even heavier in mass, 82 tons. It was too heavy to be deliverable by a plane or rocket, and therefore not very suitable for an attack.
546511
Any nuclear bomb will create an electromagnetic pulse.  The size of the pulse radius will be approximately related to the blast radius.
630393
That would be pretty stupid of mankind.  But then, we're not known for intelligence, on the whole...\n\nTornadoes only form in very low pressure systems, and the main destructive force of a nuke is its ability to create a very high pressure center that blows down everything in its path.  If anything, the low pressure of the atmosphere would amplify the effect of the nuke, because the pressure differential would be greater.  As for tornado, if it weren't destroyed (and the disruption caused by the high pressure of the bomb may do that), it could potentially carry and scatter radioactive dust for miles, especially if the nuke were burst close to the ground.
52131
Alright this is the answer to your question. This is pretty obvious if you think about it. If I asked 100 people if they had the capability to end the world with the touch of a button I would probably get one crazy person saying they would do it. Now with that being agreed upon the next transition would be the advancement of technology. In a period of about ten years humans developed the atomic bomb. Ten Years! So my opinion is that humans will develop some sort of weapon whether biological or just a bomb that would be able to destroy the entire planet. This weapon will probably be a closely guarded secret at first, however it let time pass about a couple hundred of years and it would have to leak to one of those 1 in 100 crazy people who would have the resources to release this weapon. He is going to do it and humans are all wiped out. So really as the technology to create WMD's becomes better the worse the human race is. That is why we really need to stop countries with crazy dictators from creating these weapons. This will at the very least slow the process down. But it will happen and its pretty obvious if you think about it.
636689
The larger of the two dropped on Japan, on Nagasaki, had a 20-22 kiloton yield. Meaning, it would take 20,000 tons of TNT to release the same energy. The B83, the most powerful weapon in the active US arsenal can be up to 1.2 megatons, 1,200,000 tons of TNT, 60 of the Nagasaki bombs. The largest explosion ever was a Russian bomb at 50 megatons, 2,500 times as powerful as the explosion at Nagasaki.
375930
as a matter of fact, the US indeed have arsenals for nuclear bombs. The US Gov't has to maintain nuclear bombs, simply because, it wanted to stay as the world's most powerful and influential nation.
958092
Thers no telling how long the war would have lasted If we had not used the bomb. It likely would have gone on for years, probably killing even more people. The bomb made a very strong statement. Still I understand what you mean. I suppose no one really knows for sure.
724259
How can the world eliminate nukes all together?\n\nThis probably won't be solved, but all sides would like to be able to do this, and I would think they would not call others names on this topic
1137579
M-16s?  No.  Not powerful enough.\n\nDillon 20 mm mini-guns installed on HUMVEES and Apache helicopters.  And land mines.  Let's not forget land mines.
177603
It depends on how the bomb is designed.\n\n"The most efficient pure fission bomb possible would still only consume ~25% of its fissile material before being blown apart, and can often be much less efficient (Fat Man only had an efficiency of 14%, Little Boy only about 1.4% efficient)."
439217
War on Terror and Weapons of Mass Destruction are the funniest words of this century. \nTruely speaking, the superpower countries like USA,Russia,Germany,Britain,China have enough nuclear, hydrogen and bio-chemical bombs that is more than enough to completely destroy the whole EARTH leaving no bit of it.
576718
explosion, yes...nuclear, no
906091
Bombing is pointless they built there facilities with our bombs in mind. Thus any attack would be worthless as the facilities are way underground and well armored. Invasion as Iraq proved is quite out of the question. The best response is to let them have there toys and let them know that they have now made themselves targets for our nuclear arsenal. This kind of deterrence has worked to keep nuclear powers in line before and will again. No matter if the govt is full of religious or political fanatics in the end they are human and don't want to die if it can be avoided.