[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

Search:


View post   

>> No.11637963 [View]
File: 118 KB, 602x414, main-qimg-0f4a7243c9279b556ff2c6dfe2660c38.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11637963

My little cousin asked me why nuclear reactors are not bombs and I told him how the fuel is different and such. Then he asked me why the army doesn't use the nukes it has as batteries while not at war and I explained that you can't just plug a wire on a nuke and get power and all.

But now I got a big thonk. What would it take to turm your average 500kt nuke into a reactor? How hard would it be? Say you are on a post apocalyptic situation and need really reliable constant power and the nuke is just there. Could it be done? Just dismantle it and make a little core from the plutonium and have it go brrrrrr and heat water and shit?

I mean, it would obviously be a waste of plutonium and dangerous as fuck and the workers building it 100% gonna die of a Chernobyl special but could it be done? How effective could it be?

Navigation
View posts[+24][+48][+96]