[ 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

View post   
File: 98 KB, 450x344, nuclear-explosion[1].jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2261550 No.2261550 [Reply] [Original]

how to make a homemade nuke

>> No.2261560

>buy plutonium
>light it on fire

>> No.2261565

>take a neutron
>split it

>> No.2261569

First you're going to need a lot of plutonium or highly enriched uranium.

>> No.2261587

Take an atom and cut it in half.

However most people can't do this because you need a microscope as well as some really small and really sharp knives that are very expensive.

>> No.2261588

If you wish to make a nuke from scratch, you must first invent the universe.

>> No.2261702
File: 65 KB, 250x261, SATAN.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2261702

hey hey hey...! whatcha talkin bout?

>> No.2261709

>>2261569
so you'll have to travel to Russia and visit any vegetable market there ...

>> No.2261710

1. Get a few ounces of Plutonium.
2. Encase it between a sphere of pistons ready to compress it equally across the sphere.
3. House the equipment in a large metal hull
4. Fire when ready!

>> No.2261717

>>2261565
Isn't splitting a single one capable of only giving off enough energy to make a single grain of sand jump a little off the ground?

Seems too negligible to actually pursue of course, but to say you've done it by yourself seems worth boasting about I suppose.

>> No.2261731

go to a gas station, buy one of those apple pies you put in the stations microwave. Heat for 4 minutes until the molecules inside the crumbly crust reach an unstable state/ (4000 degrees c) then drop in the emergency bucket of water. Instant thermonuclear blast.

>> No.2261732

>>2261717

when you split one, what do you think happens to the others around it

>> No.2261748

>>2261732

They just move the fuck out da way

>> No.2261755

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Hahn
Its been done.
>fralsop comitted
no, david hahn comitted

>> No.2261757

>>2261732
Thermonuclear devices do operate off of chain reactions, I know what you're getting at, but that's only under very different circumstances other than what I guess I was implying. My bad for not elaborating, bro.

I was merely talking about the endeavor of splitting a single neutron here. Not exactly aiming for anything beyond that point. I'll be the first to admit that I haven't the slightest as to what that would actually involve mechanically speaking, but I like to think that it would involve a vastly different process and involve different tools.

What I mean to get at is this: splitting a single neutron in a laboratory setting would involve different methods and tools than what one would employ for creating a massive chain reaction of them in a condensed casing for a nuclear device. The principles would be the same, sure, but most other aspects of these goals wouldn't. At least what upon my impromptu conjecture can assert.

P.S. I know I'm kind of an idiot and have absolutely no credibility considering the anonymous medium of 4chan, so I just want to say that I don't want this thread to degrade into some kind of base internet squabble. Peace, bros.

>> No.2263186

>>2261732

You tell us

By your logic a nuclear explosion on the surface of earth would turn earth into one giant nuclear exposlion

>> No.2263202

>>2263186
Always wondered this.

Then I realized that the light/sound energy given off decrease the energy used in splitting the others...but then it's just given off again when a new atom is split...and now I are confused.

>> No.2263249

lots of chemicals and materials, lots of tools, lots of scientists, and lots of guess and check work.

>> No.2263280

Biggest issue will be getting enough U235. Plutonium requires a lot more precision to set off properly. I understand plans are relatively easy to find.

>> No.2263285

btw, the bomb in that picture was designed to do as much damage as possible in a two dimensional circular area around it i.e. along the ground only, and not up into the air in every direction i.e. 'wasted energy' the better answer would have been lots of small bombs. the pressure waves are going to go everywhere regardless of what you do, but focusing the pressure waves/sound waves with a wave guide that contains the up/down oriented waves so they can continue adding energy to the outward waves would be a good way to make the single bomb more destructive, but lots of bombs is just better. regardless of how good you are at making bombs, certain sized bombs are going to loose energy creating exotic forms of matter at ground zero, and to several other poorly understood scientific phenomena.

>> No.2263364

building a homemade nuke is surprisingly simple actually. The hardest aspect is procuring a viable chain reacting element. (which contrary to what this crowd thinks, isn't only U235.)
(procure aprox. 5 kilos said reactive element)
step 1: encase in non-reactive metaloid
step 2: encase metaloid in varying densities of class 7 high powered explosives
step 3: wire rounds of ******** ammunition to fire at the core at precise times
step 4: wire explosive to detonate at specific times
step 5: build arming and detonating system
step 6: place in case
arm and detonate....
enjoy the fireworks
burn in hell

Although nuclear weapons are really not nearly as effective as say a biological or chemical weapon.

>> No.2263521

what's your point? we need to scale up security to keep our citizens safe? profound bro.

>> No.2263541

and that is just a basic multistage explosive weapon. you say 'encase' like that's some easy thing you can do in your back yard without having a fucking high tech foundry.

>> No.2263606

>>2261757
>>2261732
>>2261717
>>2261565

A nuclear chain reaction works by knocking a neutron OUT of an atom, which then knocks other neutrons out of the other accompanying atoms. This frees the potential energy and, thus, produces an explosion. This is how a basic nuclear chain reaction works; U235 and Pl are considered viable sources for this reaction mainly because of their respective atomic numbers. Beryllium is utilized as the original neutron source and that is bombarded by alpha particles. The alpha particles eject the neutrons out of the Beryllium, which then impact the U235.

By the way, splitting U235 from U238 is EXTREMELY difficult. They're basically attached to the hip, and U238 is the primary isotope. Plutonium is a derivative/decay product of Neptunium, which is a derivative of Uranium. Even that takes a tremendous amount of work to produce.

Here's a good site that showcases the progression simply enough:
http://www.atomicarchive.com/Fission/Fission2.shtml

Sincerely,
Math-Physics double major.