This professor could explain the process of paint drying and make it interesting and compelling, I love these videos

@URProductions

4 жыл бұрын

Well if you knew what the paint was doing while it was drying, of course it'd be less boring. I mean, the paint itself never gets bored of drying.

@imonlyamanandiwilldiesomed4406

4 жыл бұрын

Ya, he has a rare gift.

@MrNicoJac

4 жыл бұрын

I'm sure the precise process of water molecules finding their way from the middle of the (thin) paint layer to the surface where they evaporate, has a ton of interesting physics behind it!

@JordanBergstrom

4 жыл бұрын

Dude you’re not kidding....

@danclassic7065

4 жыл бұрын

@@MrNicoJac Paint is honestly pretty amazing!

The short-sleeve work shirt was made for this man.

@StreuB1

4 жыл бұрын

Literally!

@Nemesis816

3 жыл бұрын

U basic af m8, that’s the least interesting most normie thing to notice

@nooorm18

3 жыл бұрын

Let’s not forget the signature brown suit and tie. If he ever switches clothes I quit this channel. 😎

@Smokey298

3 жыл бұрын

It is actually incredible.

@christopherbullock2644

2 жыл бұрын

U of I needs to give him logo’d pocket protectors.

So funny how I have to drag myself to my lectures yet I sit here at home in the evening watching others out of interest.

As a teacher, I am going to try to emulate your process. Top notch work.

@johnd2058

4 жыл бұрын

But it's almost all TTT w/ pictures... 'cause YT. ;P

I love this guy. Nobody is to troll him. He is making people smarter. Or taking them out of dumbness, myself included. Gave thumbs up.

"It just has to be a really really big explosion." Looks at mushroom clouds coming out of kettle.

Prof Ruzic as a suggestion, I would love a class on how much energy nuclear reactors (from fuel to operation) need versus how much they produce.... I love your lectures, congratulations to bring quality information to the public.

I just found your videos and am so hooked. You are the epitome of a fantastic instructor

It's pretty difficult for me to learn something new, but the format of these videos make it so easy for me to absorb all this information. Also the fact he dives into topics I'm highly interested in helps A LOT.

14:14 Polystyrene foam, check Soon I will have nuclear supremacy!

@ddopson

3 жыл бұрын

This comment is highly under-rated. Polystyrene is my favorite aspect of the Teller-Ulam bomb design. Under intense XRay radiation, far more effective than conventional explosives at generating compression. Even explosives weren't enough for the bomb scientists, they had to resort to styrofoam!

@mllhild

3 жыл бұрын

Considering those scientist where holding apart sub critical halfs with a screwdriver I can only imagine them just grabbing the first thing they could find in the lab and trow it in there to hold the parts in place. Sticky note saying "replace later with explosives"

Very informative video, thank you.

Great video Prof! One correction for those who are interested. The footage shown at 16:40 of a bomb being dropped and the subsequent explosion is not a H bomb. That bomb was Ivy King, the largest pure fission ever detonated (~500kt). Still much smaller than the hydrogen bombs being discussed during that segment.

Imagine if every teacher was as good as Dr. David Ruzic! Amazing skill at teaching. Thank you sir :)

Excellent video! Thank you for making it!

Spot on -- Except for 2 parts. 1 -- The first H bomb was tested and detonated in 1952, not 1956. 2, the bomb was 10 megatons in yield, not 15. Ivy Mike, tested at Bikini Atoll in 1952, 10 megaton yield. The only bomb that the US ever detonated that was larger was Castle Bravo which was a 15 megaton yield, and that was because a MISTAKE was made in the calculations, not realizing that one of the isotopes would be stripped of one of it's particles, subsequently turning it INTO bomb fuel that would add to the explosive yield. I believe it was originally only intended to be a 5 megaton yield, but lithium 7 was stripped of a neutron during the initial detonation and then became lithium 6, and thus the yield was 300% larger than originally planned for .... I could be wrong about the chemistry aspect of that, or at least what element was stripped of a particle to become bomb fuel anyway. The rest is spot on. As far as everything else goes.... more power to ya, chemistry is hard as hell and you're an expert at it. A better man than me by a factor of infinity in that regard. *applause*

@circuitsmith

4 жыл бұрын

There were two other Castle shots bigger than Mike: Romeo 11MT, Yankee 13.5MT. www.nuclearweaponarchive.org/Usa/Tests/Castle.html

16:56 Slight correction is needed here. The test that the Professor is referring to, where the expected yield was low but the delivered yield was 15Mt was not the first thermonuclear device. The first device was Ivy Mike (Operation Ivy test series) where the device was the "sausage" and it was actually an entire installation and it produced 10Mt. The device he is referring to, where the delivered yield was far greater than expected, was Castle Bravo (Castle test series) where its delivered yield was 15Mt and this indeed was monumental. Monumental in what it delivered relative to expectations, monumental as in the knowledge in physics it delivered and monumental in the destruction it caused; unfortunately. The physics behind the Castle Bravo "accident" is spectacular. How the Li7 isotope "impurity" in the Li6 target underwent fast fission as well but with the uranium tamper under intense neutron flux is just unreal. The physics in this all is just staggering.

@TyrannoJoris_Rex

2 жыл бұрын

Also should mention Operation Ivy took place in 1952, not 1956

A superb channel hosted by a superb explainer. This guy educates. I'm recommending this one to my friends.

As usual, Prof, this is both terrifying and reassuring.

Used to work out at White Sands... I got to stop by Trinity many times and yea... you'd even find a few specs of green glass.

@DomDoesCoasters

4 жыл бұрын

Trinitite

This doc rocks!

I grew up in Halifax Nova Scotia on stories of the horrific incident of the Halifax explosion. The largest non nuclear blast and so I learned at a young age that you don’t need uranium to make one hell of a mushroom cloud.

I love this guy hes the best at explain complicated physics

The say the smartest man is the one who can explain very complex subjects in terms which the lay person can understand. That's this man. Great videos.

This video just became incredibly relevant.....

I always understood the formation of the mushroom "cap" to be partially torroidal in nature.? I.e. the drag from the outside of the column rolled the edges down, while the continuing flow of super heated material pushed the insides up.

i love how ill watch this professor for hours but wont show up to my own classes.

Part if the mushroom cloud's shape is due to the explosion 'bouncing' off the ground. The 'first' H-bomb presented was not the first H-bomb. The first was Ivy Mike, a liquid system and had a predicted yield. The second one, Castle Bravo, was the one that had the unexpectedly large yield due to Li-6 becoming tritium and deuterium from all the fast neutrons. Anyway, I really enjoy your videos, especially the ones on Chernobyl and xenon poisoning.

@teresashinkansen9402

6 ай бұрын

Accurate knowledge and horse butts? Hello there fellow gentlemen.

thank you professor you are credit to mankind by freely sharing your knowledge, god bless you and your family.

@michaelblankenau6598

9 ай бұрын

Don't think he believes in any Gods

Correction - you don't need a really, really big explosion to create a mushroom cloud. Even a few grams of uncontained black powder will generate a mushroom cloud if the conditions are right.

These are great videos! One question though he said we weren't sure about Israel and South Africa, but didn't SA detonate a test bomb?

Best teacher ever

Prof, tell me what I need to know.

This is an important video, as there has been way too much misinformation about nuclear power!

@paulanderson79

3 жыл бұрын

I agree entirely. The dangers associated with nuclear power reactors are outrageously exaggerated. Nuclear states have to maintain general public fear of the word 'nuclear'. Without fear the weapons are useless. There's also the question of money. Governments and oil corporations are inextricably interlinked. There is still a fortune to be made from fossil fuels and no government or big oil company is gonna give that up. There is also a fortune to be made from the 'management' of reactor 'waste'. You wait til oil profit mountain starts to subside. The nuclear tune will change overnight.

@SchweinungHD

3 жыл бұрын

@@paulanderson79 Also, as stated in one of his videos, the benefits of nuclear power plants are in the long run, which means that the ones that potentially decides to go for nuclear power, will not be the ones that get credit for it.

After watching TMI and Chernobyl, and now this, I just have to subscribe. This dude is fascinating.

16:43 "got two different views of it" Two different bombs. The bomb on the ground (Ivy Mike) was more a "nuclear installation', not really a bomb but a building that blew up and crated a huge crater you can still find on google maps (search "Elugelab, Enewetak Atol"). Also it was more like 10 megatons in yield, the one with the unexpected yield was Castle Bravo, a proper bomb with solid lithium deuterium fuel. The bomb that falls from the sky (Ivy King) was a pure fission bomb that would produce half a megaton of yield as backup.

@shelbyz1988

4 жыл бұрын

@bami2 yeah, they were using cryogenic D-T so they knew exactly how much reactants they were dealing with in Ivy Mike. They didn’t think the lithium-7 in Castle Bravo was going to contribute anything, it did.

For 239, you need a reactor that can be refuelled while in operation (candu, rbmk, etc) with low burn up (time in a reactor)

My understanding is that Stalin wanted 100 mega ton but the Russian scientist where afraid of cracking the earths core

@SciFiMangaGamesAnime

2 жыл бұрын

100mts is nothing compared to Chicxulub impact, its not about Earth's crust, instead, scientists where afraid of atmosphere itself igniting.

this guy is good.

The final bomb drawing looks like 70’s stoner art.

The scientists had so much confidence in the gun type bomb design that they didn't test it first. Trinity was an implosion type bomb. As an engineer, this is an ASTOUNDING level of confidence, considering this was a completely new (to humans) and untested form of energy.

No winners in an all-out nuclear confrontation. There's no such thing as a first-strike advantage.

Not sure how this showed up but I have to say I’m learning about something I didn’t know I was interested in and want to know because this of professors style. Even the comments are polite and thought provoking for a change

To be accurate, the Uranium Gun Bomb was not the first bomb, but the SECOND bomb, dropped on Hiroshima. The first was the Trinity test, a Plutonium implosion type, as was the Nagasaki bomb.

@circuitsmith

4 жыл бұрын

One could argue that Trinity was an experiment, not a bomb.

I love your videos! Also you sound like Dr. Spaceman on 30 Rock! I can't unhear it.

Also, keep in mind that modern Intercontinental ballistic missiles have multiple warheads that detonate in the atmosphere. Very scary!

16:35 I remember seeing this around high school age and thinking it looked like something out of Dragonball Z

The South African program was public knowledge by 1994, when the IAEA validated that the devices had been dismantled.

@patrichausammann

4 жыл бұрын

Correct, I was searching that comment, good job!👍

Bob Brinker is another expert in critical mass.

11:00 That's why Chernoyl reactor was built that weird way. This was Pu239 making machine just pretending to be a power plant.

The crazy part is that all the nuclear reactions take place (including triggering a fusion secondary) BEFORE the high explosives that trigger the fission primary blow apart the hohlraum and bomb casing. Craziness.

5:20 - 5:50 and 6:25 - 6:53 of course, and for people who are skeptical, i can quote a lot of example but here is one more recently, "the disaster over Beirut port in 2020". 500Tons of TNT equivalent which is another deal. Cause people sometimes says ¿How can a nuclear explosión can be equivalent to TNT? there's also the proof.

Technically, the first bomb was implosion (Trinity) if you are talking about the first type that got set off.

This Prof is highly intelligent and articulate... Who would have thought a nuclear physicist at a good university would be so learned.

@tommypetraglia4688

4 жыл бұрын

Chk out just a portion of his credentials: David N. Ruzic :: ECE ILLINOIS ece.illinois.edu/directory/profile/druzic PROFILE EDUCATION •Ph.D., Physics, Princeton University, 1984 •M.A., Physics, Princeton University, 1981 •B.S., Physics/Appl Math, Purdue, 1979 ACADEMIC POSITIONS •Abel Bliss Professor of Engineering, 2011 present •Affiliate in Micro and Nanotechnology Laboratory- December 2008-present (0%) •Director, Center for Plasma Material Interactions, 2004 - present •Associate Vice President for Administration, University Admin., Aug 2002 - Sept 2005 •Faculty Fellow, Vice Presidents for Academic Affairs Office, August 2000 - July 2002 •Assistant Dean, College of Engineering, Academic Programs - 1995-1996 •Professor, 1994-presentAffiliate Faculty in Dept. of Electrical and Computer Engineering, December 1991 - present •Associate Professor, 1989-1994 •Affiliate Faculty in Dept. of Material Science and Engineering, June 1988 - 2002 •Honors Faculty for Undergraduate Campus Honors Program, January 1988 - present •Graduate Faculty in Physics, November 1986 - present DOCUMENTS •Biodata_IT_Final OTHER PROFESSIONAL EMPLOYMENT •Research Staff I, Princeton University Plasma Physics Lab, February 1984 - June 1984 •Research Assistant, Princeton University Plasma Physics Lab, Sept. 1979 - Feb. 1984 •Teaching Assistant, Purdue University, October 1978 - August 1979 •Professorial Assistant, Purdue University, Sept. 1975 - May 1977 MAJOR CONSULTING ACTIVITIES •LAM Research -- Expert Witness for Physical Vapor Deposition patent dispute •View - Expert Witness for Physical Vapor Deposition patent dispute •TOSOH SMD Inc. - Sputtering Target AnalysisKurt J. Lesker- Expert Witness for Magnetron Sputtering patent dispute •Varian - Expert Witness for Physical Vapor Deposition patent disputes •Novellus Systems - Expert Witness for Physical Vapor Deposition patent dispute •Fannie and John Hertz Foundation - Interviewer and Selection Committee RESIDENT INSTRUCTION •HIST 248, “Science Technology and the Human Condition” (co-created this course) •NPRE 521, "Interaction of Radiation with Matter"NPRE 458, "Nuclear Engineering Design"NPRE 452, "Advanced Nuclear Engineering Laboratory" (created this course) •NPRE 451, "Nuclear Engineering Laboratory"NPRE 429, “Plasma Engineering” (created this course) •NPRE 423, "Plasma Laboratory" (created this course) •NPRE 421, "Introduction to Controlled Thermonuclear Fusion" •NPRE 402, "Nuclear Power Engineering" •NPRE 241, "Introduction to Radiation Protection” •NPRE 201, "Advanced Energy Systems" (created this course) •NPRE 101, "Introduction to Energy" (created this course) COURSE DEVELOPMENT What you need to know -- Energy, Environment and Everyday Stuff. Massively-Open On-Line Course (MOOC) with Coursera •HIST 248- Science Technology and the Human Condition, Co-Creator •NPRE 452- Advanced Nuclear Engineering Laboratory, Creator •NPRE 429- Plasma Engineering, Creator •NPRE 423 - Plasma Laboratory, Creator •NPRE 201- Advanced Energy System, Creator •NPRE 101 - Introduction to Energy, Creator { And there's more... }°:

@TS-jm7jm

4 жыл бұрын

@@tommypetraglia4688 that is an impressive work record

@tommypetraglia4688

4 жыл бұрын

@@TS-jm7jm If ever I regarded myself as having a modicum of intelligence a person like this quickly extinguishes that

@TS-jm7jm

4 жыл бұрын

@@tommypetraglia4688 i wouldn't go so far as to say that, rather I'd say that in this area you've been lazy in your time, he obviously hasn't.

Impressed with this mans knowledge. Also impressed that we is writing everything backwards so we can see it

@troyangelo3999

3 жыл бұрын

Writing backwards like that without skipping a beat is the biggest flex

@keithfukaton3135

3 жыл бұрын

The video must be flipped because of how seamless it is

Perhaps a review of the miscalculation for Castle Bravo. Lithium 7, it turns out, is fissionable material, when the atomic 'detonator' in a hydrogen bomb converts it instantly to Lithium 6.

@Agarwaen

3 жыл бұрын

rather, the cross section for neutron capture wasn't known accurately enough, which is why way more than expected was turned into fusion (not fission) fuel.

I remember at uni where I could not use Wikipedia as reference material, End of video: 100% Wikipedia references from university professor *-_-

@beachcomber2008

4 жыл бұрын

Wikipedia is a SOURCE of references. Ignoring this fact doesn't say much for one's intellect.

@bami2

4 жыл бұрын

It's high school physics class subject level though

@jadefalcon001

4 жыл бұрын

The source citations were for the images used, not the information. They're giving credit for the things they showed, not what they said.

@WadcaWymiaru

4 жыл бұрын

But there is a TONS of crap in the wikipedia...like in the "global warming" article. All false...

@michaelmoorrees3585

3 жыл бұрын

Back when I was in college, Wikipedia, and the modern Internet did not exist. Using an encyclopedia, was fine in grade school, and high school, but would NOT pass muster in college. In university they expect more out of you. At least, now you have the assistance of the internet, instead of driving around to various university libraries, with several rolls of nickels. The nickels were needed to make xerox copies of the reference materials, as they would not allow you to check those out. I was one of the few fortunate people to have access to a word processor, on the computer at work. Most other students used typewriters. I think I got an "A", just because the margins on both sides lined up.

I thought the gun style bomb came after the implosion style, not the other way around?

Wonder what the smallest amount of fissible material is needed to create an explosive device .

5:46 - people often comment about seeing such a mushroom cloud about why parts of it are pink. The pink is the nitrogen in the air that was oxidized because of the heat (this is real chemical burning just as happens in the engine of your car, not the metaphoric nuclear "burning"). The pink is the NOx compounds. So, yes, an atomic explosion is, on top of everything else, a little polluting.

Thanks David! One question: what was the purpose for the polystyrene in the hydrogen bomb?

@emilen2

4 жыл бұрын

Being invisible to x-rays/gamma rays, so they can compress the secondary to the point of fusion.

@uegvdczuVF

4 жыл бұрын

Polystyrene *absorbs* radiation, so much so, that it turns in to plasma. The pressure of this plasma starts of a reaction in the Plutonium spark-plug. So essentially it acts as a chemical fuel for the secondary like high explosive is for the primary.

@emilen2

4 жыл бұрын

@@uegvdczuVF Oh I was completely wrong, thanks for correction 👍

Could you explain Neutron Bombs next¿¿¿

I'm surprised no one made a "your mom" joke considering the title of this video.

For us non-professionals, what kind of reading would you recommend ? So far I've read both books written by Richard Rhodes (The Making of the Atomic Bomb & Dark Sun).

@NathanDudani

3 жыл бұрын

Maybe nuclear museum material and then what that material cites

In the 1950 and 1960s the USA and Soviets made larger and larger hydrogen bombs. The USA changed that and started to make smaller bombs. They also developed multiple warheads on one missile. It took a long time for the Russians to come to that conclusion that smaller bombs were better than one big bomb.

@numberstation

2 жыл бұрын

I believe Soviet missiles had a larger CEP than American ones and they compensated for this by using larger warheads. As their technology improved this was no longer necessary.

7:25 Tokyo was burned to the ground with conventional bombs and Incendiary devices dropped from planes. An official of Japan was quoted as saying something like "1 plane, 1 bomb, 1 ruined city or 1000 planes, 1000 bombs and 1 ruined city. What's the difference?" Same was true in Dresden and many other cities across Europe and Japan.

The world would be less ignorant if more high school teachers were like him

Radioactive fail out only happens on surface detonations as the ground in the immediate vicinity of the explosion is contaminated before being pushed out of the way of the explosion. Above ground and below ground explosions leave little to zero surface or airborne radioactive fallout.

@ediakaran

3 жыл бұрын

You're wrong, both of the bombs exploded 500+ meters above ground and it was planned. Fallout was relatively low in both cases.

@mathewm7136

3 жыл бұрын

@@ediakaran doesn't change the point.

The prompt radiation in Hiroshima was more significant than usual because of the flimsy houses in the city. In open air, the bomb would still give lethal burns farther than the radiation effect. But if there's any object blocking the view, such as a thin wall, you're protected from the burns. Gamma radiation goes through the thin wall however. Also, in case of collapse, the flimsy houses were less likely to kill occupants. Since people could survive both the thermal radiation and shockwave this way, those of them inside the ionizing radiation radius were able to get a significant dose.

The step into MTs was made with the H-Bomb, as there was never a pure fission MT bomb. Ivy King was the biggest pure fission with 500kT.

One small mistake, UN Security Council was formed in 1946, when US was the sole nuclear power. It was formed by WW2 winners, who were naturally in best position to develop the bomb in the 1940s and 50s. Communist China didn't come member until 1971, before that Taiwan was seen as chinese representative.

The general public keeps associating nuclear weapons with nuclear power. This is like saying Napalm (weaponized gasoline/phosphorus incendiary bombs) and the gas in you car are the same thing. Actually ridiculous. The main point is also that you REALLY CANNOT make a nuclear weapon from reactor spent fuel, even if you build the chemical factory to extract the plutonium (called PUREX).

@paulanderson79

3 жыл бұрын

I agree entirely. The dangers associated with nuclear power reactors are outrageously exaggerated. Nuclear states have to maintain general public fear of the word 'nuclear'. Without fear the weapons are useless. There's also the question of money. Governments and oil corporations are inextricably interlinked. There is still a fortune to be made from fossil fuels and no government or big oil company is gonna give that up. There is also a fortune to be made from the 'management' of reactor 'waste'. You wait til oil profit mountain starts to subside. The nuclear tune will change overnight.

Soooo much better at 1.75x. I LOVE these videos but he talks way too slow.

I read that Nikita Khrushchev wanted his physicists and engineers to build a 100 megaton hydrogen bomb but one of his physicists talked him down to 50...

The professor is pretty ripped.

16:13 Uhhhh, the reflections inside the secondary case are of radiation (mainly x-rays), not neutrons. Yes, the neutrons are needed to fire the sparkplug, but only after it is compressed by the radiation and plasma energy raining down on the tamper. That was the Teller-Ulam secret, use of radiation to compress the secondary. 16:45 The falling bomb is a different test, done at the NTS I think. The Ivy/Mike wasn't dropped - it was an industrial cryo plant feeding the bomb inside the "shot cab", a shed that kept the rain off, shown in the video at 16:38. The yield of Ivy/Mike was 10.5 mt, to be outdone by Castle/Bravo 18 months later at 16 MT.

@chap666ish

4 жыл бұрын

I'm glad I wasn't the only person to notice the Prof's inaccuracies in this video. It was Castle Bravo that had the unexpectedly high yield as it was the first to use Lithium Deuteride as the fusion fuel which had an unexpected boost from Lithium 7 being converted to Tritium during the fission/fusion. Ivy Mike - the first "hydrogen" bomb - used cryogenic liquid deuterium and its yield was within the forecast range.

@MichaelKatzmann

4 жыл бұрын

The speculation is that the the radiation pressure (from the reflected X-rays) is not enough and that it is the ablation pressure of the tamper surface that compresses the secondary. You are correct the only purpose of the primary A bomb is to produce the X rays for compression. (since the X-Rays move at the speed of light you don't need the symmetry and lens that you do for the chemical explosive in the primary). The neutron flux to create the tritium comes from the spark-plug. The case itself can be U238 which can take part in the reaction giving a fission-fusion-fission sequence (with a large proportion of energy coming from fission)

@stephanbrunker

4 жыл бұрын

The video footage is also mixed up somewhat. 16:33 shows the Ivy Mike building with the radio tower beside it. And that was at Eniwetok, not Bikini. Castle Bravo then was at Bikini with the solid Lithium Deuteride fuel and a much higher yield than predicted because of the reaction of the Li-7. And if at 16:43 the footage shows a falling bomb, that has to be a very different test altogether, because after the Able drop was quite a bit off the mark, for a long time all the tests were made stationary. 17:10 doesn't look like either Ivy Mike or Castle Bravo.

@circuitsmith

4 жыл бұрын

@@stephanbrunker I'm pretty sure 17:10 is Ivy King, a 500KT fission device.

@stephanbrunker

4 жыл бұрын

@@MichaelKatzmann Afaik, the three-stage fission-fusion-fission device was considered for the Tzar Bomba test, but not realised - that much fission would have increased the fallout of all previous tests together with 25%. That bomb was already strong enough that most of the pressure wave escaped from the atmosphere. With only two stages, it was also the cleanest bomb with 97% of the yield generated from fusion and being air-dropped.

The way he said Tsar Bomba did the weapon justice.

@allangibson2408

2 жыл бұрын

And the test version of the Tsar Bomba was neutered - the full deployment version was supposed to have at least twice the yield (but would destroy the aircraft dropping it if air dropped - the intent was that it would be a missile warhead on a Soyuz R7 class launcher).

Being blown to dust seems quick at least .

The first bomb ever detonated, Trinity, was actually an implosion-type device, not a gun-type.

@koyotekola6916

4 жыл бұрын

Correct. It was a plutonium bomb, of which was of the type dropped on Nagasaki. That's why they called it Fat Boy.

@aleksandarrudic3694

4 жыл бұрын

@@koyotekola6916 You mean 'Fat Man' (named after Winston Churchill). The one dropped on Hiroshima ('Little Boy', named after Franklin D. Roosevelt) was a gun-type device, made of U235. This design was not tested before use for two reasons: First, it was regarded so simple and reliable that it did not need any testing, and second, producing that much U235 was very expensive - in fact, Los Alamos laboratory could only produce enough U235 for one bomb in the given timeframe so they could not spend it on testing. Two bombs of two different types were developed in parallel in order to achieve the goal of having the bomb before the War ended with greater certainty. The preferred design was the implosion-type - it used cheaper fuel and a smaller quantity of it, but was extremely technically challenging. The gun-type was a safe alternative, although much more expensive in terms of fissile material. As we all know now, they managed to produce both before the war ended (at the great misfortune of many). As far as I know, the Little Boy was the only gun-type design ever produced and the only design that used Uranium as fuel (it could be that Nort Korea or Iran developed or tested such weapons but in well established nuclear states all nuclear warheads have Plutonium cores and are implosion-type designs). By the way, Plutonium cannot be used in gun-type assembly because it would fizzle - if two parts of the supercritical mass would be slammed together, the chain reaction would start before they are completely assembled, so they would 'bounce off' each other, producing a burst of neutrons and a relatively insignificant energy yield. I don't know exactly why this would happen (a nuclear physicist could help), but I guess it has something to do with the speed of neutrons and the neutron absorption crosssections.

@koyotekola6916

4 жыл бұрын

@@aleksandarrudic3694 Correct - Fat Man. I thought they named it after Chris Farley. :) I didn't know producing U-235 was expensive, even in large quantities. I always though producing Plutonium was much more expensive. I'll research it. Seems to me that if you push two piles of uranium together, many of the neutrons would escape on the other side and above and below. Hence, the implosion method was designed to grab all the neutrons and produce a much more potent critical mass.

@bodyno3158

4 жыл бұрын

Gun-type is a surely-will-go-boom design, they were not sure if implosion-type works or not, so they decided to test a implosion-type nuke and drop that surely-will-go-boom nuke in Hiroshima first. Actually I think that two nukes saved more people than they killed, and Japan should be glad that US decided to nuke them.

@UnicaLuce

4 жыл бұрын

I think the bomb's name is gadget not trinity

They shouldn't even show the gun type bomb as an example anymore. It was obsolete the same year it was tested.

I missed on the chart for amounts of Plutonium vs. Uranium required for a weapon what the numerical value stood for in the left column. Was it Lbs, Oz....GRAMS!

@tonyc7352

3 жыл бұрын

Kilograms

@ericluffy7970

3 жыл бұрын

@@tonyc7352 whew. That's a little more reassuring I suppose

If everyone in world understood the power of these weapons, and these people were sane, why would war ever happen? History seems to repeat.

Castle bravo. Thry thought lithium 7 wouldn't react with the fusion material.

@Evan_Bell

3 жыл бұрын

They thought it wouldn't breed tritium.

Crazy that we still feel the need to spend a Trillion dollars to upgrade and miniaturize our nuclear arsenal.

How do they suspend the core in a vacuum? I've always wondered.

@jmcooney2000

Жыл бұрын

I think that level of detail is a bit beyond wikipedia ;)

@nickpn23

Жыл бұрын

@@jmcooney2000 lol.

Project Orion is the most accessible way to reach other stars in a human lifetime. If we needed to not be a single stray GRB from extinction and were in a rush, nuking the back of a ship to make it go fast is probably what we'd do.

This man could make paint drying seem amazing and have you feeling dumb for not having his explanation.

Fantastic Human being right here. Extremely Intelligent, Entertaining, and leaves politics out of it.

I don't think there are many bombs in the megaton range anymore. Most are in the 300 to 400 kiloton range, more efficient somehow in that size.

@buzzkill4623

4 жыл бұрын

has to do with targeting. enormous yield bombs were needed because targeting was poor. the better your targeting and delivery are, the smaller bomb you need.

How's a nuclear bomb blast so big? Is the critical mass has enormous power to have an enormous blast radius. Is there a detonator or both the critical mass heat up so much that it can make a huge blast radius?

@Agarwaen

3 жыл бұрын

a huge amount of energy, that's all

The research on this video is disappointing, Castle Bravo was not expected to have 3 but 5 MTs : "The yield of 15 megatons was 3 times that of the 5 Mt predicted by its designers"

The first bomb, Trinity, was a plutonium bomb. Hiroshima was uranium, Nagasaki was plutonium. So, Hiroshima was basicallya weapons test.

Israel definitely has nukes. South Africa dropped and dismantled their nuclear program at the end of the 80s,if I remember correctly. But they did build about 6 nuclear devices.

Plutonium does occur naturally - it is constantly raining from space where it is made in supernovae. It is just very very rare.

I'd rather be incinerated, turned to dust, and blown away than have to live through the fallout in the aftermath. That is depending on whether the weapon was an airburst, or groundburst. Though looking at Cold War era maps of probable fallout in the event of a total release if you are living east of the Rockies you'll probably be blanketed with fallout anyways.

@NathanDudani

3 жыл бұрын

I don't think you'd care post incineration but I get what you're trying to say

Funny fact: body fat has nearly ten times MORE energy than TNT is relasing en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_density Diesel fuel 45.6 MJ/Kg Body fat 38 MJ/kg TNT 4.184 MJ/kg

Why doesn't the tritium in jupiter explode?

United States nuclear reactor commission has 4 division 1 research and development 2 military weapons 3 waste nuclear 4 process control also known as grid. All these use atomic elements that are radio active, they are always on. It is like throwing hairr blow dryers in a closet up

@karenfreeman1601

2 жыл бұрын

The closet keeps getting hotter and hotter no turn off or escape. One day the door opens a burst of very hot air or in atomic it is radiation witch is related to 12 variable health effects death, burns cancer, weight loss dehydration, hair loss impotence, vision problems ,birth defects, and more..At present we have leakage and pressure problems from over production that need solutions and war and faulty nuclear power products act like atomic bombs. Mixing war and technology rare Earth's elements in the newest product create infernos never before seen. No nukes no nukes look at pictures of atomic bombs explosion nuclear tell leaders stop please no methane ice stop before the planet blows up

Ever notice in the trinity shot as the cloud is going up the camera seems to move weird? Thank berlin brixner for pulling the cable to get that shot. Google the name. Berlin brixner real person not a joke....one of the Manhattan project camera men

Professor Ruzic kind of reminds me of Bryan Cranston - if Walter White were a nuclear physicist instead of a chemistry teacher... I wonder what color meth Prof. Ruzic would make?

@bugraegebaydar9409

2 жыл бұрын

He makes weapon grades uranium instead. So yellow I guess. His buyers would be even more "eccentric"

He has a few things wrong there… the first bomb used uranium… the gun type was the first used as in war and used plutonium… etc…