|
|
|
|
|
by littlestymaar
70 days ago
|
|
> Similarly to how the hard part is to cause a self-sustaining fissile chain reaction, and once you do making the bomb bigger is not the hard part. I don't like this analogy very much, because in practice making a nuclear reaction is much, much easier than making a nuclear bomb. You don't need any kind of enrichment or anything, just a big enough pile of natural uranium and graphite [1]. Making a bomb on the other hand, required an insane amount of engineering: from doing isotope separation to enrich U235 to an absurd level (and / or, extract plutonium from the wastes of a nuclear reactor) to designing a way to concentrate a beyond critical mass of fissile element. The Manhattan project isn't famous without reason, it was an unprecedented concerted effort that wouldn't have happened remotely as quickly in peacetime. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_Pile-1 |
|