How great the world would be without bombs

  • Thread starter Dagenais
  • Start date
In summary, bombs have played a significant role in the advancement of technology and understanding of the universe. From creating innovation in aerodynamics and demolition, to aiding in the discovery of new elements and shaping our understanding of nuclear explosions in space, bombs have had a significant impact on mankind. While their destructive power is undeniable, it is important to recognize and acknowledge the positive contributions they have made to our world.
  • #1
Dagenais
290
4
You know that saying, "imagine how great the world would be without bombs"?

Would it be great?

Bombs must have had to have helped nuclear technology or mankind in some way.

I know guns have lead to important inventions.

I was wondering if you could tell me what some of those inventions are.
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
  • #2
Tons of airplane and aerodynamics research has been done because of bombs.

Wings are more resistant to flutter when bombs (or engines) are placed underneath and forward. I'm not sure, but it's possible the phenomena was first observed when wind-tunnel tests were done with bombs under the wings.
 
  • #3
Don't forget demolition - not just buildings, but how the heck do you dig a tunnel through solid rock without TNT?

RE: nuclear. Nuclear bomb and power research went hand in hand at the beginning. Each benefited the other.
 
  • #4
The universe is better described, according to the latest observations of the Hubble expansion rate from distant supernovae flashes, as a 10^55 megaton bomb detonation for times beyond 3 minutes. Obviously the initial energy release mechanism is different from a fission bomb, although the creation of the heavy elements in supsequent star explosions has some similarities to hydrogen bomb capture reactions. If you look up the history of elements 99 and 100, you see both were isolated first from fallout of the 10 megaton Mike shot at Eniwetok in 1952.

Later, they were duplicated in the laboratory. Successive neutron captures in supernovae explosions created the elements iron and calcium, as well as uranium, found in nature. People moan about nuclear explosion physics without understanding how useful it was in making them. There is also a general misunderstanding about the nuclear radiation environment in space. People seem to think that the radiation level on the moon, which lacks the 10 metres of water (equivalent) radiation shield of the Earth's atmosphere, is less than that on the earth, whereas it was actually found to be something like 100 times higher due to cosmic rays. The universe is basically a nuclear explosion, and this is covered up by force-fitting General Relativity to the Hubble constant, instead of scaling the universe to a nuclear explosion in space such as the starfish detonation at 400 km altitude in 1962. The U.S. Defence Dept has a lot of responsibility for excessive secrecy, since it has spent millions developing computer simulations for nuclear explosions in a vacuum. (see http://members.lycos.co.uk/nigelbryancook/ for more)
 

1. What impact would the elimination of bombs have on global conflicts?

The elimination of bombs would greatly reduce the severity of global conflicts. Bombs are often used as a means of mass destruction and can cause significant harm to both humans and the environment. Without bombs, conflicts would likely be resolved through more peaceful means.

2. Would the elimination of bombs make the world completely safe?

No, the world would not be completely safe without bombs. While bombs are a major threat to global security, there are other weapons and forms of violence that still exist. However, the elimination of bombs would greatly decrease the risk of large-scale destruction and loss of life.

3. How would the elimination of bombs affect military strategies?

The elimination of bombs would require a shift in military strategies. Without bombs, countries would need to rely on other weapons and tactics in times of war. This could potentially lead to more strategic thinking and a focus on minimizing harm to civilians.

4. Would the elimination of bombs have any negative consequences?

There may be some negative consequences to the elimination of bombs. For example, countries that heavily rely on their military power may feel less secure without the option of using bombs. Additionally, the elimination of bombs could potentially lead to an increase in conventional weapons being used in conflicts.

5. How feasible is it to completely eliminate bombs?

Completely eliminating bombs would be a difficult and complex task. It would require cooperation and agreement among all countries to disarm and destroy their existing bombs, as well as strict regulations to prevent the production and use of new bombs. However, with strong international efforts and commitment, it is possible to significantly reduce the number of bombs in the world.

Similar threads

  • Science Fiction and Fantasy Media
Replies
15
Views
536
  • Nuclear Engineering
6
Replies
191
Views
5K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Nuclear Engineering
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • Nuclear Engineering
2
Replies
66
Views
14K
  • Sci-Fi Writing and World Building
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • Nuclear Engineering
Replies
19
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • Nuclear Engineering
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
602
Back
Top