- #1
IDNeon
- 30
- 4
It is my understanding there are two alternative paths to a bomb, one which the North Koreans have possessed for over 30+ years which is a graphite moderated natural uranium fuel reactor.
A 3rd path is the possibility of doping Thorium to produce short lived 233-protactinium and separate this product before it decays into 233-Uranium. Which maybe the bomb characteristics may be very different for a 233-U bomb, or even to be triggered by 233-U (even though I've read that there have been 233-U/239Pu bombs that weren't fizziles).
So why all this focus on enriched 235-U like it's some holy grail?
Is this just fluff to the masses that the media doles out? For instance a big part of shutting down Iran's bomb making ability was to control its plutonium pathways which arguably are now fully controlled (fuel is given, spent fuel is collected, reprocessing is validated to not have occurred).
<Moderator's note: Political comment removed>
A 3rd path is the possibility of doping Thorium to produce short lived 233-protactinium and separate this product before it decays into 233-Uranium. Which maybe the bomb characteristics may be very different for a 233-U bomb, or even to be triggered by 233-U (even though I've read that there have been 233-U/239Pu bombs that weren't fizziles).
So why all this focus on enriched 235-U like it's some holy grail?
Is this just fluff to the masses that the media doles out? For instance a big part of shutting down Iran's bomb making ability was to control its plutonium pathways which arguably are now fully controlled (fuel is given, spent fuel is collected, reprocessing is validated to not have occurred).
<Moderator's note: Political comment removed>
Last edited by a moderator: