Estás en: Inicio >> Foros >> Humanidades >> Ciencia
Ciencia /

¿Las armas nucleares son buenas o malas? Cómo fabricar una Atómica.

Participa en el tema ¿Las armas nucleares son buenas o malas? Cómo fabricar una Atómica. en el foro Ciencia.
El secreto de la fisión nuclear es bastante viejo, muchos años antes del 45 habían ...

Buscar en este tema:
1 2 >
 
  •  
    jjluisgil escribió el 14/05/2005 a las 22:46 hs.
     
    ¿Mensaje inapropiado?
    #1 ¿Las armas nucleares son buenas o malas? Cómo fabricar una Atómica.
    El secreto de la fisión nuclear es bastante viejo, muchos años antes del 45 habían un grupo de personas que ya lo sabían, conocimiento que recibieron de otros y estos de otros instructores.(Todos humanos, no es necesario mezclar extraterrestres).
    La verdad que hacer una Bomba Atómica de unos 20 kilotones no es nada dificil, solo tienen que saber algo de física, algo ma matemática y conseguir 2,3 kg de U235 puro (mejor 3 kg así sobrepasamos la masa crítica). Explicación esquemas y planos aquí van :



    ================================================== ==========================

    -------------------------------------------------

    - Documentation and Diagrams of the Atomic Bomb -

    -------------------------------------------------

    ================================================== ==========================

    ______________

    / \

    <-} DISCLAIMER {->

    \______________/



    The information contained in this file is strictly for academic use

    alone. Outlaw Labs will bear no responsibility for any use otherwise. It

    would be wise to note that the personnel who design and construct these

    devices are skilled physicists and are more knowledgeable in these matters

    than any layperson can ever hope to be... Should a layperson attempt to

    build a device such as this, chances are s/he would probably kill his/herself

    not by a nuclear detonation, but rather through radiation exposure. We here

    at Outlaw Labs do not recommend using this file beyond the realm of casual or

    academic curiosity.





    ================================================== ==========================



    -----------------------

    -+ Table of Contents +-

    -----------------------





    I. The History of the Atomic Bomb

    ------------------------------

    A). Development (The Manhattan Project)

    B). Detonation

    1). Hiroshima

    2). Nagasaki

    3). Byproducts of atomic detonations

    4). Blast Zones





    II. Nuclear Fission/Nuclear Fusion

    ------------------------------

    A). Fission (A-Bomb) & Fusion (H-Bomb)

    B). U-235, U-238 and Plutonium





    III. The Mechanism of The Bomb

    -------------------------

    A). Altimeter

    B). Air Pressure Detonator

    C). Detonating Head(s)

    D). Explosive Charge(s)

    E). Neutron Deflector

    F). Uranium & Plutonium

    G). Lead Shield

    H). Fuses





    IV. The Diagram of The Bomb

    -----------------------

    A). The Uranium Bomb

    B). The Plutonium Bomb









    ================================================== ==========================



    --------------------------------

    File courtesy of Outlaw Labs

    --------------------------------







    I. The History of the Atomic Bomb

    ------------------------------



    On August 2nd 1939, just before the beginning of World War II, Albert

    Einstein wrote to then President Franklin D. Roosevelt. Einstein and several

    other scientists told Roosevelt of efforts in Nazi Germany to purify U-235

    with which might in turn be used to build an atomic bomb. It was shortly

    thereafter that the United States Government began the serious undertaking

    known only then as the Manhattan Project. Simply put, the Manhattan Project

    was committed to expedient research and production that would produce a viable

    atomic bomb.



    The most complicated issue to be addressed was the production of ample

    amounts of `enriched' uranium to sustain a chain reaction. At the time,

    Uranium-235 was very hard to extract. In fact, the ratio of conversion from

    Uranium ore to Uranium metal is 500:1. An additional drawback is that the 1

    part of Uranium that is finally refined from the ore consists of over 99%

    Uranium-238, which is practically useless for an atomic bomb. To make it even

    more difficult, U-235 and U-238 are precisely similar in their chemical

    makeup. This proved to be as much of a challenge as separating a solution of

    sucrose from a solution of glucose. No ordinary chemical extraction could

    separate the two isotopes. Only mechanical methods could effectively separate

    U-235 from U-238. Several scientists at Columbia University managed to solve

    this dilemma.



    A massive enrichment laboratory/plant was constructed at Oak Ridge,

    Tennessee. H.C. Urey, along with his associates and colleagues at Columbia

    University, devised a system that worked on the principle of gaseous

    diffusion. Following this process, Ernest O. Lawrence (inventor of the

    Cyclotron) at the University of California in Berkeley implemented a process

    involving magnetic separation of the two isotopes.



    Following the first two processes, a gas centrifuge was used to further

    separate the lighter U-235 from the heavier non-fissionable U-238 by their

    mass. Once all of these procedures had been completed, all that needed to be

    done was to put to the test the entire concept behind atomic fission. [For

    more information on these procedures of refining Uranium, see Section 3.]



    Over the course of six years, ranging from 1939 to 1945, more than 2

    billion dollars were spent on the Manhattan Project. The formulas for

    refining Uranium and putting together a working bomb were created and seen to

    their logical ends by some of the greatest minds of our time. Among these

    people who unleashed the power of the atomic bomb was J. Robert Oppenheimer.



    Oppenheimer was the major force behind the Manhattan Project. He

    literally ran the show and saw to it that all of the great minds working on

    this project made their brainstorms work. He oversaw the entire project from

    its conception to its completion.



    Finally the day came when all at Los Alamos would find out whether or not

    The Gadget (code-named as such during its development) was either going to be

    the colossal dud of the century or perhaps end the war. It all came down to

    a fateful morning of midsummer, 1945.



    At 5:29:45 (Mountain War Time) on July 16th, 1945, in a white blaze that

    stretched from the basin of the Jemez Mountains in northern New Mexico to the

    still-dark skies, The Gadget ushered in the Atomic Age. The light of the

    explosion then turned orange as the atomic fireball began shooting upwards at

    360 feet per second, reddening and pulsing as it cooled. The characteristic

    mushroom cloud of radioactive vapor materialized at 30,000 feet. Beneath the

    cloud, all that remained of the soil at the blast site were fragments of jade

    green radioactive glass. ...All of this caused by the heat of the reaction.



    The brilliant light from the detonation pierced the early morning skies

    with such intensity that residents from a faraway neighboring community would

    swear that the sun came up twice that day. Even more astonishing is that a

    blind girl saw the flash 120 miles away.



    Upon witnessing the explosion, reactions among the people who created

    it were mixed. Isidor Rabi felt that the equilibrium in nature had been

    upset -- as if humankind had become a threat to the world it inhabited.

    J. Robert Oppenheimer, though ecstatic about the success of the project,

    quoted a remembered fragment from Bhagavad Gita. "I am become Death," he

    said, "the destroyer of worlds." Ken Bainbridge, the test director, told

    Oppenheimer, "Now we're all sons of bitches."



    Several participants, shortly after viewing the results, signed petitions

    against loosing the monster they had created, but their protests fell on deaf

    ears. As it later turned out, the Jornada del Muerto of New Mexico was not

    the last site on planet Earth to experience an atomic explosion.



    As many know, atomic bombs have been used only twice in warfare. The

    first and foremost blast site of the atomic bomb is Hiroshima. A Uranium

    bomb (which weighed in at over 4 & 1/2 tons) nicknamed "Little Boy" was

    dropped on Hiroshima August 6th, 1945. The Aioi Bridge, one of 81 bridges

    connecting the seven-branched delta of the Ota River, was the aiming point of

    the bomb. Ground Zero was set at 1,980 feet. At 0815 hours, the bomb was

    dropped from the Enola Gay. It missed by only 800 feet. At 0816 hours, in

    the flash of an instant, 66,000 people were killed and 69,000 people were

    injured by a 10 kiloton atomic explosion.



    The point of total vaporization from the blast measured one half of a

    mile in diameter. Total destruction ranged at one mile in diameter. Severe

    blast damage carried as far as two miles in diameter. At two and a half

    miles, everything flammable in the area burned. The remaining area of the

    blast zone was riddled with serious blazes that stretched out to the final

    edge at a little over three miles in diameter. [See diagram below for blast

    ranges from the atomic blast.]



    On August 9th 1945, Nagasaki fell to the same treatment as Hiroshima.

    Only this time, a Plutonium bomb nicknamed "Fat Man" was dropped on the city.

    Even though the "Fat Man" missed by over a mile and a half, it still leveled

    nearly half the city. Nagasaki's population dropped in one split-second from

    422,000 to 383,000. 39,000 were killed, over 25,000 were injured. That

    blast was less than 10 kilotons as well. Estimates from physicists who have

    studied each atomic explosion state that the bombs that were used had utilized

    only 1/10th of 1 percent of their respective explosive capabilities.



    While the mere explosion from an atomic bomb is deadly enough, its

    destructive ability doesn't stop there. Atomic fallout creates another hazard

    as well. The rain that follows any atomic detonation is laden with

    radioactive particles. Many survivors of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki blasts

    succumbed to radiation poisoning due to this occurance.



    The atomic detonation also has the hidden lethal surprise of affecting

    the future generations of those who live through it. Leukemia is among the

    greatest of afflictions that are passed on to the offspring of survivors.



    While the main purpose behind the atomic bomb is obvious, there are many

    by-products that have been brought into consideration in the use of all

    weapons atomic. With one small atomic bomb, a massive area's communications,

    travel and machinery will grind to a dead halt due to the EMP (Electro-

    Magnetic Pulse) that is radiated from a high-altitude atomic detonation.

    These high-level detonations are hardly lethal, yet they deliver a serious

    enough EMP to scramble any and all things electronic ranging from copper wires

    all the way up to a computer's CPU within a 50 mile radius.



    At one time, during the early days of The Atomic Age, it was a popular

    notion that one day atomic bombs would one day be used in mining operations

    and perhaps aid in the construction of another Panama Canal. Needless to say,

    it never came about. Instead, the military applications of atomic destruction

    increased. Atomic tests off of the Bikini Atoll and several other sites were

    common up until the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty was introduced. Photos of nuclear

    test sites here in the United States can be obtained through the Freedom of

    Information Act.



    ================================================== ==========================



    - Breakdown of the Atomic Bomb's Blast Zones -

    ----------------------------------------------





    .

    . .





    . . .

    . .

    [5] [4] [5]

    .

    . . . .



    . . . .



    . [3] _ [3] .

    . . [2] . .

    . _._ .

    . .~ ~. .

    . . [4] . .[2]. [1] .[2]. . [4] . .

    . . . .

    . ~-.-~ .

    . . [2] . .

    . [3] - [3] .



    . . . .



    . ~ ~ .

    ~

    [5] . [4] . [5]

    .

    . .





    . .

    .





    ================================================== ==========================



    - Diagram Outline -

    ---------------------





    [1] Vaporization Point

    ------------------

    Everything is vaporized by the atomic blast. 98% fatalities.

    Overpress=25 psi. Wind velocity=320 mph.



    [2] Total Destruction

    -----------------

    All structures above ground are destroyed. 90% fatalities.

    Overpress=17 psi. Wind velocity=290 mph.



    [3] Severe Blast Damage

    -------------------

    Factories and other large-scale building collapse. Severe damage

    to highway bridges. Rivers sometimes flow countercurrent.

    65% fatalities, 30% injured.

    Overpress=9 psi. Wind velocity=260 mph.



    [4] Severe Heat Damage

    ------------------

    Everything flammable burns. People in the area suffocate due to

    the fact that most available oxygen is consumed by the fires.

    50% fatalities, 45% injured.

    Overpress=6 psi. Wind velocity=140 mph.



    [5] Severe Fire & Wind Damage

    -------------------------

    Residency structures are severely damaged. People are blown

    around. 2nd and 3rd-degree burns suffered by most survivors.

    15% dead. 50% injured.

    Overpress=3 psi. Wind velocity=98 mph.







    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------



    - Blast Zone Radii -

    ----------------------

    [3 different bomb types]

    __________________________________________________ __________________________

    ______________________ ______________________ ______________________

    | | | | | |

    | -[10 KILOTONS]- | | -[1 MEGATON]- | | -[20 MEGATONS]- |

    |----------------------| |----------------------| |----------------------|

    | Airburst - 1,980 ft | | Airburst - 8,000 ft | | Airburst - 17,500 ft |

    |______________________| |______________________| |______________________|

    | | | | | |

    | [1] 0.5 miles | | [1] 2.5 miles | | [1] 8.75 miles |

    | [2] 1 mile | | [2] 3.75 miles | | [2] 14 miles |

    | [3] 1.75 miles | | [3] 6.5 miles | | [3] 27 miles |

    | [4] 2.5 miles | | [4] 7.75 miles | | [4] 31 miles |

    | [5] 3 miles | | [5] 10 miles | | [5] 35 miles |

    | | | | | |

    |______________________| |______________________| |______________________|

    __________________________________________________ __________________________



    ================================================== ==========================





    -End of section 1-





    --------------------------------

    File courtesy of Outlaw Labs

    --------------------------------



    II. Nuclear Fission/Nuclear Fusion

    ------------------------------





    There are 2 types of atomic explosions that can be facilitated by U-235;

    fission and fusion. Fission, simply put, is a nuclear reaction in which an

    atomic nucleus splits into fragments, usually two fragments of comparable

    mass, with the evolution of approximately 100 million to several hundred

    million volts of energy. This energy is expelled explosively and violently in

    the atomic bomb. A fusion reaction is invariably started with a fission

    reaction, but unlike the fission reaction, the fusion (Hydrogen) bomb derives

    its power from the fusing of nuclei of various hydrogen isotopes in the

    formation of helium nuclei. Being that the bomb in this file is strictly

    atomic, the other aspects of the Hydrogen Bomb will be set aside for now.



    The massive power behind the reaction in an atomic bomb arises from the

    forces that hold the atom together. These forces are akin to, but not quite

    the same as, magnetism.



    Atoms are comprised of three sub-atomic particles. Protons and neutrons

    cluster together to form the nucleus (central mass) of the atom while the

    electrons orbit the nucleus much like planets around a sun. It is these

    particles that determine the stability of the atom.



    Most natural elements have very stable atoms which are impossible to

    split except by bombardment by particle accelerators. For all practical

    purposes, the one true element whose atoms can be split comparatively easily

    is the metal Uranium. Uranium's atoms are unusually large, henceforth, it is

    hard for them to hold together firmly. This makes Uranium-235 an exceptional

    candidate for nuclear fission.



    Uranium is a heavy metal, heavier than gold, and not only does it have

    the largest atoms of any natural element, the atoms that comprise Uranium have

    far more neutrons than protons. This does not enhance their capacity to

    split, but it does have an important bearing on their capacity to facilitate

    an explosion.



    There are two isotopes of Uranium. Natural Uranium consists mostly of

    isotope U-238, which has 92 protons and 146 neutrons (92+146=238). Mixed with

    this isotope, one will find a 0.6% accumulation of U-235, which has only 143

    neutrons. This isotope, unlike U-238, has atoms that can be split, thus it is

    termed "fissionable" and useful in making atomic bombs. Being that U-238 is

    neutron-heavy, it reflects neutrons, rather than absorbing them like its

    brother isotope, U-235. (U-238 serves no function in an atomic reaction, but

    its properties provide an excellent shield for the U-235 in a constructed bomb

    as a neutron reflector. This helps prevent an accidental chain reaction

    between the larger U-235 mass and its `bullet' counterpart within the bomb.

    Also note that while U-238 cannot facilitate a chain-reaction, it can be

    neutron-saturated to produce Plutonium (Pu-239). Plutonium is fissionable and

    can be used in place of Uranium-235 {albeit, with a different model of

    detonator} in an atomic bomb. [See Sections 3 & 4 of this file.])



    Both isotopes of Uranium are naturally radioactive. Their bulky atoms

    disintegrate over a period of time. Given enough time, (over 100,000 years or

    more) Uranium will eventually lose so many particles that it will turn into

    the metal lead. However, this process can be accelerated. This process is

    known as the chain reaction. Instead of disintegrating slowly, the atoms are

    forcibly split by neutrons forcing their way into the nucleus. A U-235 atom

    is so unstable that a blow from a single neutron is enough to split it and

    henceforth bring on a chain reaction. This can happen even when a critical

    mass is present. When this chain reaction occurs, the Uranium atom splits

    into two smaller atoms of different elements, such as Barium and Krypton.



    When a U-235 atom splits, it gives off energy in the form of heat and

    Gamma radiation, which is the most powerful form of radioactivity and the most

    lethal. When this reaction occurs, the split atom will also give off two or

    three of its `spare' neutrons, which are not needed to make either Barium or

    Krypton. These spare neutrons fly out with sufficient force to split other

    atoms they come in contact with. [See chart below] In theory, it is

    necessary to split only one U-235 atom, and the neutrons from this will split

    other atoms, which will split more...so on and so forth. This progression

    does not take place arithmetically, but geometrically. All of this will

    happen within a millionth of a second.



    The minimum amount to start a chain reaction as described above is known

    as SuperCritical Mass. The actual mass needed to facilitate this chain

    reaction depends upon the purity of the material, but for pure U-235, it is

    110 pounds (50 kilograms), but no Uranium is never quite pure, so in reality

    more will be needed.



    Uranium is not the only material used for making atomic bombs. Another

    material is the element Plutonium, in its isotope Pu-239. Plutonium is not

    found naturally (except in minute traces) and is always made from Uranium.

    The only way to produce Plutonium from Uranium is to process U-238 through a

    nuclear reactor. After a period of time, the intense radioactivity causes the

    metal to pick up extra particles, so that more and more of its atoms turn into

    Plutonium.



    Plutonium will not start a fast chain reaction by itself, but this

    difficulty is overcome by having a neutron source, a highly radioactive

    material that gives off neutrons faster than the Plutonium itself. In certain

    types of bombs, a mixture of the elements Beryllium and Polonium is used to

    bring about this reaction. Only a small piece is needed. The material is not

    fissionable in and of itself, but merely acts as a catalyst to the greater

    reaction.



    +
     
    0
    Me gusta
     
    http://www.psicofxp.com/forums/ciencia.176/238982-armas-nucleares-son-buenas-o-malas.html
    | Más
  • chakotey escribió el 16/05/2005 a las 08:17 hs. ¿Mensaje inapropiado?

    #2 Re: ¿Las armas nucleares son buenas o malas? Cómo fabricar una Atómica.

    Que temita este che.... SUPER COMPLIKETI....

    Me gustaria empezar mi reflexion con otra pregunta para ayudar a despertar mi cerebr en esta linda mañana de Lunes....

    Hay armas buenas?? CHA CHAN!

    Creo que si, y antes que empiecen a dispararme con vuestras AK-47, os digo:

    Gracias a ellas el hombre no se extinguio en los complicados dias de la prehistoria, logrando evolucionar a lo que es hoy; ahora si nos ponemos en puntillosos, creo que a esas armas deberiamos llamarlas herramientas, sin embargo eso no cambia nada ....

    El drama empezo cuando nuestros tataratataratataratatara Abuelos se apuntaron las lanzas entre ellos , por que querian reclamar el pedazo de tierra que tenia vista a la laguna donde se bañaban nuestas hermosas tataratataratataratataratataratataratataratatara Abuelas, o x que querian demostrar quien era el mas Guapo de la banda; y no olvidemos el que le queria curtir el morfi y las herramientas al otro..... etc etc etc..
    O sea suplantaron las piñas, mordidas, extrangulaciones, etc x una manera mas comoda de hacerse daño.
    En fin, lo que sale todos los dias en los diarios no??


    Asi como nosotros evolucionamos, y nos convertimos en los guachos lindos, muscolosos e inteligentes que somos; nuestras amigas jodidas, las armas lo hicieron de la misma manera...
    Lamentablemente a nivel tecnologico es el campo en el que mas avanzamos, y muchas veces trajo aparejado un efecto colateral del cual se beneficio la humanidad, por los distintos ingenios que de ellas derivan.

    Asi que no lo duden, arriba las palmas al grito de: AGUANTEN LAS ARMAS!!!

    Podriamos prescindir de ellas????


    Me gusta imaginar que un dia nos vamos a calmar, a dejar de matarnos a lo pavote entre nos; aunque es medio dificil no? Esta en nuestra naturaleza..
    Pero aunque si llegasemos a abrazar esa utopia; seria conveniente para la humanidad destruir todas las armas????

    Creo que no...:fuck_u:

    QUe onda si nos vienen a agitar unos extraterrestres vatolocos .
    Porque no me jodan, en la inmensidad del Universo algunos marcianos pirados (imperialistas - falto de recursos - aburridos - miedosos - incapaces de soportarnos - etc) tiene que haber.

    Ahora, si despues de tantos libros y peliculas; la Tierra se ve finalmente amenazada por un kaskote gigante malo (lease asteroide/meteorito) con sed de venganza por que lo echaron del cinturon de asteroides??? :o

    DANGER!

    Que paradojico seria que un (o varios) misil con cabeza nuclear nos salvara el pellejo !!!

    Ahora si quieren ironia, piensen que durante la guerra fria y hasta nuestros dias, las responsables de mantener el delicado "equilibrio mundial", sean las armas nucleares.....

    No hay nada mas peligroso y destructivo que este tipo de armas, eso lo sabemos y le quita el sueño a mas de un presidente.... PERO NOS GUSTE O NO....

    SON NESARIAS.



    CHAKOTEY FUERA
    Me gusta este mensaje
  • jjluisgil escribió el 17/05/2005 a las 21:16 hs. ¿Mensaje inapropiado?

    #3 Re: ¿Las armas nucleares son buenas o malas? Cómo fabricar una Atómica.

    Originalmente publicado por chakotey
    Que temita este che.... SUPER COMPLIKETI....
    Las armas no son el problema, sino quién la usa.
    Algunas personas bién intencionadas quieren destruir todas las armas, que el estado se las quite a todos los ciudadanos, para así evitar calamidades y de esa forma conseguir el bién común. Muy hermoso planteo pero totalmente inutil.
    El estado norteamericano quizo hacer lo mismo en Waco (Texas) y la contestación fueron 1500 quilos de amonita en el edificio federal de Oklahoma.
    Además debo recordar que los delincuentes no registran sus armas ni las compran como lo hacen los civiles comunes.
    Desarmar un pueblo es dejarlo a merced del bandidaje y los mafiosos.
    Yo explico como se puede armar una Atómica, faltan algunos pequeños detalles de la masa crítica y de la geometría necesaria ya que solo es para armar y no para detonar (debí hacerlo en 3 partes por la extensión del tema) en mi escuela se lo usa en la práctica de Inglés y para ejercitar la imaginación.
    Como dato ilustrativo un lápiz puede servir para escribir un poema de amor, o para matar a una persona clavándoselo en la nuca.
    Un bisturí sirve para salvar un paciente en una operación, pero también para desgollar ana viejita a la salida del cajero automático.
    Una bufanda sirve para evita el frio en la garganta, pero también para estrangular a cualquier persona.

    Reitero: Las armas no son ni buenas ni malas, las personas si lo son.

    Saludos de Siul Lig
    Me gusta este mensaje
  • ArakiEl escribió el 17/05/2005 a las 21:20 hs. ¿Mensaje inapropiado?

    #4 Re: ¿Las armas nucleares son buenas o malas? Cómo fabricar una Atómica.

    Sé que lo mío es más metafísico que otra cosa (pucha cuantos acentos)... pero...
    En definitiva, el propósito de un ARMA ¿no es la agresión?
    Me gusta este mensaje
  • Antonio Rivera escribió el 17/05/2005 a las 22:17 hs. ¿Mensaje inapropiado?

    #5 Re: ¿Las armas nucleares son buenas o malas? Cómo fabricar una Atómica.

    Originalmente publicado por polarBear
    En definitiva, el propósito de un ARMA ¿no es la agresión?
    Puede que SI y puede que NO, depende lo que hagas.
    ¿ Nunca se te ocurrió que podes tener un arma para evitar que te agredan ?

    Una situación imaginaria:

    Grandulón prepotente y pendenciero viene caminando y en el camino un enano que tranquilamente viene sin molestar a nadie, ... violento patadón y el enano sale dando tumbon unos 4 metros, 3 dientes menos y una mandíbula fracturada, mientras el agresor con solo las armas que le dió Natura comenta "... enano repodrido vas a darme paso o no..".
    Ahora la misma situación pero el enano tiene una UZI 9 mm en la mano y lo mira al grandote con ganas de cocinarlo, el prepotente ¿ crees que le va hacer algo al enano armado ? Solamente si además es estúpido.

    Salu2s
    Me gusta este mensaje
  • ArakiEl escribió el 18/05/2005 a las 08:16 hs. ¿Mensaje inapropiado?

    #6 Re: ¿Las armas nucleares son buenas o malas? Cómo fabricar una Atómica.

    Con lo cual me estás diciendo que la agresión es una forma de evitar la agresión...
    Bue dejemos acá en todo caso en otro momento abro un thread en humanidades.
    Me gusta este mensaje
  • energratis escribió el 09/06/2005 a las 02:52 hs. ¿Mensaje inapropiado?

    #7 Re: ¿Las armas nucleares son buenas o malas? Cómo fabricar una Atómica.

    Nikola Tesla armó a principios del siglo20 por 1906 una arma de rayos él mismo dijo fue el causante de la explosión de Tunguska fue más potente que una explosión nuclear, él emitió una carta al presidente de USA todavía está en la fundación Tesla diciendo que equivocó sus cálculos y uno de sus rayos cayó por la región de Siberia
    El tema es que si tienes energía ilimitada y en forma libre eres capaz de hacer el arma más poderosa imaginable en donde la bomba nuclear es solo un juguete, y por cierto mucho más fácil de hacer y menos peligroso que conseguirte Uranio u otros

    Bye

    gigawattgratisQUITARESTO@123mail.cl
    Me gusta este mensaje
  • NAHUELATTAKERO escribió el 19/06/2005 a las 14:35 hs. ¿Mensaje inapropiado?

    #8 Re: ¿Las armas nucleares son buenas o malas? Cómo fabricar una Atómica.

    esta todo en ingles me cago, = nunca conseguireia la guita nesesaria
    Me gusta este mensaje
  • jjluisgil escribió el 05/07/2006 a las 22:59 hs. ¿Mensaje inapropiado?

    #9 Re: ¿Las armas nucleares son buenas o malas? Cómo fabricar una Atómica.

    Originalmente publicado por NAHUELATTAKERO
    esta todo en ingles me cago, = nunca conseguireia la guita nesesaria
    No es tan cara... la de U-235
    Me gusta este mensaje
  • cholo_orozco escribió el 06/07/2006 a las 09:51 hs. ¿Mensaje inapropiado?

    #10 Re: ¿Las armas nucleares son buenas o malas? Cómo fabricar una Atómica.

    Es un tema practicamente eterno, va mas alla de si el arma es nuclear o no, el tema a discutir creo q seria "las armas son buenas o malas", pues añadiendo la palabra "nucleares" hablariamos mas de ingeniería y fisica que de lo bueno o lo malo.
    Las armas -en general- son tan buenas como el conjunto cerebro/intenciones de la persona que las tenga en sus manos. La existencia de tantas armas (masivas o no) son la prueba de que se vive de manera deshumanizada.

    Y si me dicen que mañana un ingeniero descubre una manera de fabricar una bomba no mas grande que la pantalla que tenes adelante, capaz de reducir a cenizas el sistema solar completo, y sin generar contaminacion.. no creo que empiece a los saltos diciendo "yupii, encontramos un arma 'mejor' que las nucleares!"


    orozco, out.
    Me gusta este mensaje
1 2 >
Estás en: Inicio >> Foros >> Humanidades >> Ciencia


Estadísticas del tema
  • 10 RESPUESTAS
  • 1746 VISTAS
  • 7 USUARIOS RESPONDIERON
 
Ir arriba
Contacto | Acerca de | Ayuda | Términos Legales | privacidad | Pautas de convivencia | Mapa de los foros | TrabajÁ con nosotros
©2008 Psicofxp.com S.A. - Todos los derechos reservados
Certifica IAB