When did atomic bombs become nuclear bombs?

[randomman]

Just wondered really, atomic bombs were dropped on Japan, now we all have nuclear weapons. Is it a change in isotope? Or the firing type? Yield?

[Tony*T3]

randomman said:

Just wondered really, atomic bombs were dropped on Japan, now we all have nuclear weapons. Is it a change in isotope? Or the firing type? Yield?

The radioactive elements used changed almost immidiatly for more efficient substances. Probably has something to do with it....?

[mackie1]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapon#Types_...

[Quaint]

I think they're synonyms, really. "Atomic bomb" is a rather more old-fashioned term.

[kambites]

Aren't atomic bombs fission devices, where "nuclear" is used to include fusion as well?

[s2art]

randomman said:

Just wondered really, atomic bombs were dropped on Japan, now we all have nuclear weapons. Is it a change in isotope? Or the firing type? Yield?

Just a better term I think. Thermonuclear seemed to come into existence as a term when fusion bombs were developed. So nuclear covers both fission and fusion. The old term 'atomic' was associated with the early fission bombs.

[AlexKP]

kambites said:

Aren't atomic bombs fission devices, where "nuclear" is used to include fusion as well?

Exactly my understanding.

[Eric Mc]

The two terms are totally interchangeable. Both Uranium/Plutonium fission bombs and Hydrogen fusion bombs generate their explosive power by doing things with atoms (hence "atomic") and the nuclei of those atoms (hence "nuclear").

[hairykrishna]

Tony*T3 said:

randomman said:

Just wondered really, atomic bombs were dropped on Japan, now we all have nuclear weapons. Is it a change in isotope? Or the firing type? Yield?

The radioactive elements used changed almost immidiatly for more efficient substances. Probably has something to do with it....?

Not really. Hiroshima used Uranium 235 Nagasaki used Plutonium 239; all modern bombs use one or the other (mostly plut).

Efficiency gains come from changes in the implosion assembly. The two Japan bombs, particularly Little Boy, were deliberately over engineered. They wanted to make sure they went off and weren't too concerned with efficiency.

The two terms are interchangeable- it's just a fashion thing (i.e. 'the atomic age' at the time).

Edited by hairykrishna on Thursday 19th March 15:57

[Bushmaster]

It happened shortly after the Atom Bomb became the Atomic Bomb and a bit before it branched off into the Thermonuclear/Hydrogen /Neutron Bomb

[navier_stokes]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

+1.

I think fission is used as the trigger for fusion (nuclear/hydrogen etc) bombs.

[hairykrishna]

navier_stokes said:

I think fission is used as the trigger for fusion (nuclear/hydrogen etc) bombs.

They are. They (probably) use radiation pressure from a fission bomb to compress a deuterium-tritium mix.

[Oily Fingernails]

And Hello to our Secret Iranian Nuclear Scientist.....you are taking notes? pay attention to Eric's posts

[AUDIHenry]

Atomic bombs were quickly replaced with hydrogen bombs by the countries that were able to, as it was/is very, very, very complicated, much more than a mere atomic bomb (fission).

I think the name to "nuclear bomb" came mostly out of PR considerations as there was much opposition to the hydrogen bomb and the absolute devastation that it could bring on any area.

These days nuclear bombs are used to describe both simple fission bombs as developed by North Korea (possibly) and South Africa (abandoned) and complex hydrogen bombs, which are owned by a handful of countries, among them the U.S., Russia, China, United Kingdom, France, and likely Israel, too. I believe pakistan and India do not have hydrogen bombs.