How Easy is It to Really Build A Radioactive Bomb?

Honestly, are there any physicists on Sup Forums right now? How easy is it to build a nuclear bomb? How easy is it to build a dirty bomb? Is it just getting the resources that's the hardest part? Do you have to have enriched uranium? Why not just make a Hydrogen bomb?

Calm down NSA/FBI/CIA/etc., I'm only asking this because I recently came across William Perry's "Nuclear Nightmare" video and, in addition, to my current knowledge it got me thinking about this possible threat.

youtube.com/watch?v=t98PD6KCg2Q

>TL;DW: Basically a plausible scenario of a uranium dirty-bomb going off in Washington D.C. and the aftermath effects of said scenario.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Aristotle_Phillips

>TL;DR: In the 1970's, an underachieving college student (who was the school's mascot too btw) showed how to build a (debatable) nuclear bomb from publicly-accessible information.

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goiânia_accident
youtube.com/watch?v=0c4f4NJSB_4
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

Yes

I've heard we had to slip the Soviets infos so they could figure it out. They were not stupid, even though they did some stupid things. Do I would say it's not that easy.

The device itself is easy.
Delivery system obtaining materials is what's difficult.

A nuclear bomb would be quite an undertaking, but a dirty bomb is as simple as putting some cobalt-60 you stole from a hospital into a pressure cooker bomb.

...

>How easy is it to build a nuclear bomb?
I don't know.
But I think it's possible the government may be exaggerating how easy it is to justify all the enforcement they are doing.
Getting it not to "fizzle" and have a high yield is probably pretty hard. Fusion bombs even harder.
NK and Iran are having a hard time with it, and they do have real scientists. They're not all morons.
>How easy is it to build a dirty bomb?
Easier for sure.
>Why not just make a Hydrogen bomb?
IIUC, fusion/hydrogen bombs mean the same thing, and they are much harder to do. They need multiple fission bombs to kickstart a fusion process.

"Weaponizing" it is probably the most difficult, but it's not necessary. If they could manage to ship it in container form and blow up a large port for example, it would already be pretty bad.

...

delivery is easy, its just the materials that are the problem. I'm sure there are ways to get material, but I sure as hell am not going to give you sandniggers any ideas

...

it's explained in the tom clancy novel "sum of all fears" user. basically, you need some fissile material like uranium or plutonium and some tritium to increase the yield. if you can work out calculations, said tritium can be used to make a fusion bomb.
if you want a dirty bomb with easier materials, just scavenge some radioactive cobalt from medical oncology centers. makes a good dirty bomb.

...

... why the hell would anyone nuke WV?
We are literally 99% innawoods.
Even Charleston is small.

Did the UK at least have the decency to give Australia some nukes after that?

Neither endeavor is easy. At all. To build a true fission bomb, you need refined, centrifuged nuclear material. That alone is hard enough.

Even a dirty bomb, with nuclear material sufficiently pulverized to spread more than a block or two would be as dangerous to the builder as to the victims.

What's with all the warheads in Montana, North Dakota and Wyoming/Colorado/Nebraska?

For one, they're relatively protected areas with lots of nothing to hide your nukes in.

>How easy is it to build a nuclear bomb?
impossible, unless you are a state

>How easy is it to build a dirty bomb?

>buy some nuclear waste from Chinks
>Fill it in a truck/plane and add some C4
>allahuackbar it in middle of a city
low damage, highly dangerous, expensive, easy to track. Not really a threat

>buy some nuclear waste from Chinks
>Get a spraying plane and spray it over some city
Thinking about it, this one might have some potential

>I've heard we had to slip the Soviets infos so they could figure it out
Wouldn't make much sense. Soviet nuclear bombs at the time functioned much more differently than American nuclear bombs. Smaller explosions, much more radiation.

Everytime I eat fabes I am a radioactive bomb.

There is this crummy, forgettable made for TV movie about a disgruntled oil refinery worker who starts a massive fire that threatens an entire city.
The last line reiterates this point.
I think a major reason, by itself, that the elites want dumb people is because of the relative ease of making trouble. People forget that Brooklyn -- Brooklyn -- was terrorized for decades (decades!) by a disgruntled power company worker who called himself The Mad Bomber.
But then we'll see some interesting stuff if Hillary is "elected."

>Calm down NSA/FBI/CIA/etc.
Top Kek 2016

i wouldn't know but there's plenty of reasons to nuke things

building a dirty bomb is easy, just add some material to a conventional bomb

to build a thermonuclear bomb though takes an INSANE amount of precision in terms of calibration, timing, staging. It's pretty much a 100 percent engineering feat by this point because everyone knows how to build it you just need the precise equipment to do so

if you're wondering how hard is it to get some radioactive material that could be used with conventional explosives to wreak havoc, it has happened in 3rd World countries, and surely easy to do in former soviet union with all rtg's laying around.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goiânia_accident

I don't know what it is exactly that is claimed that we gave them or when, but the claims made it sound some rudimentary ideas to work with than actual plans or anything. Could be completely false for all I know, but there are plenty of ways in which we helped build up the Soviets on the sly along the way, and even a contingent of people who wanted to eventually have us merge with them to form the basis for world government.

RosenBERG

My actual degree was in nuclear engineering with classes on nuclear weapons (most schools are forbidden from teaching on them...I went to a special school).

The answer is that building a nuke is extremely difficult, although computers have made it easier to figure out what geometry and material you need to actually fabricate, making them is still very hard. Add to that the fact that constant isotopic decay leads to your bomb going inert unless it is constantly maintained (which is also very, very expensive) and you have something very hard to make and very hard to maintain.

Dirty bombs on the other hand are very easy, however they are also not very dangerous. You've been indoctrinated into a bunch of bullshit about radiation because its spooky and not taught in our shitty schools, but radiation is everywhere and in all things including your body at all times. All a dirty bomb does is blow some minimally radioactive rock up into the air. Rain or water cleans it up easily. Literally there's more radiation in the granite holding up the statue of liberty than there is in a dirty bomb.

Read my pic.

...

>How easy is it to build a nuclear bomb? How easy is it to build a dirty bomb?
t. Mohamed

>How easy is it to build a nuclear bomb?

Fairly hard. Requires good access to quality equipment because you're making a precision weapon. It also requires access to large amounts of fissile material that's highly restricted.

>How easy is it to build a dirty bomb?

Way easier. In fact for something to qualify as a dirty bomb you could basically have a bunch of radioactive material stolen from dentists xray machines and put some TNT in the middle of it.

But that gets to the heart of the issue.

WHY would you make a dirty bomb? It's not very effective. It uses materials that are highly controlled and watched for, things that you can even screen for and detect.

Compare that to growing botulism or anthrax in a bathtub. You can collect massive amounts of biological warfare material without anyone being able to stop you. It's easy to get, easy to do, and the lethality is higher than a dirty bomb, especially if you can get it into water sources (which are some of the least secure major public works there are).

In a big city you could kill hundreds of thousands before anyone could detect you.

>if it's so easy why hasn't anyone done it

Honestly beats me. Maybe the threat of terrorism is overblown? Maybe they're all idiots? Maybe they don't really want to kill massive amounts of people? I really can't say.

But like 9/11 after it happens we'll all look back and say "well that was an obvious risk someone should have told us that could happen".

Building a bomb? Trivial. First nukes were literally just a couple chunks weapons grade uranium with some dynamite strapped to it to force them together and reach critical mass.

Refinement of that weapons grade uranium is the problem. A hydrogen bomb using a fission reaction to spark it, so you still require the nuclear material.

I am a physics student (applied tho, not specialized yet) and will post proofs if needed.

I would say it's pretty hard because you require an engineering degree or something similar to obtain industrial/commercial off the shelf materials. Basically you just need heavy stable isotopes and that's literally it. Than there's the "avalanche effect", just like with chemically enriched transistors, reactions once started are just going to keep going off as long as there is the fuel, fuel being heavy and stable isotopes.

Technically its not the most demanding thing in the world, but fuel/materials are extremely hard to come by. Some are found in medical equipment, you'd have to steal a shit ton of it tho. I dont think its possible to obtain enough fuel to actually build a weapon, you would attract attention at some point certainly.

Trips has it
Building a bomb strong enough to compress weapons grade material to critical mass is something a reasonably bright high schooler could figure out
Getting the material is incredibly difficult and expensive
You need a massive amount of factory space, electricity, and difficult to build and operate equipment run by trained technicians working round the clock for years

>require an engineering degree or something similar to obtain industrial/commercial off the shelf materials

Since we're making a nuke I don't think we need to worry about obeying the law.

Why build them when you can buy them?

youtube.com/watch?v=0c4f4NJSB_4

Dirty bomb=
Literally strap any dangerous radioactive element to a regular bomb

Nuclear bombs=
Combining 8 or more kg of either 98% uranium 235 or 98% plutonium 239 thru the use of a perfectly timed detonation of powerful high explosives.

Only nation-states have the ability to refine radioactive material in a large enough quantity and quality to make nuclear weapons. However modern computers and a good understanding of physics could allow almost any deticated group to make a bomb. This is why controlling the availability of nuclear material is so important.

Also I'm not a physicist but I am a engineering student that had a interest in this subject.

This shit is 70 years old.
Any fucking retard with a chemistry degree can builf this. Stop the nuclear meme, it's not some magical voodoo

I bet you know my name, too.
I swear I don't know how to make a bomb.

Right, well, if you were doing it in a state capacity you wouldnt make Sup Forums posts about them, I assume he is doing it in a private citizen capacity.

Maaaaaybe you might be extremely lucky to find some sort of ore of some really heavy element in some place of Africa or something (synthesizing cores yourself is extremely hard, and not practical at all) and than refine it, which wouldnt be extremely hard to do, but I am pretty sure the world is putting money into some sort of policing for these kinds of ores/mines and transportation of such things.

There's lots of vulnerable radioactive medical waste out there for making dirty bombs. I'm not saying it'd be lethal or anything, but just the fact that one goes off in a city would require the US government to effectively shut the city down and rebuild it somewhere else. It wouldn't be an exaggeration to put the costs and lost income into the low trillions depending on the city.

On the other hand, if you get a contract to build or run a nuclear power plant, you can get paid to get away with blowing it up. According to, what was it, Brussels, you can even hire ISIS to help you run it.

imo they were scammed.
as far as i'm aware there was never any legal action against this guy, i'd guess at best an investigation that found he trolled vice.

that being said it's certainly believable there are real sellers, but likely long sold what they had

The ease with which you can build a nuclear bomb depends on where you are. Which city are you in, OP?

Hundreds of people would need to believe that what they were doing was lawful and morally correct. They would also need to believe that there was no alternative. The repercussions of such a thing would be ridiculous. Every single perpetrator would be hunted down and slaughtered, so you would need every person to be on board and willing to die and willing to kill hundreds of thousands of people. It will never happen.

This makes me feel warm and cozy. Americans are going to suffer in ww3.

also post view from window
post pictures of eyes (hd please)
post hand to prove you're white (make sure you get your fingerprints in the shot)
if you tell me the first letters of your names i can tell you what your le funny bulgarian name would be

That warm and cozy feel is the radiation. Better start putting up lead around your house.

Power grid

There's generating stations in WV that feed DC

...

Believe it or not ionizing radiation can be managed. You could restore the city in 10 years or less and people would be able to walk around without hazmat protection or suits or anything, and live and work there.

In fact, well depending on the amount, but ionizing radiation has a hard time going trough the concrete.

> How Easy is It to Really Build A Radioactive Bomb?
I can't play barre chords on my new guitar. Must be harder than that i think.

And a lot of people who man the beltway and its surrounding sprawl also live over to the west.

...

>Hundreds of people would need to believe that what they were doing was lawful and morally correct.
When people tell me about conspiracy theories like "the government invented AIDS to kill negros" or "the government cured cancer but is hiding it to control people" I think of this
During the Manahattan Project 3 different people in the project decided to turn research they had access too over to Russian spies in spite of knowing Stalin was a lunatic mass murderer trying to enslave all of humanity
The idea you could get hundreds of people to buy into some conspiracy and keep their mouths shut is ridiculous

Yeah but I'm from WV, most of those are direct hits to Coal Plants

Also Charleston, the state capitol

The most important part is that there is no real incentive. It would be fucking suicide.

I always try to think about how you can get two birds with one stone, but taking out the power grid is one of the most devastating possible things.

hardest part is refining the uranium
you would get party vanned long before you had access to the required facilities

It's very difficult. Creating a nuclear runaway nuclear reaction takes extreme precision and engineering that frankly a group of filthy sand negros, led by a loser in a dirty hat, would never be able to pull it off.

>doesn't know WV Was once the chemical valley of the world and made a hell of a lot of war goods such as tanks, battleship guns, ammunition, steel, and supposedly has secret WMDs stored in South Charleston

You guys are forgetting one other critical thing beyond power plants. West Virginia has the highest number of military recruits. If they survive WW3 then you are looking at a large source of military recruits.

>all those fucking toolbars
Why

making nuclear bomb is difficult. read the book "The Making of the Atomic Bomb." It's very interesting. But by nature, the developing of the bomb is a massive industrial undertaking. If you got someone from somebody else maybe it's different, but it's also very difficult to operate, prepare the bomb for detonation, keep it functional in travel, etc.

posting just to say hi to the fbi

>Turkish Citizens are losing satisfaction with their leadership.

Lost muh shit.

>buncha white people unloading the bomb

Dropped.

>Honestly, are there any physicists on Sup Forums right now?
Yes
>How easy is it to build a nuclear bomb? How easy is it to build a dirty bomb?
Extremely difficult to make. Very hard to transport.
>Is it just getting the resources that's the hardest part?
No, only half of the information was ever made public. The greatest difficulty France had in becoming a nuclear power was piecing together the missing information.
>Do you have to have enriched uranium?
No
>Why not just make a Hydrogen bomb?
It's quite a bit different internally and far less information was leaked about how the H-bomb works.
>Calm down NSA/FBI/CIA/etc
Trust me they aren't worried
>I'm only asking this because I recently came across William Perry's "Nuclear Nightmare" video
It's fantasy. The only way a nuke would go off in Washington is if an existing nuclear power dropped/launched one and with current star wars anti-nuke technology it would almost have to be an inside job.

Nice try ISIS