>neat
You'd better be fast though, otherwise its just going to fizzle.
>>7689801
>U-238
>Not U-235
>Not accounting for geometry
0/100.
but wouldnt you get cancer from holding it in your hands
>>7689801
I fucking love science.
>>7689812
No. U-238 is weakly radioactive.
The OP "fact" isn't a fact either.
I fail to see why a piece of a submarine would be warm let alone why two pieces would explode
How does that work?
>>7689870
It doesn't, the picture is retarded.
>>7689846
well if you smashed two submarines together it would be a disaster
same principle
>>7689874
My initial though was that the shedding particles from the decaying lumps would collide with the other lump and "knock off" some of the neutrons, a la Atomic Bomb. Is that what it is getting at?
>>7689880
No. It's supposed to be talking of a critical mass, except U238 is not fissile. U235 is the only naturally occurring isotopes that is fissile and its critical mass is 40 something kg.
>>7689881
So if it was U235 and 2x 21kg the picture would be correct?
>>7689891
Very broadly "correct".
What would actually happen would be a brief supercriticality event which would lethally irradiate you, followed by a fizzle blasting the material (and you) apart without a full-scale nuclear explosion.
Full you're looking to buy
>>7689801
This doesn't sound right. U-238 isn't fissile, and even if it was, wouldn't you need a neutron moderator to get it to do anything? Sounds like Hollywood physics to me.
>>7689870
If you put two lumps of 10 kg together, you exceed the critical mass and it blows up.
>>7689876
Well yeah two whole submarines. But two pieces are hardly enough to cause anything disastrous
this is wrong.
the critical mass assumes spherical geometry
and U-238 isnt even fissile
>>7689927
except you don't
>>7690039
This is atomic physics 101 bro, read it again
>>7689819
Underrated post
>>7690031
>the critical mass assumes spherical geometry
It doesn't have to be spherical, Little boy was a hollow cylinder slamming down onto a spike surrounded by neutron reflectors. The 'bullet' analogy is used because it's convenient and prevents dissemination of potentially classified design details.
>>7689928
no, you take all the mass of the submarine and compress it into a superdense 10kg ball, so its the full effect of a submarine crash
>>7690351
i mean the numbers people find on wiki for critical mass are for bare spherical geometries
>>7690051
>U238
Not fissile
>20kg
Not enough to get fissile U235 to reach critical mass at normal densities.
>>7690356
>take all the mass
>compress it into a superdense 10kg ball
looks like you're also superdense, anon
>>7690356
So where do the other six thousand tons go?
>>7689801
>U-238
>>7689819
back 2 reddit with u :^)
>>7691427
Don't you see? The energy emitted by that amount of lost mass would be in the billions!
>>7689876
if they are two russian submarines it would just be another statistic
>>7689801
Correct, but you'd have to bring them together at the speed of several kilometers per second, otherwise the collision of 10kg lumps of metal wouldnt have that strong of an effect.
>>7691818
I don't know anything in detail about the subject but I've read enough pop-accounts of nuclear weapons to know a gun type nuke isn't very effective use of fissile material either. But would just bringing them together have any kind of noteworthy effect what so ever?
>>7689819
good day to u my sir :^)
enlgihbtenebnsmfg
xcvbölkjcxlöb xcv
m'am
>>7691847
E = MC^2
>>7689928
Torpedos are pieces of submarines, and can cause a lot of trouble of they collide with each other or with a submarine.
Checkmate.
