WI: A theoretical limit on yield of nuclear weapons

This topic is a duplicate of another discussion.

You were redirected here from a duplicate topic.

 

 

Previous Previous  

Page 1

  Next Next

 

Other recipients:

You see, that's the problem with nuclear weapons.  There is no limit whatsoever on their destructive power.  So, even a single individual could, in principle, destroy the entire planet using a single nuclear device.  So, ever since the first atomic b

You see, that's the problem with nuclear weapons.  There is no limit whatsoever on their destructive power.  So, even a single individual could, in principle, destroy the entire planet using a single nuclear device.  So, ever since the first atomic bomb was detonated, the world has ceased to be a competitive environment about power and effectiveness, and it has become one great game of "chicken" between individuals and governments, each attempting to manipulate the other through fear of ultimate destruction.


Of course, no single bomb has ever been built that could actually destroy the entire planet.  Such a technology has been rigorously suppressed by all governments as being too destructive.  But it could have been.  And, when Emperor Hirohito of Japan ordered the surrender of his people, in 1945, that is probably exactly what he was thinking: what's the point in my people's devotion, when a single individual now can wipe out humanity?


So, let's suppose that there is a limit of 20 kilotons to the power of all nuclear weapons.  How does that change things.  Does Japan still surrender?  Are nuclear weapons more readily used?  Are there full scale nuclear wars with 20 kiloton bombs, bearing in mind that's as big as they can get?