About 10700000000000000000000000 h bombs
This is a complicated function of:
It would be far far easier to just blow away the atmosphere and leave the earth alone and even far far easier to light firestorms in all the forests and fill the stratosphere with soot for decades causing nuclear winter.
No, a single nuclear bomb does not have the capability to blow up the entire world. However, it can cause massive destruction and loss of life in the targeted area. Multiple nuclear bombs used simultaneously could have catastrophic global consequences.
A nuclear bomb and an atomic bomb are virtually synonymous. The two terms are both used to refer to a nuclear weapon. Even Wikipedia agrees. The use of either term as a search argument redirects the answer to the article Nuclear Weapon. A link is provided. from benjaminmarkiewicz that dont make any sense a nuclear bombs blow travels 100s of miles and is more powerful cause its the newly invented bomb and the atomic bombs blow travel is under a nuclear bombs travel rate
Countries may possess nuclear weapons for various reasons, including deterrence against potential adversaries, ensuring national security, and projecting military power. The idea is that possessing nuclear capability can deter other countries from attacking, as the consequences of a nuclear conflict are too catastrophic to justify the use of nuclear weapons.
No, a single nuclear weapon is not powerful enough to blow up an entire continent. The destructive power of a nuclear weapon is concentrated in a relatively small area known as the blast radius. The impact would be devastating locally, but the effect would not extend to an entire continent.
It is unlikely for a nuclear bomb or reaction to blow up a whole state. The explosive power of a nuclear bomb is devastating, but the physical size of a typical state is much larger. The impact of a nuclear explosion would be significant within a certain radius, but it would not cover an entire state.
It would depend on the size of the bomb.
Your question assumes someone would not blow up the world with atomic bombs. That is a fallacy. There are a few humans in this world who would be insane enough to issue enough nuclear bombs in order to destroy the world. They would not be considered "sane rational people" by the rest of the world. Humanity wants to preserve itself. Therefore people are not inclined to "blow up the world". If a poll was taken around the world you would probably learn that people do not want to end the world via nuclear elimination. They want to live and enjoy peace around the world. That is why people would NOT blow up the world with atomic weapons.
To say how many nuclear bombs it would take to blow up the sun is almost impossible. Actually the sun is a continuously exploding thermonuclear bomb, that's where the energy comes from - fusion. It doesn't matter how many bombs you shot into the sun, it would just get hotter.
depends on how big the bombs are, if they were as big as Tsar Bomba (Soviet bomb 60MT) it would take about from 15-25 no you retard it would take about 15-25 to blow the usa NT the us it would take 10 a-bombs to kill every living thing (cuz of the radiation)
It is impossible to accurately estimate the number of nuclear bombs it would take to completely destroy Earth as the amount would be so vast that it is beyond comprehension. Using nuclear bombs to destroy Earth would also have catastrophic consequences for all life on the planet.
It is impossible to blow up the Moon with nuclear bombs as it is too massive and its gravity would likely prevent such an event from happening. Additionally, any attempt to do so would have catastrophic consequences for Earth due to the debris and environmental impact.
It is impossible to blow up Pluto with nuclear bombs, as it is a dwarf planet located over 3.6 billion miles away from Earth. Additionally, the use of nuclear weapons in space is banned by international laws and treaties.
the world will blow up
No, a single nuclear bomb does not have the capability to blow up the entire world. However, it can cause massive destruction and loss of life in the targeted area. Multiple nuclear bombs used simultaneously could have catastrophic global consequences.
actually i think they are not because roaches can survive nuclear bombs so i think microwaves will be no prblem
This question is too complex to be answered here as written, it depends on:your definition of "blow up"bomb yields availableburst heights/depthsetc. for dozens of additional variables
A nuclear bomb and an atomic bomb are virtually synonymous. The two terms are both used to refer to a nuclear weapon. Even Wikipedia agrees. The use of either term as a search argument redirects the answer to the article Nuclear Weapon. A link is provided. from benjaminmarkiewicz that dont make any sense a nuclear bombs blow travels 100s of miles and is more powerful cause its the newly invented bomb and the atomic bombs blow travel is under a nuclear bombs travel rate