Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Chemical, Biological and Nuclear Weapons Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Whats after Nukes?
mike14    2/16/2005 4:55:44 PM
I have no idea but something must replace them one of these days.
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: 1 2
BrittleSteel    RE:Whats after Nukes?   11/2/2005 1:38:26 PM
Something already exists. Anti-matter which has 100s if not 1000s of times the power than fusion bombs. They have not made the bomb but in the early 90's labs have begun creating anti-matter (CERN).
 
Quote    Reply

Crass Spektakel    Strangelet   1/26/2006 2:29:27 AM
Antimatter is ridiciolous expensive to produce, nearly impossible to store even for fractions of a second and the largest quantities weighted less than one water molecule. I think there is a better chance to see a weapon based on strangelets or nanite machines. The first one behaves like a black hole, eating away planets with one single sub-atomar strangelet and the later one also eats planets but by reproducing itself. Both are much more realistic than antimatter. You asked for "after nukes" and that must mean "whipe out whole planets".
 
Quote    Reply

TrustButVerify    RE:After nukes   1/30/2006 6:12:31 PM
I agree- antimatter sounds good in theory but our present technology does not offer us any useful options for production and containment. I suspect the next step will be a result of some breathrough in applied quantum physics such as a proper Grand Unified Theory, or perhaps a more feasible method of storing and instantaneously releasing vast amounts of energy but without the lingering radiation problems of our current fission/fusion weapons. This is pure uneducated speculation, but it might come in the form of a physics package which uses elements having an extremely short half-life outside of very specific conditions. I suspect, however, that politics will prevent development or at least deployment of any such weapons for quite a while. Oooh! Oooh! Maybe an even MORE Enhanced Radiation Bomb. With even less blast and fall-out! Yeah!
 
Quote    Reply

jlb    RE:Whats after Nukes?   1/30/2006 7:55:04 PM
as Crass Spektakel said, the next step is a planet buster. It's almost certain that one of these days antimatter will replace fusion in high-power bombs, but nobody has ever fielded anything even remotely like the Soviet 50/100 Mt bomb of 43 years ago. And it is theoretically possible to build even more powerful fusion bombs, but the question is, what for? It reminds me of a guy I knew who never understood why nobody tried to make nuclear grenades...
 
Quote    Reply

Galrahn    RE:Whats after Nukes? - Nanotechnology: the potential for new WMD   1/30/2006 8:33:07 PM
The possibility for the production of new types of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) is emerging as the burgeoning field of nanotechnology (NT) – the science of designing microscopic structures in which materials are machined and manipulated atom-by-atom or molecule-by-molecule – matures. While specialists agree that its widespread use by the military is some ways off, it is likely that it will be increasingly employed, especially as this new science develops. Under such monikers as "micromechanical engineering" and "microelectromechanical systems" (MEMS), the field of NT was born 30 years ago in nuclear weapons laboratories. Its present application has been to refine existing nuclear weapon designs. But its greatest potential, however, remains on the drawing board. Nanotechnology has the potential to create entirely new weapons. Fourth-generation nuclear weapons are new types of nuclear explosives that would use inertial confinement fusion (ICF) facilities. The defining technical characteristic of fourth-generation nuclear weapons is the triggering - by some advanced technology such as a superlaser - of a relatively small thermonuclear explosion in which a deuterium-tritium mixture is burnt in a device whose weight and size are not much larger than a few kilograms. Since the yield of these warheads could go from a fraction of a ton to many tens of tons of high-explosive equivalent, their delivery by precision-guided munitions or other means will dramatically increase the fire-power of those who possess them - without crossing the threshold of using kiloton-to-megaton nuclear weapons, and therefore without breaking the taboo against the first-use of WMD. Moreover, since these new weapons will use no (or very little) fissionable materials, they are expected to produce virtually no radioactive fallout. http://www.janes.com/security/international_security/news/jcbw/jcbw030115_1_n.shtml This is probably what your looking for in terms of an answer. You should also search on Molecular Nano Weapons.
 
Quote    Reply

Carl S    RE:Whats after Nukes? - Nanotechnology: the potential for new WMD   1/30/2006 8:41:54 PM
I was thinking of things a little less spectacular. Like maybe a aimed electromagnetic device that disrupts the function of the human brain from a distance.
 
Quote    Reply

Braddock    RE:Whats after Nukes?   1/30/2006 9:06:51 PM
Good Question I'll get right on it.
 
Quote    Reply

Nanheyangrouchuan    RE:Whats after Nukes? - Nanotechnology: the potential for new WMD   1/30/2006 9:07:19 PM
Nanotech looks good on paper, but it is a long way off from deployment and may resemble germ warfare in some it's behavior (random unpredictability within a general framework of predictability. Nuetron bombs look like the way countries might go, even on the battlefield. A weapon I am thinking of is a massive death ray from space. It would be able to use a combination of sun-like heat and crushing pressure focused on a small area. Anti-matter weapons on a large scale may never be used or even built on earth, supercollider experiments only do 1 to 1 collisions, 5 pounds of anti-matter could wreak alot of havoc on the earth especially if the reaction ratio is 1:double digits.
 
Quote    Reply

BraddockCaesar    RE:Whats after Nukes?   2/1/2006 12:57:49 PM
Mike 14 Before you can establish what type of weaponry you can use to replace nuclear weapons, we must first assess what type of strategy will permeate the rung compartmentalization variables of Dr. Herman Kahn that were set up to prevent a premature and or undisciplined use of nuclear weaponry. Any and all successful permeable factors will suggest the post nuclear attack algorthms concerning global alliances, configurative defensive/offensive postures and flashpoint intervention factors that will be used by some nations initially as a concession strategy and tactic in regards to implementing force projection initiatives in a new world that will be traumatized by the after effects of a nuclear exchange. These factors will dictate what type of change in nuclear weaponry is instituted if any, as it will depend on who emerges from the exchange as a globally viable nation in a economic, military and diplomatic sense. The national and global doctrines/initiatives of the same nation(s)will also have a dramatic and pivotal effect on the future proliferation and or future use of nuclear weaponry in war. Remember what General Schoomaker said in his "Operation-Leadership" interview, people are more important than machines. The same is true concerning weaponry, as the strategy that dictates their methods of use comes from the minds of men.
 
Quote    Reply

Nanheyangrouchuan    RE:Whats after Nukes?   2/1/2006 2:53:54 PM
anti-environment weapons. heat weapons that set fire to farmland, bombs that contaminate water supplies, initiate nasty chemical reactions in the air over cities, etc.
 
Quote    Reply
1 2



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics