Tell me more ×
Physics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for active researchers, academics and students of physics. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I mean which part of the process of making an Atomic bomb is the hard and how many people know how to do that on Earth. Is it in hundreds or less i.e. 20 - 50 people or even less?

Don't get me wrong but I don't get it, because the USA has A-bomb from July 16, 1945 (Trinity) so it is almost 70 years!

How can by it so difficult with today technology that has advanced tremendiously?

share|improve this question
1  
The calculations done by big teams and room-sized computers in the 1940s can be done on an iPhone very quickly but one still needs the expertise. Much of the general sketch of the atomic bomb is publicly known but much of it is classified. So the technology is advanced but it's not accessible to everyone. At the same time, I believe that there are at least hundreds of people in the world who pretty much know how to build an atomic bomb. ... Netanyahu said that the detonator is easy etc. Well, it is "less advanced" science but maybe still hard enough. – Luboš Motl Sep 29 '12 at 10:18
I don't understand? Which part is the hardest? – Derfder Sep 29 '12 at 10:23
1  
There are several difficult tasks. Measuring the underling cross-sections and decay profiles is a big, fiddly, demanding chunk of science. Refining the material is a hard engineering problem and a giant industrial undertaking. Figuring the minimum requirements to get prompt criticality is a largish programming task, and figuring more efficient designs is a bigger one still. But all these things have been done, so perspective developers can try to short cut any of them, and as @LubošMotl mentioned, the capital costs of the computations parts are enormously reduced. – dmckee Sep 29 '12 at 16:44
2  
I think the less said about this the better. – physicsphile Sep 29 '12 at 22:42
@physicsphile yep, and to me the question seems quite off topic ... – Dilaton Sep 29 '12 at 23:11
show 2 more comments

closed as off topic by David Zaslavsky Sep 29 '12 at 23:19

Questions on Physics Stack Exchange are expected to relate to physics within the scope defined in the FAQ. Consider editing the question or leaving comments for improvement if you believe the question can be reworded to fit within the scope. Read more about closed questions here.

4 Answers

up vote 3 down vote accepted

The hard part is getting the material — enriched uranium or plutonium :-)

Other than that it's trivial to make gun-type device similar to the Hiroshima one, but it requires much more material as you need a critical mass to sustain a chain reaction.

A more advanced implosion version crushes the material and so increases its density, so you need less material. The usual method is to make the material into a sphere and symmetrically detonate chemical explosives around it. The hard part is ensuring these charges denotate symetrically, as even several microseconds' delay between their detonations prevents the material reaching critical density.

About "getting the material", you could enrich uranium by reacting it with fluorine to make uranium hexafluoride, and spin it in a powerful centrifuge. Ordinary uranium contains mostly heavier U-238 (not useful in your case) and lighter (useful) U-235. The centrifuge very slowly separates the useful isotope from the less useful "depleted" uranium.

As for politically hard part, try building such a centrifuge and you'll soon have the IEAE (or worse) knocking on your door!

share|improve this answer

It is still difficult because the physics involved in nuclear weapons did not change over time and is fortunately quite involved. Some of the challenges are listed in the Wikipedia article about nuclear weapon design.

Even if technology has advanced you need complex models involving the reactions and the outcome on very small timescales. One example is how to compress a metal sphere using explosives absolutely evenly in microseconds. The faster computers help you only a bit, as you still need accurate models that can often only be calibrated using extensive data from experiments. This data is almost exclusively classified so only few things changed compared to decades ago in terms of published or generally accessible knowledge.

I do not want to speculate about the number of people who might have enough knowledge as this is off-topic here. One should not forget though that it is not only about the knowledge but also about the access to a lot of technologies and materials.

share|improve this answer
I do not understand that e.g. countries with a lot of money like Brazil, Saudi Arabia, Israel etc. could not develope a nuclear weapon. Again it is almost 70 years from the first A-bomb. – Derfder Sep 29 '12 at 13:38
2  
Developing defensive or offensive weapons for a country is a measure of how it views its neighbors, and its neighbors view it. Israel has nuclear weapons for decades, it was always threatened and felt always threatened by most of its neighbors. So have Pakistan and India who have had bad relationships and hold a balance in a "peace of terror". The other countries you quote must not feel threatened enough. Other countries may not have enough money to acquire the knowhow and technology. This question should be asked in a different Q & A forum. – anna v Sep 29 '12 at 13:44

To develop an A-bomb from scratch you have to make tests. Such tests cannot be made unnoticed by other nuclear powers (they are easily detectable from space, by seismic sensors and by radiation pollution dosimeters).

Once you have your tests detected, you face strong political response and possible sanctions.

share|improve this answer

Organising the administration.

The Manhattan project employed 100,000 people - many of them physicists or mathematicians. Even organising a room full of physicists and mathematicians and keeping them concentrated on a common goal for a longer than a tea break is impressive. Managing 1000s of them for many years in secret is almost un-imaginably difficult.

share|improve this answer

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.