Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!thunder.mcrcim.mcgill.edu!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!att!cbnews!cbnews!military
From: john%ghostwheel.unm.edu@ariel.unm.edu (John Prentice)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: Terminology:Nuclear, Atomic, Neutron
Message-ID: <1991Feb27.021040.21923@cbnews.att.com>
Date: 27 Feb 91 02:10:40 GMT
References: <1991Feb21.030902.12162@cbnews.att.com> <1991Feb22.232819.4666@cbnews.att.com>
Sender: military@cbnews.att.com (William B. Thacker)
Organization: University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM
Lines: 27
Approved: military@att.att.com



From: john%ghostwheel.unm.edu@ariel.unm.edu (John Prentice)
In article <1991Feb22.232819.4666@cbnews.att.com> john%ghostwheel.unm.edu@ariel.unm.edu (John Prentice) writes:
>
>Fission is an atomic process, so a fisson weapon is an atomic weapon.
>Fusion is a nuclear process, so a fusion weapon is a nuclear weapon.
>

I would like to clarify my statement above, since it is misleading
the way I said this.  Fission itself is a nuclear process, however
80% to 90% of the kinetic energy of the fission fragments comes from
the electrostatic repulsion of the nuclei.  Very little of the energy
is derived from the nuclear forces.  So, while fission is nuclear, the
energy of the weapon is derived mostly from atomic forces and hence the
term atomic bomb.  

Sorry for the confusion.

John



--
John K. Prentice    john@unmfys.unm.edu (Internet)
Dept. of Physics and Astronomy, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM, USA
Computational Physics Group, Amparo Corporation, Albuquerque, NM, USA


Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com