It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Francium Fluoride bomb

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 15 2008 @ 10:38 PM
link   
reply to post by ege1993
 

Scientific American had an article in one of the last issues about fluoridated water (the element is fluorine, the compound is fluoride). It reported that there were some hints as to illnesses from the fluoride, mostly from bone decay issues.

Fluoride reacts with the outer layer of enamel in teeth to form s more stable compound in reaction to acids that naturally occur in our mouths. That's how it prevents tooth decay. It is also true that fluoride became widely used after aluminum became popular, leading to the concerns (I believe founded) from Alcoa's actions.

I don't have that issue at hand, but it would be in the last three months. Anyone else subscribe to it that can give an issue date?

Oh, yes, on the nuclear/chemical subject, both produce new chemicals from the reactions, but a nuke produces them from a change in mass (and therefore energy), whereas a chemical reaction is simply the shifting of electrons to form more stable bonds. Nuclear is many times more powerful than any chemical reaction known.

TheRedneck




posted on Apr, 5 2008 @ 10:57 PM
link   
Chemical reactions are Electro-magnetic in nature. Nuclear fission requires that an energetic neutron strike an atomic nucleus with sufficient energy to overcome the Strong Nuclear Force and fracture the nucleus. The ratio of the strength of chemical explosives to a nuclear chain reaction is roughly 10,000,000 to 1 for a similar mass. (although it's not that simple)

No merely chemical reaction can come remotely close. The teeny weapons that were used in WWII were very inefficient. Of the 64kg of U235 in "Little Boy", only about 600 grams were converted to energy... resulting in a yield equivalent to over 14,000,000,000 grams of TNT.

The fusion reactions in modern "H-bombs" are substantially more energetic.



posted on Jun, 17 2008 @ 08:02 AM
link   



posted on Oct, 15 2008 @ 02:06 PM
link   
I've been thinking about FrF for a long time, and I was thinking something like this:

Francium, like it's entire column, is highly reactive with water. Flourine loves francium to death because one wants what the other one is willing to give.

Take FrF, add an electron to make it FrF-, and drop it in a large source of fresh water.

Chemical manipulation can produce synthetic Fr, so it can be mass produced at a cost.

FrF(-) + H2O(+) > FrO(+) + H2F(-).

In the resulting exchange, Francium combines with oxygen to produce Francium Oxide, a radioactive aqueous solution. The flourine reacts with the hydrogen to produce dihydrogen flouride, a poisonous gas. The reaction itself, given enough mass of francium, produces a magnificent explosion and results in the poisoning of a water source and everything in the air dies.

I discussed the previous with a Biogeochemistry student who confirmed that theory is sound, provided it's possible to manufacture that much Francium, which at this point is not cost-efficient.



posted on Nov, 3 2008 @ 01:35 AM
link   
Umn, I remember in high school watching a film of the Francium Fluorine reaction it was pretty impressive though obviously not a viable bomb given the reasons above.



posted on Jan, 7 2009 @ 12:46 PM
link   
I thought there were Fluoride explosives used to generate enough light for Lasers for anti-missile satellites...?



posted on Jan, 15 2009 @ 04:19 AM
link   
reply to post by Simulacra
 


i'm sorry but you can't have barrels of anti-matter, it would just destroy the barrel, if it comes into contact with anything it gets destroyed so i'm doubfukl such a thing exists



posted on Mar, 1 2009 @ 12:43 AM
link   
reply to post by nyarlathotep
 



It may be toxic but it is excreted/used by the body (in teeth enamel) so fast that it has no effect on health at all (other than less cavities



posted on May, 26 2009 @ 12:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by Simulacra

Originally posted by DetectivePerez
Thanks for the information. Is there a reaction stronger than a nuclear reaction?


Anti-matter/Matter reaction would quite possibly be the strongest thing known to man. But good luck getting your hands on some anti-matter. I heard the Iraqi insurgents have three barrels of it hidden somewhere in Fallujah. You might want to talk to them.



lmao! ah... think i just totally orgasmd a bit when i read this. --or i peed. either way.. something happened and something didnt. matter/anti matter would be something of a bff's no?.



posted on May, 26 2009 @ 11:42 AM
link   
reply to post by Simulacra
 


Only question I would have is how could you contain 3 barrels of antimatter in 3 barrels made of matter?




top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join