4 ms·
"10 times the combined power of all the conventional explosives used in WWII, or one quarter of the estimated yield of the 1883 eruption of Krakatoa." Looks li
by hythloday 14y ago
"10 times the combined power of all the conventional explosives used in WWII, or one quarter of the estimated yield of the 1883 eruption of Krakatoa."
Looks like we still have a way to go.
- PostOnce 14y agoWell, that's the most powerful ever detonated, not necessarily the most powerful ever designed or built. Also I assume the current best is classified. We've probably surpassed that by a margin, given that FIFTY years have passed. The time between the first nuke and Tsar Bomba was 15 years. Now we have better science, more money, computers, and a 50 year lead.
- cli 14y agoHowever, as the "analysis" section of the wikipedia article mentions, ever since the invention of ICBMs and other more accurate and faster methods of delivering nuclear bombs, the trend has been towards carpeting the target area with smaller and more numerous bombs. Since the energy of the explosion is inversely proportional to the square of the distance, for destroying a specific area I suspect having multiple smaller explosions would be more effective than one large explosion.