yes, indeed. lots of other factors go into it, as well. criticality safety can be quite complicated.

Hi Mike, thanks so much! I do get a lot of requests, but I welcome it - I want to know what everyone else finds interesting about nuclear. I wasn't planning on going over Castle Bravo, no, but is there a particular aspect of that you're interested in?

@@TheAtomicAgeCM Particularly how they miscalculated the yield to such a disastrous effect.

to be fair, i have posted three videos in the past 30 days lol

Damn, totally forgot to go over that lol. Great question! No bang, unless the heat makes the tanks pop from pressure, for example. It tends to kind of hum along critical or it can get into oscillations where it goes supercritical and subcritical. So, it could start cold, go critical and heat heat up - which tends to make things subcritical, so then it goes subcritical, cools down, and goes critical again, etc. Also, if it's fluid, it can make the fluid jump and that sloshing around can go critical or subcritical depending on temperature, shape, etc. If it's a lidless tank, it could go critical once and slosh out enough fluid to stay subcritical. But either way, the chain reaction puts out a ton of radiation and is very dangerous to be around.

@@TheAtomicAgeCM Thanks for the detailed info 👍

Yes, you're correct, but it's because it can be used for bombs. If there were some way to enrich for reactors that couldn't be used for bombs, that would solve one of the "issues" with nuclear power

@@TheAtomicAgeCM I disagree. I've seen no evidence that the IAEA/USA is at all concerned with what's been happening at Dimona for the last 40+ years. The "concern" for enrichment operations is purely a political excuse to attack nations that America doesn't like. If I'm wrong explain Dimona to me.

Do you think a NATO country is proliferating?

@@TheAtomicAgeCM Sorry. I guess I wasn't clear. at 0:30 in the Top Gun 2 clip, the speaker, Warlock (?), say a rogue nation is violating an uranium enrichment ban treaty. The speaker also mentions the treaty is 'a multilateral NATO treaty', so I assume any treaty dealing with NATO would imply the rogue nation would be somewhere around Europe. I was wonder what you think what real-world nation could be the basis for the fictional rogue nation in Top Gun 2?

Oh, sorry, you're totally right. I think I just didn't really pay attention to that part lol that's a good point you bring up, I'm not sure what a NATO multilateral treaty has to do in this instance. I thought the target was Iran because the nation in this movie has F-14s and Iran is the only other country to have ever operated F-14s, and because Iran is going for uranium enrichment. I don't think it's North Korea because they've never had F-14s and they've gone for plutonium production for their bomb program. But the movie doesn't explicitly say who it is so it's all just fun speculation.

@@TheAtomicAgeCM cool 😁

And ofc, it was build in the middle of mountain range with no one noticing anything. Facility like this take years to build :D Movie was good otherwise, I did not go see it for deep story but planes and bangs