Go back
Buckminster won't like this one: Buckybombs:

Buckminster won't like this one: Buckybombs:

Science

s
Fast and Curious

slatington, pa, usa

Joined
28 Dec 04
Moves
53321
Clock
05 Mar 15
Vote Up
Vote Down

http://phys.org/news/2015-03-buckybomb-potential-power-nanoscale-explosives.html

I wonder if this could be useful as an anti-cancer treatment, if you could keep it to one or two molecules embedded inside a tumor, heat it with a fast microwave beam or something. Seems like it would have a devastating effect on any cells in the vicinity.

D
Losing the Thread

Quarantined World

Joined
27 Oct 04
Moves
87415
Clock
07 Mar 15
Vote Up
Vote Down

I doubt that that would work, the microwaves would have such a destructive effect on tissues that you may as well do without the buckybombs. The military applications are obvious. It's a high energy explosive, combined with a standard detonator, or possibly even just a spark, you can produce miniaturized high explosives. A 50 mm rifle round with as much effect as an artillery shell. Although, in fairness, that can have civilian applications as well.

m
Ajarn

Wat?

Joined
16 Aug 05
Moves
76863
Clock
07 Mar 15
1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by DeepThought
I doubt that that would work, the microwaves would have such a destructive effect on tissues that you may as well do without the buckybombs. The military applications are obvious. It's a high energy explosive, combined with a standard detonator, or possibly even just a spark, you can produce miniaturized high explosives. A 50 mm rifle round with as mu ...[text shortened]... fect as an artillery shell. Although, in fairness, that can have civilian applications as well.
The first thing I thought of when reading the article, and military implications, was bullets. Imagine a small bullet that can take out a tank... 😲 ... and then think of the following machine-guns that can fire thousands of rounds of these things per second. The onslaught is frightening, and the man-power needed is little. In the hands of Delta or the SAS.. a few units could wipe out a complete army using such. 🙄

-m.

s
Fast and Curious

slatington, pa, usa

Joined
28 Dec 04
Moves
53321
Clock
07 Mar 15
1 edit

Originally posted by mikelom
The first thing I thought of when reading the article, and military implications, was bullets. Imagine a small bullet that can take out a tank... 😲 ... and then think of the following machine-guns that can fire thousands of rounds of these things per second. The onslaught is frightening, and the man-power needed is little. In the hands of Delta or the SAS.. a few units could wipe out a complete army using such. 🙄

-m.
I'm sure the military uppers are drooling at the mouth to develop just that.

"Mr. President, just THINK of how many people we can kill with that weapon".......

Shallow Blue

Joined
18 Jan 07
Moves
12477
Clock
08 Mar 15
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by sonhouse
I'm sure the military uppers are drooling at the mouth to develop just that.

"Mr. President, just THINK of how many people we can kill with that weapon".......
Yes, I fear you're right. ABC weapons are banned - now the CIA will push for the non-banning of N-weapons.

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.