--- Howard Brazee <howard at brazee.net> wrote: > Carla Hunt wrote: > > would it be accurate to say that "nuclear weapons" are more a > > catagory and "atomic weapons" are a type of weapon in that catagory? > > I wouldn't say that. "Atomic weapons" is simply an older term for > "nuclear > weapons". When that expression was in wide use, the weapon being > referred > to was a fusion bomb. At about the time when the fission bomb > (thermonuclear bomb) came into being, the press started referring > replacing > all references to "atomic" with regards to weapons and power plants with > "nuclear". Right (except that you got fission and fusion backwards). Another source of confusion that I forgot about, though, is "A-bomb" (fission) and "H-bomb" (fusion). It's probably better to just forget about "atomic bomb" and use "nuclear bomb", and the same with "weapon". Jerry Friedman __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com