The tech is the same tech used in nuclear reactors, and depending on how far you go certain therapies. Nuclear weapons are just one instance of the tech.
Simply put: no. This is just misinformation. Thermonuclear weapons derive their energy from fusion, not fission. The prompt criticality of the igniting fission weapon has nothing to do with the criticality seen in a nuclear reactor used for generating energy.
The Manhattan Project literally built the world's first nuclear fission reactor. The group that built that reactor later became Argonne National Laboratory which then built the first nuclear reactor that generated electricity. Nuclear weapons and nuclear power come from the same roots.
> Modern nuclear weapons work by combining chemical explosives, nuclear fission, and nuclear fusion. The explosives compress nuclear material, causing fission; the fission releases massive amounts of energy in the form of X-rays, which create the high temperature and pressure needed to ignite fusion.
I disagree that it has nothing to do with it. All of this technology was being developed at the same time, and the most important part of the technology for both purposes is criticality.
Yes, technology advances. We're no longer pedaling around on penny farthings or driving around on Benz Patent-Motorwagens, but the technology is the same basis in many ways, just evolved.
Is fusion weapon research informative of fusion reactor research, and vice versa?
Not even remotely useful. If it was, there would be no more research on fusion reactors. They'd just process the heaps of government data available from both full weapon tests & other research projects.
Good point. I think it's fair to criticize instances of technology and innovation. So it would be fair to criticize all innovation that is specific only to weapons.
Since their inception they have revolutionized modern biology, and by extension medicine [1]. Also they gave us the seismic monitoring network we currently use to understand the earth.
Of course it wasn't the weapons that did this, but rather the offshoot technologies. But like every technology the first use was blowing something up, the later uses were arguably more peaceful.
I would agree that these days there's a bit more divergence between weapons research and useful nuclear research. But there are still some things that might belong in both camps (e.g. inertial confinement fusion).
Not that I agree with op but you could make a solid argument that they're the reason we haven't had war between major powers. You could probably argue the whole Ukraine Russia issue is because Ukraine gave up it's nuclear weapons in exchange for a promise of peace (and other countries can take notes on the result of that)
