# why wouldn't have it had worked?

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-wouldnt-have-it-had-worked/196260>\
**Category:** Factual Questions\
**Created:** [August 19, 2003, 7:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-wouldnt-have-it-had-worked/196260 "2003-08-19T19:10:10Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 2\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![nocturnal\_tick](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/3d9bf3/32.png) [@nocturnal\_tick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/nocturnal_tick)\
**Post date:** [August 19, 2003, 7:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-wouldnt-have-it-had-worked/196260/1 "2003-08-19T19:10:10Z")

</div>

i remember hearing that during the creation of the first nuclear bomb some believed that it was impossible due to the mass required being more than was available. Can someone tell me the proper argument used and why they thought it?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![newcrasher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/b3f665/32.png) [@newcrasher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/newcrasher)\
**Post date:** [August 19, 2003, 7:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-wouldnt-have-it-had-worked/196260/2 "2003-08-19T19:30:23Z")

</div>

The better question is why haven’t you chosen a more descriptive thread title.

More people will read a thread that has a relevant title, thus giving you more opportunities for a useful answer.