I can make a nuclear bomb.

I can make a nuclear bomb. However, "can" is loosely defined here, because I am knowledgable but not able. I do not have the desire or materials, but they are really simple devices. When countries, such as Iran and North Korea, cannot make them with pooled resources, I wonder what is wrong with them.

Some background:
Special Relativity was published in 1905.
General Relativity was published in 1916.
Now, let's put ourselves in 1945 with a slide rule. We have two types of bombs that we can make: uranium (such as Little Boy), or Plutonium (such as Fat Man). If I had to pick one, I would pick a the "gun based" Little Boy. This takes a lot of Uranium, and is inefficient, but it's pretty much fool proof. If you look at the mathematics for this weapon, it's obvious why you'd make it this way. You can pretty much guarantee that it will work, you wouldn't even need to test it. Now it comes down to what you need to do it, which is either whole bunch of centrifuges or a lot of time.

Using ore that is readily available (the earth is a fissile system, there's tons of Uranium about), and a single centrifuge (I designed one on the back of the piece of paper, it might work) at the cost of about ¥20,000,000, I would take me about 300 years to get enough U-235, so the limiting factor is the number of centrifuges and the cost of power.

So in summary, anyone can make a bomb easily. I definitely believe that nuclear power is a more noble cause because it is free. You take a hot rock, remove energy and put it back in the ground where you got it. If you think that nuclear power is a terrible idea, well, frankly, you are an idiot. Here's radioactive coal ash for the layman. --Dr. Suigin, Ph.D. (no, I'm not kidding)