It's the end of the world

[ZokesPro]

Originally posted by ZokesPro
You know, in some sick and twisted way I'm kinda hoping that that asteroid WILL hit the Earth. We need a change.

I'd even settle for seeing it hit our moon, that would make quite the awesome show.

Actually, let me re-phrase that.

I just want it to hit places I don't like. For example, my work place would be a great spot to hit, but only if the asteroid broke up in our atmosphere to a size that would only destroy a few buildings.

And if it breaks up in our atmosphere I get first dibs on any remains!

[Drizzt]

I'm missing something (wanted to say something more complex, but, I always end up using this pre-made sentence )


I remember from the time I used to study that...uhmmm...complex to translate.
A bomb does no damage with magical energy or the like; there is no hidden energy or karma into a kg of C4.
It's simply the reaction with the air that make it blown, and actually it's air itself that do the huge damage.

And, for nuclear weapon is the same: the nuclear energy generate a huge explosion that has as an effect the creation of a killing wind (don't remember the exact speed of the generated wind, but something in the order of 50.000 km/h is near)

So, if an asteroid is coming to impact with earth...how can we make it explode in space where there is nothing to have a reaction with?
The only two chanches (wrote correctly?) are:
1) Make it explode when it's into the atmosfear
2) Make it explode when it's really near to a sun or a star, so that the explosion can burn the elium or the H to produce a damage.

Now, if the number two is useless, what remains?

[McElvis]

According to NEO page, if it hits, which seems less likely now as the Palermo value is down to -0.25, it will hit with the force of 1.2 MILLION mega tons!

That's going to make a rather large PIT

[Drizzt]

And, no, wen can't send the dynamite on an asteroid with a huge load of hoxygen container!

[Technoid]

uhm....



Drizzt:

You are wrong on so many points it almost hurts.

[Drizzt]

Tech, maybe, as I'm trying to remeber something studied about 7-8 years ago, and in a few hours

[RichL]

Originally posted by Drizzt

I remember from the time I used to study that...uhmmm...complex to translate.
A bomb does no damage with magical energy or the like; there is no hidden energy or karma into a kg of C4.
It's simply the reaction with the air that make it blown, and actually it's air itself that do the huge damage.

Drizzt,
you don't mean Fuel-Air Explosives do you?
AFAIK they work something along the lines of spraying a cloud of explosive vapour in the air and using the oxygen in the air as part of the explosive.
I think...

[Gurm]

No, he thinks that TNT uses oxygen to explode.

Atomic weapons use matter to explode. In fact, they use ANY matter. Air, water, helium, hydrogen. Don't matter.

- Gurm

[az]

What now, Gurm? Matter or don't matter?

Would they work in space, then? AFAIK, there's close to no matter there... or would they need direct contact with the asteroid?

We wouldn't want to use them anyway - an EMP would be devastating.

AZ

[Technoid]

Gurm is right!
The Atomic weapon converts the matter its carying to energy!
The hiroshima bomb could now be as smal as a soup can!

And space is not absolute wacum!
Absolute wacum is hard to do even in laboratoruims.

Nuclear weapons can be "modified" to emit little or no emp...
Think reversed neutron bomb!
And if it it long enough out we are protected by earths natural EM field!

[Gurm]

Technoid has hit it on the head.

1. Yeah, we would want it to hit the asteroid. But it could probably work in space. Remember that scientists have decided that space is mostly "dark matter", *ahem* which is scientist-code for "there's something there but we don't know what, dammit". To the best of my knowledge, nobody has detonated an atom bomb in orbit yet, so we really don't know. But a direct hit would be perfectly good... and if it's 2 miles wide shouldn't be hard.

2. The EMP would suck if it happened within the atmosphere. If it happened in orbit it wouldn't be an issue. We have this lovely thing called "the sky" which protects us from "outer space".

3. As Technoid said, atom bombs don't HAVE to emit EMP, they just do because they're unshielded, and frankly we WANT the secondary effects. They are WEAPONS, after all.

- Gurm

[RedRed]

You are assuming that we could do a number of things Gurm

1 Hit it! Not as easy as it sounds! Assuming that this thing has a relative velocity (to the missile flying twords it) of perhaps 200 000 KPH!!! that is a hard target! its only 2 miles across

2 The structure of it. If it is made up of a loose collection of debris, your explosion will have negligable effect - the micro gravity of the chunk could re claim as much as 90% of the mass..... If its solid - you dont want 1000 50Meter bits hitting the earth in a spray - probably more damage!

3 you have to develop a nuke which could hit this surface - and SURVIVE long enough to explode- no current tech could do that....

4 You are assuming that it is not a black body and 20 times the size. if it is we are trully shagged.

5 Thes size of a nuke big enough to vapourise 2 cubic kilometers of a solid material could be bigger that the worlds COMBINED nuke stockpile!!!

6 where Drizt is comming from is Valid - if a bit wrong.. You cant detonate the nuke NEAR the asteroid - you need a mass to react it off against - spraying the asteroid in hard radiation wont deflect or destroy the asteroid. you probably couldnt build a missile with enough reaction mass to sacrafice in your nuke to deflect the asteroid dignificantly. Remember you need to transport the reaction material in the rocket. The velocity the missile and the momentum it can witstand (anuveriing twords such a small target) would be dependant upon trully massive propulsion systems and a stupendous amount of reaction fuel - I would be surprised if there was the ability to build such a beast in a reasonable timeframe


the only chance - if it is going to hit - is a deflection.... A C Clarke discussed this in some of his Sci Fi books -
Possibly a deflection shot with ion motors 5 years out might do the trick.... that would be your best bet.

[Gurm]

1. We can build really big a-bombs. We have thus far chosen not to, but there's no reason we can't.

2. There are bombs even more dangerous than a-bombs in development now. Prototypes look to be very nasty. Perfect for vaporizing small moons, large asteroids, or Ted Turner.

3. If the right people work on it, hitting it shouldn't be an issue. And by "the right people", I mean "anyone but Nasa, who can't hit the broad side of a barn with a water balloon".

- Gurm

[RedRed]

remember that you are probably only going to get one shot at this.....

do it too late and it wont matter...

why would anyone in their right minds be developing anything more destructive than a fusion bomb?

I can assure you that it would be VERY difficult to hit such a beast - and have your bomb survive the impact. remember the Physucs around momentum.... its a bitch - cos you hve to carry a reaction mass sufficient to be able to turn in time and sufficiently to target.... you could not carry sufficient reaction to get out there wuickly, slow down, manuver and then control impact. The mass of a missile sufficient to vapourise a full 2 cubic kilometers of matter, combined with the reaction mass for these manuvers would pobably make the device bigger and more massive than the TITANIC! We might only have 12 years for this (we have to do it before it gets too close) ... at the moment we can only put up the mass of a bus.... never mind pulling it out of near earth orbit.....

So far (in 40 years) we have probably managed to deploy perhaps a thousand tons of material into space. we would probably need to design, launch, deploy and build a one shot missile of a mass of perhaps 10,000 tons! (I havent done the math , but I reckon (back of envelope stuff) that thats what you would need.)

[Fat Tone]

It'll take 10 years to decide who pays for it!