Using nukes to blow up asteroids

Juuzou · October 01, 2014, 03:20:30 PM

This user has been blacklisted from posting on the forums. Until the blacklist is lifted, all posts made by this user have been hidden and require a Sep7agon^® SecondClass Premium Membership to view.

DAS B00T x2 · October 01, 2014, 03:23:31 PM

Well, if we blow it up well enough, the debris will just burn up in the atmosphere like millions of other tiny little space rocks.

gats · October 01, 2014, 03:23:48 PM

There's always a chance one of the smaller chunks will hit into something. Whether it be a plane, a person or a building.

cxfhvxgkcf-56:7 · October 01, 2014, 03:24:45 PM

This user has been blacklisted from posting on the forums. Until the blacklist is lifted, all posts made by this user have been hidden and require a Sep7agon^® SecondClass Premium Membership to view.

Septy · October 01, 2014, 03:25:47 PM

Instead of one huge asteroid it could become 4 tiny ones that strike all over the planet.

big sponge · October 01, 2014, 03:28:55 PM

Uhhh, hasn't it already been established that blowing up an asteroid is the last thing you'd want to do?

You know since it'll end up causing much more damage since instead of having one giant one you'll have dozens of small and medium sized ones hurdling at you.

It's much better to change their trajectory using an unmanned spacecraft with incredibly strong magnets.

DAS B00T x2 · October 01, 2014, 03:31:06 PM

Quote from: Septy on October 01, 2014, 03:25:47 PM

Instead of one huge asteroid it could become 4 tiny ones that strike all over the planet.

That's why you have a bunch of nukes!

PSU · October 01, 2014, 03:32:49 PM

We would most likely use some sort of "Laser" to break a small part of the asteroid off and deflect its path. Blowing it up is never good.

Korra · October 01, 2014, 03:46:59 PM

Blowing up a big asteroid will turn it into smaller asteroid that would destroy many areas instead of just one. Laser it and turn it into ash instead.

Word Wizard · October 01, 2014, 03:53:01 PM

I think we land a bunch of nukes on the asteroid then deflect it. Once it's about a quarter of its' orbit away we blow it to smithereens.

Turkey · October 01, 2014, 04:27:51 PM

Sounds like a job for the the Little Doctor:

Auspicious Rose · October 01, 2014, 04:37:48 PM

Well a dozen or so smaller ones hitting earth are better than one big one I guess.

Dustin · October 01, 2014, 06:33:51 PM

This user has been blacklisted from posting on the forums. Until the blacklist is lifted, all posts made by this user have been hidden and require a Sep7agon^® SecondClass Premium Membership to view.

Tackel · October 01, 2014, 08:31:24 PM

Quote from: Gatsby on October 01, 2014, 03:23:48 PM

There's always a chance one of the smaller chunks will hit into something. Whether it be a plane, a person or a building.

Better than planet wide extinction...

Yu · October 01, 2014, 08:31:52 PM

Not the best of ideas.

Relatively Quiet · October 01, 2014, 09:58:18 PM

For one thing, don't quote me on this, but I doubt the effectiveness of nukes in space. While the bomb itself may be a sealed unit, some form of combustion may be needed for it to ignite and explode. And the best catalyst we have for that is our own atmosphere. Second, when the bomb exploded, a lot of its potential energy would be wasted, because space is a vacuum. All that fusion and explosive power would probably just dissipate. And third, as everybody has said, breaking up an asteroid is a bad idea, because then you have many more projectiles to deal with. Instead of a grenade, you get a shotgun.

Mattie G Indahouse · October 02, 2014, 06:05:15 AM

Quote

If they were able to hit the target, would the smaller chunks be a threat to the planet?

The asteroid will still be around the same mass. Instead of having one big hunk of rock going at you there's no many hunks of rock coming at you. By breaking it apart it's going to cause more damge because its hitting more than one area. There's a reason why we use M.I.R.V's instead of using one big ass bomb.

The Lord Ruler · October 02, 2014, 07:25:12 AM

Time to call Bruce Willis.

velox · October 02, 2014, 09:11:25 AM

Quote from: Relatively Quiet on October 01, 2014, 09:58:18 PM

For one thing, don't quote me on this, but I doubt the effectiveness of nukes in space. While the bomb itself may be a sealed unit, some form of combustion may be needed for it to ignite and explode. And the best catalyst we have for that is our own atmosphere. Second, when the bomb exploded, a lot of its potential energy would be wasted, because space is a vacuum. All that fusion and explosive power would probably just dissipate. And third, as everybody has said, breaking up an asteroid is a bad idea, because then you have many more projectiles to deal with. Instead of a grenade, you get a shotgun.

I'm no expert on the subject, but I believe that nukes can detonate just fine in vacuum, it's just that they don't cause much damage as the shock waves need a medium to travel in.

TB · October 02, 2014, 09:21:50 AM

That is an awful idea.

Statefarm · October 02, 2014, 10:12:09 AM

Nuke the asteroid, then nuke the pieces. Then nuke those pieces. Then nuke the planet just to get it over with.

Seriously though. A more interesting question is would you rather allow aliens to take Earth or nuke them and the planet to oblivion? Nukes solve everything!

I liked the laser / change trajectory idea though.

Juuzou · October 02, 2014, 12:42:46 PM

This user has been blacklisted from posting on the forums. Until the blacklist is lifted, all posts made by this user have been hidden and require a Sep7agon^® SecondClass Premium Membership to view.

Naru · October 02, 2014, 01:16:42 PM

Well.. We have a rover landing on an asteroid soon, so let's see what we can do.

Septy · October 02, 2014, 01:23:51 PM

Quote from: Nuka on October 02, 2014, 12:44:00 PM

Quote from: Lady Noelle on October 02, 2014, 12:42:46 PM
NASA is trying to figure out a way to have a satellite or craft that is able to capture smaller asteroids and change their trajectory away from Earth, but it is years away from ever being finished.
NASA also gets almost no funding these days.

http://www.planetary.org/blogs/casey-dreier/2014/0529-the-house-just-passed-an-increase-to-nasas-budget.html

Oh · October 04, 2014, 02:26:15 PM

You wouldn't use nukes to blow them up, you'd use a shaped charge to change the trajectory of the asteroid.

Assassin 11D7 · October 04, 2014, 03:42:09 PM

Quote from: True Velox on October 02, 2014, 09:11:25 AM

Quote from: Relatively Quiet on October 01, 2014, 09:58:18 PM
For one thing, don't quote me on this, but I doubt the effectiveness of nukes in space. While the bomb itself may be a sealed unit, some form of combustion may be needed for it to ignite and explode. And the best catalyst we have for that is our own atmosphere. Second, when the bomb exploded, a lot of its potential energy would be wasted, because space is a vacuum. All that fusion and explosive power would probably just dissipate. And third, as everybody has said, breaking up an asteroid is a bad idea, because then you have many more projectiles to deal with. Instead of a grenade, you get a shotgun.
I'm no expert on the subject, but I believe that nukes can detonate just fine in vacuum, it's just that they don't cause much damage as the shock waves need a medium to travel in.

Since nuclear bombs create a vacuum when they explode, I don't see why people think a vacuum would make them not work.

Hoak Hokan · October 04, 2014, 11:53:46 PM

Maybe using a nuke to nudge the asteroid off a collision course for Earth.

Turkey · October 05, 2014, 04:29:50 PM

Let's clear some misconceptions about nuclear weapons detonating in space:

1. There would be no physical blast. Shockwaves are a result of pressure moving particles in the atmosphere; when something is destroyed by an explosion, it's because it's pushing huge quantities of air at a very high velocity into it. In space, there is no air so there's nothing to carry a blast. This is also why sound doesn't travel in space; sound is a reverberation of particles in an atmosphere.

2. There would be no transfer of heat because that radiation travels through a medium also. You could be right next to a nuclear explosion and, aside from shrapnel and the other forms of radiation, you'd feel nothing.

3. The significant threat is nuclear radiation, which is normally dispersed through the air. It's still a huge hazard in-atmosphere, but in space the radiation will travel outward until it hits something.

So no, nukes won't really do anything to an asteroid. The Armageddon tactic was actually pretty sound, since drilling into the asteroid will mean the explosion will attenuate off of the asteroid's tiny atmosphere of trailing gases and ice.