“Simply stated, for a 100-meter object that’s projected to hit Earth, if we employ a robust nuclear disruption technique by at least one month before impact, we can prevent 99% or more of the impacting mass from hitting the Earth,”
Nukes Vs Asteroids
Posted 17 October 2021 - 01:13 PM
Using multiple nukes in a row to nudge the projectile away sounds slightly better than trying to turn it into smaller pieces.
Posted 17 October 2021 - 01:52 PM
A thermonuclear blast is so destructive for 3 reasons: The initial energy blast and its heat output, the shock wave from the blast and the radiation aftermath. The radiation only kills life forms so that's not useful. The shock wave only happens in an atmosphere. That really only leaves the initial blast which granted is very large but is it really large enough to disintegrate a stony asteroid. This in turn brings up the more important question, do you want to be struck by a bullet or a shotgun blast? Breaking an asteroid into smaller pieces and burning them up in our atmosphere would heat the atmosphere and could do as much or more damage to life on the planet.
I say fund the search, find them early and paint one side black and let solar radiation push them off their original course.
Edited by Rickycardo, 17 October 2021 - 01:54 PM.
- ShaulaB likes this
Posted 01 November 2021 - 09:25 AM
Well, it's very clear that the nukes are more powerful then asteroids (at least what we've seen), especially thermonuclear blast. Just watch documentals and you'll get what Im saying
Posted 01 November 2021 - 02:22 PM
I say fund the search, find them early and paint one side black and let solar radiation push them off their original course."
Don't think they're talking about blowing an asteroid into a bunch of pieces. Think they're talking about detonating close to use the Shockwave to nudge the bulk out of our path.
And even if they were, it is not as simple as "do you want to be hit by a bullet or a shotgun blast?", because in this cosmic game of Russian Roulette, you would be smart to always choose the bullet.
Blasting into a million pieces would vastly increase the surface area of these space rocks and the volume they would occupy in our atmosphere. Whereas with no intervention, the rock would get super hot on its way to the surface, it would only affect that region of the atmosphere it entered. And the heat would easily dissipate in the atmosphere. If it were blasted to a million pieces they'd all rain down at roughly an equivalent time period all over the globe raising the temperature of the atmosphere vastly everywhere. With our atmospheric makeup and no cooler areas to dissipate that heat to, the atmosphere could easily get hot enough to vaporize large amounts of our oceans and lakes as well as pretty much insta-kill all land based life (with the rest following soon after).
So you don't want shotgun blasts is the tldr.
Also, radiation doesn't "just kill lifeforms". Radiation is just light being radiated from a source. There's radiation in nearly every aspect of daily life we interact with. And there are many wavelengths in a nuclear blast that would help propel an object in addition to its initial shockwave, especially if we could paint one side first.