Lucifer Project - creating a new sun out of Jupiter/Saturn?

[danielost]

Click.

Lol. Got to love those type of people. However I must admit, I don't remember people talking about it.

Sorry if the wrong forum. I was going to post in the conspiracy forum but then you have some people who worship the very word 'conspiracy' and I don't want to be hunted down by the men in black.

If anything had happened because of that probe we would have had two suns not one less planet.

[Oderint]

If anything had happened because of that probe we would have had two suns not one less planet.

Not really.

A sun isn't one giant explosion.

If Jupiter exploded we would maybe see a flash of light.

And probably die because of gravitational changes

[danielost]

Not really.

A sun isn't one giant explosion.

If Jupiter exploded we would maybe see a flash of light.

And probably die because of gravitational changes

But what I am saying is Jupiter would have lit up before it blew up. IE become a star. nuke fussion.

[Oderint]

But what I am saying is Jupiter would have lit up before it blew up. IE become a star. nuke fussion.

I'd love to see the cold, hard scientific facts behind this statement.

[danielost]

I'd love to see the cold, hard scientific facts behind this statement.

I just think it would be a lot easier to blow up that planet than make it a star. After all it is already burning hydrogen and helium like a star now.

Edited August 31, 2008 by danielost

[Waspie_Dwarf]

Click.

Lol. Got to love those type of people. However I must admit, I don't remember people talking about it.

Sorry if the wrong forum. I was going to post in the conspiracy forum but then you have some people who worship the very word 'conspiracy' and I don't want to be hunted down by the men in black.

The above is included to show where the new thread started before it was merged.

I'm going to merge this topic with another one which exists about the so called Lucifer project, which is in the correct forum, which is the conspiracies forum as this is a conspiracy theory (it sure as hell isn't astronomy or any form of science).

Right, that's the moderator bit out of the way, now the personal opinion bit:-

The reason you don't remember hearing people talking about it is simple... it never happened. It is a lie plane and simple. It has no bais in fact and is scientifically impossible.

The title of the thread I've just merged was "NASA tried to blow up Jupiter!". NO THEY DIDN'T! Any one with a basic grasp of science (or a grasp of reality) would be able to see this is nonsense. It was nonsense when it was claimed NASA was trying to blow up Jupiter and it nonsense now that it is claimed that NASA is trying to blow up Saturn. Read through this thread and the reasons why it is nonsense have been explained thoroughly and repeatedly.

[danielost]

One could say that Saturn is already on fire. Saturns interior is similar to Jupiters, having a rocky core at the center, a liquid metallic hydrogen layer above that, and a molecular hydrogen layer above that. Traces of various ices are also present. Saturn has a very hot interior, reaching 12,000 Kelvin at the core, and it radiates more energy into space than it receives from the Sun.

sorry no rocky core.

[Waspie_Dwarf]

sorry no rocky core.

Would you like to provide a source to back up this claim of yours, because there seems to be 2 schools of thought on this matter. There is the school of thought that says that Jupiter and Saturn have rocky cores. The other school of thought seems to think they haven't. The school of thought which says they do seems to consist of astronomers and planetary geologist. The school of thought that says they don't seems to consist of.. well you actually.

For example there is this from "An Introduction to Solar System Astronomy", Prof. Richard Pogge at Ohio State University, Lecture 37, Jupiter and Saturn:

Jupiter & Saturn are Gas Giants

Have no solid surface:

* Deep, heavy hydrogen/helium atmosphere

* Rock & ice core

Source: HERE

Or this:

The Interior:

We know very little about the interior of Jupiter but can infer a small core and liquid or gas as the remaining contents because of the lower density of Jupiter compared to Earth. The intense magnetic field allows Astronomers to create a model of the interior:

* 1000 km thick atmosphere

* Liquid hydrogen "crust" - very thick

* Liquid metallic hydrogen "mantle"

* Rocky core

and this:

Internal Structures:

Saturn and Jupiter share very similar internal structures, with the only variation being content

From Astronomy Online, Sources: Jupiter, Saturn

Or this:

Saturn's interior is similar to Jupiter's consisting of a rocky core, a liquid metallic hydrogen layer and a molecular hydrogen layer. Traces of various ices are also present

From nineplanets.org, Source: HERE

I could go on, but I think I have made my point.

[darkbreed]

thanks for reminding me about this.

Personally I think it's likely they have some solid core down below all the gasses surrounding them. No I dont have any evidence to back that up it's just a personal belief but I will try explore this further and see what I can find.

Regarding the blowing up by NASA thing, well I'm not a scientist so I can't really say, but if the gasses are highly burnable I guess it would be possible to spark it up some to put it like that. Again just a guess as I have never been on neither of the planets and can only rely on what i'm told by people whom I do not really trust much in the first place (NASA etc).

-EA

[NeoGenesis]

But what I am saying is Jupiter would have lit up before it blew up. IE become a star. nuke fussion.

Umm do you even understand the concept of nuclear fission.Nuclear fusion is created by using a small nuclear device to super heat an compress a capsule containing hydrogen isotopes like deuterium and tritium which then produces full thermo-nuclear fusion.

Cassini with its alleged plutonium warhead will do nothing more than make a small spec on Jupiter's surface and with even the largest warhead that we can launch into space Jupiter will just swallow it up.Reason why I saying this is take a look at the Shoemaker-Levy 9 asteroid that impacted Jupiter,if those asteroids impacted earth we would not be sitting here having this discussion.

Here see for yourself:

http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/planetary/comet.html

Bottom line is that we can just barely blow up a large city with a plutonium bomb and here we want to blow apart Jupiter which is 300 times larger than the Earth.Its all a bunch of nonsense.

AS for hydrogen ignition you would also need Oxygen and Jupiter does not have any oxygen in its atmosphere.The Shoemaker Levy 9 incident is proof of that.

Edited August 31, 2008 by NeoGenesis

[Picturesque Orion]

72 pound of plutonium wouldn't make a dent in Saturn...have you seen how big and unsolid the planet is? It is not big enough to have enough mass/gravity to start nuclear fission... The physics of the plan is just not even close to being feasible.

Where is Waspie when you need him?

For anyone interested, scaled representation.

[MID]

Cassini with its alleged plutonium warhead will do nothing more than make a small spec on Jupiter's surface and with even the largest warhead that we can launch into space Jupiter will just swallow it up.Reason why I saying this is take a look at the Shoemaker-Levy 9 asteroid that impacted Jupiter,if those asteroids impacted earth we would not be sitting here having this discussion.

True enough, Neo...

I should, for the benefit of those who may wish to join this nonsensical discussion without having availed themselves of reading the thread, of what I had previously posted regartding the OP's contention, and the "plutonium warhead" aboard Cassini (which of course is allegedly the power for making Jupiter into a star...???):

Of course, the OP's link is filled with utter nonsense from start to finish. This is whack-job lunatic fringe stuff.

Cassini is powered by RTGs (by necessity...one of the safest and most reliable electrical power generators available), and among the three of them, they contain ~ 71.5 lbs of Plutonium Dioxide, divided into 18 small sections, each in its own protective impact shell and heat shield, is in a ceramic form which is highly resistant to vaporization, and is protected against most any heating event by Graphite and Iridium shells.

Plutonium Dioxide is not fissionable material. An RTG is NOT a nuclear reactor, and this material cannot explode under any circumstance. If Cassini is ever sent into Saturn's atmopshere, the Pu-238 material in its RTGs will likely be exposed if the temperature exceeds 5000 degrees F and the friction can break through Iridium and Graphite shielding...and it will merely break into pieces, then being incinerated like the rest of Cassini...and not explode in any way.

The idea of causing a fusion reaction from a fission explosion on Saturn and creating a sun from a mass that isn't large enough to sustain such a reaction is nuts... and by doing so through using a fuel that cannot even explode is idiotic...

Whew...

[NeoGenesis]

Of course, the OP's link is filled with utter nonsense from start to finish. This is whack-job lunatic fringe stuff.

Cassini is powered by RTGs (by necessity...one of the safest and most reliable electrical power generators available), and among the three of them, they contain ~ 71.5 lbs of Plutonium Dioxide, divided into 18 small sections, each in its own protective impact shell and heat shield, is in a ceramic form which is highly resistant to vaporization, and is protected against most any heating event by Graphite and Iridium shells.

Plutonium Dioxide is not fissionable material. An RTG is NOT a nuclear reactor, and this material cannot explode under any circumstance. If Cassini is ever sent into Saturn's atmopshere, the Pu-238 material in its RTGs will likely be exposed if the temperature exceeds 5000 degrees F and the friction can break through Iridium and Graphite shielding...and it will merely break into pieces, then being incinerated like the rest of Cassini...and not explode in any way.

The idea of causing a fusion reaction from a fission explosion on Saturn and creating a sun from a mass that isn't large enough to sustain such a reaction is nuts... and by doing so through using a fuel that cannot even explode is idiotic...

Thank you for the info MID.I realize I made a mistake on the part of a nuclear warhead strapped to the Cassini spacecraft.

Admittedly I did read the full thread on this nonsensical discussion but I replied to only one specific post that carried with it NO technical knowledge and the spacecraft used by NASA.

[Seriously]

Aren't these the same people that believe that there is some form of Lizard people that can morph back and forth from Human to reptile person. If so there really is no point in arguing about any of this with anyone who believes in that nonsense. It's obvious they are nuts to begin with and then to try to have a logical debate with illogical people...

[Tann de Mae]

Then which one is it?! None of the spots on Jupiter has any relation to Galileo whatsoever.

Cheers,

Badeskov

Think he is mentioning this;

Mystery Spot on Jupiter

And no, that's not the other spot. And yes, this is from 2003;

Galileo Plunges into Jupiter

The spot article is from Oct 2003. The Plunge article is from Sept 2003. Chronologically it fits, in my opinion.

Thank you for sharing this - I will filter it for patterns and juggle this modern-day mythology in my mind.

[Admiral Danger]

nasa would have to be stupider than jupiter to do that

[Arcanus.]

Bah. I hate it when they try to unbalance nature just like this.

The so-called "smart" government people always try to unbalance things. Creating wars, blowing up planets, keep making space-junks, etc. Why can't we just keep everything in order? God made everything in order and it is our job to protect it to be in order. Doing otherwise would be unwise and would not be cost effective. Rather than doing feeble attempts to hassle God's creations - such as trying to fly a 32.7 kilograms of nuclear explosives to Saturn why don't we just try to store some water in Phoenix and blow some onto Mars lands? And see what the water will do. Will it diminish, or turn into ice, or vaporize, etc.! Wouldn't it be a quicker way to determine whether water would survive there or not? Or take a colony of ants and see if it will grow there, give all life-resources?

I think blowing up Saturn for reputation wouldn't be cost-effective. But I don't know, people these days spent 200,000 bucks on a cellphone.

[Czero 101]

I think blowing up Saturn for reputation wouldn't be cost-effective.

Lets not forget the completely and totally impossible part...

Cz

[Arcanus.]

Lets not forget the completely and totally impossible part...

Cz

And think about gravity. Wouldn't it disturb OUR OWN Solar System's gravity system? Remember, Saturn has quite a lot of moons... and what would happen to the ice-ring?

[frenat]

And think about gravity. Wouldn't it disturb OUR OWN Solar System's gravity system? Remember, Saturn has quite a lot of moons... and what would happen to the ice-ring?

All the mass would still be in the same general area so overall gravity would not be affected. If the transition to a star were particularly forceful (again it is completely impossible anyway) then the moons might be affected but other than a bit of extra light and heat from a new star here there would be no effect.

[Arcanus.]

All the mass would still be in the same general area so overall gravity would not be affected. If the transition to a star were particularly forceful (again it is completely impossible anyway) then the moons might be affected but other than a bit of extra light and heat from a new star here there would be no effect.

A bit of extra light and heat. In astronomy terms that means a bit. But in common terms that actually sounds like a gazillion new Celsius emanating from a new star. ;p

Oh yeah don't ask about how shiny our nights will be.

[frenat]

IF Saturn could be turned into a star, it would be farther from us than the sun is at its closest point and only then for half the year. For the other half of the year it would on the other side of the sun. It would also be smaller. It doesn't really matter how much heat or light we would get from it be IT CAN"T HAPPEN ANYWAY. I'm amazed this silliness is still being discussed.

[Hazzard]

IF Saturn could be turned into a star, it would be farther from us than the sun is at its closest point and only then for half the year. For the other half of the year it would on the other side of the sun. It would also be smaller. It doesn't really matter how much heat or light we would get from it be IT CAN"T HAPPEN ANYWAY. I'm amazed this silliness is still being discussed.

If Jupiter had been "only" about 100 times more massive at birth it would have become a star instead of a planet. Then the Solar System might have been a double star system instead of a single star with a planetary system.

Imagine that..two suns!

[thefinalfrontier]

Saturn or Jupiter do not have enough mass to become a star, This has already been done on jupiter when Gallileo was sent hurdling into it,

[Arcanus.]

Bah. Alright.

I'm out of this stupidity. Someone wants to blow a planet to be a star when they know that this feeble attempt to hassle God's creation is utterly impossible. Then what's the point of arguing about it? Let them do it IF they can.

Right, then, I'm moving out into another thread for a new life.