Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Nuclear bombs could save earth from asteroids


Still Waters

Recommended Posts

If a massive asteroid is hurtling toward Earth and threatening to sterilize the entire planet, blasting it to pieces with nuclear bombs might seem fit for a Hollywood movie. But, it could, in fact, be a viable solution to the potentially apocalyptic event, according to scientists who have studied asteroids and possible solutions to prevent Earth impacts.

There are some strings attached: The interloping space rock would have to pose a definite asteroid threat to Earth in a relatively short timeframe to justify such a drastic option, the scientists said. And blowing up an asteroid runs the risk of creating more debris to worry about later, they added.

If an asteroid was expected to collide with Earth within the next 50 years, using nuclear explosives to divert or disperse the hostile space rock could be the best alternative, explained David Dearborn, a research physicist at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in Livermore, Calif.

"The nuclear bomb is the strongest bomb we know," said Dearborn, who presented his study last month at the 216th meeting of the American Astronomical Society in Miami, Fl. "It's about 3 million times more efficient than chemical bombs. The question is how to use that energy."

arrow3.gifRead more...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
  • Replies 9
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • kobolds

    1

  • Still Waters

    1

  • Octans

    1

  • Mr Mojo Risin

    1

Ive always wondered what would even happen if we detonated a nuke in space.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the better word to use is MAY not COULD . sending nuke to space is a very risky option. the NUKE may explode before reach space.

Edited by kobolds
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the better word to use is MAY not COULD . sending nuke to space is a very risky option. the NUKE may explode before reach space.

Now that wouldn't be too good. :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It takes a very precise sequence of events to persuade a Hydrogen bomb to explode. It seems highly unlikely that one would explode 'accidently' during a launch.

I must say, I find this notion of 'nuking an asteroid' highly fanciful. It would take a LOT of bombs to change the trajectory of the asteroid, and these bombs would have to detonate in a very precise sequence/location to accomplish much, and at a very long range. (the idea of DISINTEGRATING an asteroid seems even more far-fetched).

I'm not sure that our rocket technology would be up to the job of delivering the bombs in such a precise manner. Do we currently possess ANY launch vehicle that can carry an object much beyond earth orbit, let alone accurately manoeuvre to intercept an asteroid at long range ? (especially when the precise trajectory and position of an asteroid may not be accurately known at long range).

meow purr :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I certainly hope a nuke is the very last option to divert a meteor or comet.

Besides, haven't we learned anything from the Bart's comet in the Simpsons? :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hear a lot of people say that if doing this didn't go to plan, we'd just end up being bombarded by smaller Radioatctive fragments, which I guess could be worse than the initial rock itsself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

"Nuclear bombs could save earth from asteroids", or doom the earth from millions of smaller ones...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hear a lot of people say that if doing this didn't go to plan, we'd just end up being bombarded by smaller Radioatctive fragments, which I guess could be worse than the initial rock itsself.

[/quote).

I agree, bombarded by millions of smaller radioactive fragments sounds worse than the initial rock itself.

But, if the initial rock itself are big enough to potensially destroy the whole Earth, meaning destroy life as we know it, that means an asteroid with a diameter of one kilometer or so, maybe being hit with a shower of smaller rocks would be the lesser evil. Let me explain:

A reason why a big asteroid, over one kilometer in diameter and more is so dangerous for all life as we know it, is that on impact it will throw up an enormous amount of fine dust high up in the atmosphere. This dust linger in the upper athomsphere, in the stratossphere, and block sunlight, initiating and global iceage lasting centuries. And destroy everything that was not destroyed on impact or shortly afterwards.

A shower of smaller rocks instead, will not throw dust so high up in the atmosphere, the dust will fall to the ground much faster, and we will avoid the centuries lasting iceage.

Despite radioactive contamination of the smaller rocks, the damage will be much less. A huge single rock can also set of shockwaves in the crust and tektonic plates, setting of volcanos and supervulcanoes and gigant earthquakes in addition to the devastating damage of the impact itself.

Cheers, Nordmann61.

Edited by Nordmann61
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.