Discussion:
"NASA Scientists Present Asteroid Deflection Research"
(too old to reply)
Lynn McGuire
2021-08-31 23:38:57 UTC
Permalink
"NASA Scientists Present Asteroid Deflection Research"

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2021/08/30/nasa-scientists-present-asteroid-deflection-research/

"NASA Scientists performing experiments on actual Asteroid fragments
have presented conclusions about the limits of inbound Asteroid
deflection, and the need to plan for multiple “bumps” if the Asteroid is
made of an unfavourable material."

We now have a plan to deflect annoying asteroids !

I wonder what happens if the asteroid is too big for a "bump" ?

Lynn
J. Clarke
2021-09-01 00:12:22 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 31 Aug 2021 18:38:57 -0500, Lynn McGuire
Post by Lynn McGuire
"NASA Scientists Present Asteroid Deflection Research"
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2021/08/30/nasa-scientists-present-asteroid-deflection-research/
"NASA Scientists performing experiments on actual Asteroid fragments
have presented conclusions about the limits of inbound Asteroid
deflection, and the need to plan for multiple “bumps” if the Asteroid is
made of an unfavourable material."
We now have a plan to deflect annoying asteroids !
I wonder what happens if the asteroid is too big for a "bump" ?
Nothing's too big for a bump. You just have to find a big enough
bumper.

I don't think Bennu is going to be an issue. By 2182 it will likely
have been rendered into its component parts.
Post by Lynn McGuire
Lynn
Lynn McGuire
2021-09-01 00:30:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
On Tue, 31 Aug 2021 18:38:57 -0500, Lynn McGuire
Post by Lynn McGuire
"NASA Scientists Present Asteroid Deflection Research"
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2021/08/30/nasa-scientists-present-asteroid-deflection-research/
"NASA Scientists performing experiments on actual Asteroid fragments
have presented conclusions about the limits of inbound Asteroid
deflection, and the need to plan for multiple “bumps” if the Asteroid is
made of an unfavourable material."
We now have a plan to deflect annoying asteroids !
I wonder what happens if the asteroid is too big for a "bump" ?
Nothing's too big for a bump. You just have to find a big enough
bumper.
I don't think Bennu is going to be an issue. By 2182 it will likely
have been rendered into its component parts.
Post by Lynn McGuire
Lynn
True dat. In David Weber's "The Armageddon Inheritance", the Achuultani
use many large space ships to move the entire moon of Iapetus into
position to crash into Earth.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Armageddon_Inheritance
and
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iapetus_(moon)

Lynn
Kevrob
2021-09-02 05:10:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
On Tue, 31 Aug 2021 18:38:57 -0500, Lynn McGuire
Post by Lynn McGuire
"NASA Scientists Present Asteroid Deflection Research"
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2021/08/30/nasa-scientists-present-asteroid-deflection-research/
"NASA Scientists performing experiments on actual Asteroid fragments
have presented conclusions about the limits of inbound Asteroid
deflection, and the need to plan for multiple “bumps” if the Asteroid is
made of an unfavourable material."
We now have a plan to deflect annoying asteroids !
I wonder what happens if the asteroid is too big for a "bump" ?
Nothing's too big for a bump. You just have to find a big enough
bumper.
Back when I would play casual games of 8-ball* in taverns, I
often solved the problem of how to make a shot with the
"whack the cue ball as hard as you can" method. I "scratched"
a lot. You don't want to scratch when moving asteroids.
Post by J. Clarke
I don't think Bennu is going to be an issue. By 2182 it will likely
have been rendered into its component parts.
True dat. In David Weber's "The Armageddon Inheritance", the Achuultani
use many large space ships to move the entire moon of Iapetus into
position to crash into Earth.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Armageddon_Inheritance
and
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iapetus_(moon)
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eight-ball
--
Kevin R
Quadibloc
2021-09-06 02:36:17 UTC
Permalink
True dat. In David Weber's "The Armageddon Inheritance", the Achuultani
use many large space ships to move the entire moon of Iapetus into
position to crash into Earth.
Of course, in the real world, if somebody wanted to crash something into
the Earth, they would have much better places to find it in than the deep
gravity well of Saturn.

But I suppose it's a good way to demoralize the people of Earth, by showing
them just how powerful Achuultani technology is.

John Savard
Ninapenda Jibini
2021-09-06 03:26:27 UTC
Permalink
On Tuesday, August 31, 2021 at 6:30:35 PM UTC-6, Lynn McGuire
True dat. In David Weber's "The Armageddon Inheritance", the
Achuultani use many large space ships to move the entire moon
of Iapetus into position to crash into Earth.
Of course, in the real world, if somebody wanted to crash
something into the Earth, they would have much better places to
find it in than the deep gravity well of Saturn.
But I suppose it's a good way to demoralize the people of Earth,
by showing them just how powerful Achuultani technology is.
For all that Weber has become too successful to be editable, and
tends to run on (and on and on) with stream of consciousness
infordumps, he has always grasp the important principles of Grand
Space Opera, one of which is that everything has to be on a Grand
scale.
--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration


"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.
Torbjorn Lindgren
2021-09-06 13:00:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Quadibloc
True dat. In David Weber's "The Armageddon Inheritance", the Achuultani
use many large space ships to move the entire moon of Iapetus into
position to crash into Earth.
Of course, in the real world, if somebody wanted to crash something into
the Earth, they would have much better places to find it in than the deep
gravity well of Saturn.
To be fair, they've already tried crashing probably thousands? of
smaller (but not small!) rocks into Earth and a number has gone
through to hit the planetary shield (most were redirected or blown
up).

IE, they've already thrown everything from small Tunguska sized ones
up to rocks larger than the Chicxulub impactor at Earth.

So the Achuultani finally decided to go BIG *and* far out from Earth
to avoid the defenders even being able to see it before they started
moving it (they IIRC failed but it did delay detection). They don't
stop grinding Earth defences using smaller rocks just because of this
either.

I assume Jupiter has moons in a similar mass range but in setting it
can easily be argued that Iapetus made sense for them to use.

Being far out actually helps them considering their (effectively
magical) drive systems, it gives them more time to build up speed,
lots and lots of speed.

Starting from an orbit further out means a greater starting speed
differential and they also went the "long" way and accelerated all the
way, instead of just changing the speed enough for a transfer orbit
impacting Earth.

Make no mistake, even on an transfer orbit from Saturn with "minimum"
impact energy Iapetus would make Chicxlub look like a firecracker but
it does give the defenders a lot of time to try to do something about.

Coming in at a high multiple of this speed makes deflecting it a LOT
harder and in-story the humans still ALMOST managed to do this, at the
cost of almost all their remaining spacecraft. Then <SPOILER>
happened.
Post by Quadibloc
But I suppose it's a good way to demoralize the people of Earth, by showing
them just how powerful Achuultani technology is.
They already know they WILL loose unless Colin comes back with a
miracle, it's just a question of how long it will take them to be
ground down.

Throwing something that large and fast limit the options for the
defenders and force the specific response the Achuultani want - the
defenders HAS to come far outside the range of the Earths orbital
defences with every mobile platform they still have available to try
to deflect it or it's "game over".

Just because the Achuultani know they will win eventually doesn't mean
they don't want to reduce their losses, even if it's just a small
scouting force of many.

Iapetus weighs more than 100,000 times as much as the best guess of
the Chicxlub impactor AND it's coming in at IIRC 100+ km/s vs the ~20
km/s Chicxlub came in on. So the impact would have millions of times
the energy of that one...

Even calling it "Extinction level event" is grossly underselling what
this would do to Earth. I strongly doubt it would punch through but
"X% of the Earth is melted" is NOT a good thing when it shows in an
Asteroid Impact Calculator.
Amicus Brevis
2021-09-02 15:43:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lynn McGuire
"NASA Scientists Present Asteroid Deflection Research"
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2021/08/30/nasa-scientists-present-asteroid-deflection-research/
"NASA Scientists performing experiments on actual Asteroid fragments
have presented conclusions about the limits of inbound Asteroid
deflection, and the need to plan for multiple “bumps” if the Asteroid is
made of an unfavourable material."
We now have a plan to deflect annoying asteroids !
I wonder what happens if the asteroid is too big for a "bump" ?
Lynn
Even a minor nudge far enough away from us may be sufficient. I nudge is less than a bump. :-)



Regards
Jonathan
2021-09-05 22:57:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lynn McGuire
"NASA Scientists Present Asteroid Deflection Research"
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2021/08/30/nasa-scientists-present-asteroid-deflection-research/
"NASA Scientists performing experiments on actual Asteroid fragments
have presented conclusions about the limits of inbound Asteroid
deflection, and the need to plan for multiple “bumps” if the Asteroid is
made of an unfavourable material."
We now have a plan to deflect annoying asteroids !
I wonder what happens if the asteroid is too big for a "bump" ?
Lynn
Will that ability be able to be used nefariously
to 'bump' them...towards Earth to be used as weapons
as in various sci-fi plots?

Not that I don't trust Russia or China, no wait
I don't trust them one bit~
--
BIG LIE From Wiki - "The German expression was coined by Adolf Hitler
when he dictated his 1925 book Mein Kampf, to describe the use of a lie
so *colossal* that no one would believe that someone "could have the
impudence to distort the truth so infamously."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_lie
Quadibloc
2021-09-06 02:25:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jonathan
Will that ability be able to be used nefariously
to 'bump' them...towards Earth to be used as weapons
as in various sci-fi plots?
Not that I don't trust Russia or China, no wait
I don't trust them one bit~
Carl Sagan didn't want us to develop the technology to
deflect asteroids... he didn't even trust the United States
with it, apparently.

John Savard
Michael Dworetsky
2021-09-07 07:00:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Jonathan
Will that ability be able to be used nefariously
to 'bump' them...towards Earth to be used as weapons
as in various sci-fi plots?
Not that I don't trust Russia or China, no wait
I don't trust them one bit~
Carl Sagan didn't want us to develop the technology to
deflect asteroids... he didn't even trust the United States
with it, apparently.
John Savard
To deflect even a small asteroid accurately enough to impact an enemy,
you need to start decades earlier and have very advanced space
technology. If you had the really advanced technology to do it even
faster, say within a year, then you would be so far ahead of everyone
else, that the war might be over before it began. And if you started
decades ago, then the enemy might be your friend now.

And can you blame Carl Sagan for that view? Unless the deflection was
purely Earth-defensive.

--
Mike Dworetsky
William Hyde
2021-09-05 23:46:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lynn McGuire
"NASA Scientists Present Asteroid Deflection Research"
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2021/08/30/nasa-scientists-present-asteroid-deflection-research/
"NASA Scientists performing experiments on actual Asteroid fragments
have presented conclusions about the limits of inbound Asteroid
deflection, and the need to plan for multiple “bumps” if the Asteroid is
made of an unfavourable material."
We now have a plan to deflect annoying asteroids !
I wonder what happens if the asteroid is too big for a "bump" ?
K/T 2.

William Hyde
Quadibloc
2021-09-06 02:33:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lynn McGuire
I wonder what happens if the asteroid is too big for a "bump" ?
If we could detect the asteroids long before they hit Earth, and could predict
their orbits with precise accuracy long into the future, it wouldn't take much
of a bump, even for a big asteroid.

The problem, of course, is that with factors like the pressure of the solar wind
being involved, we _can't_ predict the motions of asteroids with enough accuracy
to deflect them with tiny bumps of the "Butterfly Effect" category.

A hydrogen bomb works by having an atomic bomb as its trigger. Making a really
big H-bomb by using a normal H-bomb as its trigger instead is, I would expect,
entirely possible. Such a giant bomb, though, would still release less energy than,
say, a hurricane, and so even such a bomb - even if it was used efficiently (say by first
digging a hole into the asteroid in question) - would _still_ not be enough for a large
asteroid without a fair amount of lead time.

I'll need to look at the report to know the facts, but my inclination would be to
suspect that our technology is not yet fully equal to the challenge of protecting the
Earth against all the possible impactors the Solar System might throw at it.

Which is not a reason for not protecting ourselves against those we can, or for not
seeking to improve the relevant technology.

John Savard
Ninapenda Jibini
2021-09-06 03:24:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Quadibloc
I'll need to look at the report to know the facts, but my
inclination would be to suspect that our technology is not yet
fully equal to the challenge of protecting the Earth against all
the possible impactors the Solar System might throw at it.
I suspect the report will reach that conclusion whether it's true or
not, since basic research involves far more lucrative grant money
than engineering challenges (and it's easier to spend it on swimming
pools and yachts, never mind strippers and blow).
--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration


"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.
Robert Woodward
2021-09-06 05:15:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ninapenda Jibini
Post by Quadibloc
I'll need to look at the report to know the facts, but my
inclination would be to suspect that our technology is not yet
fully equal to the challenge of protecting the Earth against all
the possible impactors the Solar System might throw at it.
I suspect the report will reach that conclusion whether it's true or
not, since basic research involves far more lucrative grant money
than engineering challenges (and it's easier to spend it on swimming
pools and yachts, never mind strippers and blow).
Ahem. The engineering challenge involves much more money and big
Aerospace firms would much rather have that contract than another
research grant.
--
"We have advanced to new and surprising levels of bafflement."
Imperial Auditor Miles Vorkosigan describes progress in _Komarr_.
‹-----------------------------------------------------
Robert Woodward ***@drizzle.com
Ninapenda Jibini
2021-09-06 06:59:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Robert Woodward
Post by Ninapenda Jibini
Post by Quadibloc
I'll need to look at the report to know the facts, but my
inclination would be to suspect that our technology is not
yet fully equal to the challenge of protecting the Earth
against all the possible impactors the Solar System might
throw at it.
I suspect the report will reach that conclusion whether it's
true or not, since basic research involves far more lucrative
grant money than engineering challenges (and it's easier to
spend it on swimming pools and yachts, never mind strippers and
blow).
Ahem. The engineering challenge involves much more money and big
Aerospace firms would much rather have that contract than
another research grant.
None of the authors of the paper appear to be employees or
representatives of "big aerospace firms." In fact, as best I can
tell from a quick trip to Google, every one of them is actually a
academic researcher. You know, the kind who view the contract with
a big aerospace firm as wasted money better spent on their grant.

Ergo, existing technology won't be good enough, and basic research
is needed. Expensive basic research.
--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration


"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.
Robert Woodward
2021-09-07 05:28:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ninapenda Jibini
Post by Robert Woodward
Post by Ninapenda Jibini
Post by Quadibloc
I'll need to look at the report to know the facts, but my
inclination would be to suspect that our technology is not
yet fully equal to the challenge of protecting the Earth
against all the possible impactors the Solar System might
throw at it.
I suspect the report will reach that conclusion whether it's
true or not, since basic research involves far more lucrative
grant money than engineering challenges (and it's easier to
spend it on swimming pools and yachts, never mind strippers and
blow).
Ahem. The engineering challenge involves much more money and big
Aerospace firms would much rather have that contract than
another research grant.
None of the authors of the paper appear to be employees or
representatives of "big aerospace firms." In fact, as best I can
tell from a quick trip to Google, every one of them is actually a
academic researcher. You know, the kind who view the contract with
a big aerospace firm as wasted money better spent on their grant.
Ergo, existing technology won't be good enough, and basic research
is needed. Expensive basic research.
OK, but at some point the aerospace firms will decide that engineering
is possible and they will start lobbying NASA and Congress. Bye, bye
research grants.
--
"We have advanced to new and surprising levels of bafflement."
Imperial Auditor Miles Vorkosigan describes progress in _Komarr_.
‹-----------------------------------------------------
Robert Woodward ***@drizzle.com
Ninapenda Jibini
2021-09-07 06:32:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Robert Woodward
Post by Ninapenda Jibini
Post by Robert Woodward
Post by Ninapenda Jibini
Post by Quadibloc
I'll need to look at the report to know the facts, but my
inclination would be to suspect that our technology is not
yet fully equal to the challenge of protecting the Earth
against all the possible impactors the Solar System might
throw at it.
I suspect the report will reach that conclusion whether it's
true or not, since basic research involves far more
lucrative grant money than engineering challenges (and it's
easier to spend it on swimming pools and yachts, never mind
strippers and blow).
Ahem. The engineering challenge involves much more money and
big Aerospace firms would much rather have that contract than
another research grant.
None of the authors of the paper appear to be employees or
representatives of "big aerospace firms." In fact, as best I
can tell from a quick trip to Google, every one of them is
actually a academic researcher. You know, the kind who view the
contract with a big aerospace firm as wasted money better spent
on their grant.
Ergo, existing technology won't be good enough, and basic
research is needed. Expensive basic research.
OK, but at some point the aerospace firms will decide that
engineering is possible and they will start lobbying NASA and
Congress. Bye, bye research grants.
When that happens, I'm sure it will be a topic of conversation.

At the moment, however, we are talking about a paper done by
academic scientists.

Try to pay attention.
--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration


"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.
Lynn McGuire
2021-09-07 18:38:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Robert Woodward
Post by Ninapenda Jibini
Post by Robert Woodward
Post by Ninapenda Jibini
Post by Quadibloc
I'll need to look at the report to know the facts, but my
inclination would be to suspect that our technology is not
yet fully equal to the challenge of protecting the Earth
against all the possible impactors the Solar System might
throw at it.
I suspect the report will reach that conclusion whether it's
true or not, since basic research involves far more lucrative
grant money than engineering challenges (and it's easier to
spend it on swimming pools and yachts, never mind strippers and
blow).
Ahem. The engineering challenge involves much more money and big
Aerospace firms would much rather have that contract than
another research grant.
None of the authors of the paper appear to be employees or
representatives of "big aerospace firms." In fact, as best I can
tell from a quick trip to Google, every one of them is actually a
academic researcher. You know, the kind who view the contract with
a big aerospace firm as wasted money better spent on their grant.
Ergo, existing technology won't be good enough, and basic research
is needed. Expensive basic research.
OK, but at some point the aerospace firms will decide that engineering
is possible and they will start lobbying NASA and Congress. Bye, bye
research grants.
Ahem. SpaceX. Probably the biggest contractor DOD has now for space
projects.

Lynn
Lynn McGuire
2021-09-07 22:20:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Robert Woodward
OK, but at some point the aerospace firms will decide that engineering
is possible and they will start lobbying NASA and Congress. Bye, bye
research grants.
Ahem. SpaceX. Probably the biggest contractor DOD has now for space
projects.
You can look this stuff up, you know.
At NASA, spaceX is #6 (caltech is #1)
At DOD, SpaceX doesn't even make the top 100. (But Sierra Nevada(#28) beats ULA(#42)!).
http://www.fi-aeroweb.com/Top-100-NASA-Contractors.html
http://www.fi-aeroweb.com/Top-100-Defense-Contractors.html
Did I mention NASA ?

I specifically said "Probably the biggest contractor DOD has now for
space projects." Space projects. Not general projects.

And that list does not cover black projects of which just about all DOD
space projects are black. Even if you can find a list of DOD black
space projects, I would not believe it.

Lynn
Scott Lurndal
2021-09-08 21:11:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Robert Woodward
OK, but at some point the aerospace firms will decide that engineering
is possible and they will start lobbying NASA and Congress. Bye, bye
research grants.
Ahem. SpaceX. Probably the biggest contractor DOD has now for space
projects.
You can look this stuff up, you know.
At NASA, spaceX is #6 (caltech is #1)
At DOD, SpaceX doesn't even make the top 100. (But Sierra Nevada(#28) beats ULA(#42)!).
http://www.fi-aeroweb.com/Top-100-NASA-Contractors.html
http://www.fi-aeroweb.com/Top-100-Defense-Contractors.html
Did I mention NASA ?
I specifically said "Probably the biggest contractor DOD has now for
space projects." Space projects. Not general projects.
And I explicity pointed out the stats for DOD. I mentioned
NASA because they actually do contract with SpaceX.
Post by Lynn McGuire
And that list does not cover black projects of which just about all DOD
space projects are black. Even if you can find a list of DOD black
space projects, I would not believe it.
I'm sure you wouldn't. That's your problem, not mine.

Note that even black projects are paid for, and show up in the
relevent 10-K reports and budget documents (for those contractors
that are not publically owned).
Dimensional Traveler
2021-09-09 00:11:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Scott Lurndal
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Robert Woodward
OK, but at some point the aerospace firms will decide that engineering
is possible and they will start lobbying NASA and Congress. Bye, bye
research grants.
Ahem. SpaceX. Probably the biggest contractor DOD has now for space
projects.
You can look this stuff up, you know.
At NASA, spaceX is #6 (caltech is #1)
At DOD, SpaceX doesn't even make the top 100. (But Sierra Nevada(#28) beats ULA(#42)!).
http://www.fi-aeroweb.com/Top-100-NASA-Contractors.html
http://www.fi-aeroweb.com/Top-100-Defense-Contractors.html
Did I mention NASA ?
I specifically said "Probably the biggest contractor DOD has now for
space projects." Space projects. Not general projects.
And I explicity pointed out the stats for DOD.
But you didn't limit yourself to DOD _SPACE_ projects.... :P
--
I've done good in this world. Now I'm tired and just want to be a cranky
dirty old man.
Scott Lurndal
2021-09-09 18:32:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Scott Lurndal
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Robert Woodward
OK, but at some point the aerospace firms will decide that engineering
is possible and they will start lobbying NASA and Congress. Bye, bye
research grants.
Ahem. SpaceX. Probably the biggest contractor DOD has now for space
projects.
You can look this stuff up, you know.
At NASA, spaceX is #6 (caltech is #1)
At DOD, SpaceX doesn't even make the top 100. (But Sierra Nevada(#28) beats ULA(#42)!).
http://www.fi-aeroweb.com/Top-100-NASA-Contractors.html
http://www.fi-aeroweb.com/Top-100-Defense-Contractors.html
Did I mention NASA ?
I specifically said "Probably the biggest contractor DOD has now for
space projects." Space projects. Not general projects.
And I explicity pointed out the stats for DOD.
But you didn't limit yourself to DOD _SPACE_ projects.... :P
I did actually point out that Sierra Nevada got more than ULA
from the DOD; both of which are "space" companies. SpaceX was
notably absent from the top 100.

Quadibloc
2021-09-09 05:46:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lynn McGuire
And that list does not cover black projects of which just about all DOD
space projects are black. Even if you can find a list of DOD black
space projects, I would not believe it.
I don't see anything unreasonable in that. Secret stuff isn't officially
released, so anything claimed as a leak could just be made up.

On the other hand, I have found online some of the secrets of the
fictional spy James Bond:



Now you too can know which minor chords give the themes of
the James Bond movies their distinctive sound!

John Savard
Quadibloc
2021-09-06 05:32:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Quadibloc
I'll need to look at the report to know the facts, but my inclination would be to
suspect that our technology is not yet fully equal to the challenge of protecting the
Earth against all the possible impactors the Solar System might throw at it.
It turns out that the report deals with the fundamental limit, of how big a bang
we can apply to an asteroid before breaking it into lots of little pieces (that we
could do nothing further about)... and not about the question of whether applying
a bang of a certain size is feasible.

John Savard
pete...@gmail.com
2021-09-06 15:45:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Quadibloc
A hydrogen bomb works by having an atomic bomb as its trigger. Making a really
big H-bomb by using a normal H-bomb as its trigger instead is, I would expect,
entirely possible.
That's not how a thermonuclear bomb works. It's more like the same size match
(fission bomb) can light a birthday candle, or start a forest fire.

pt
p***@hotmail.com
2021-09-07 06:07:44 UTC
Permalink
On Sunday, September 5, 2021 at 9:34:00 PM UTC-5, Quadibloc wrote:

- A hydrogen bomb works by having an atomic bomb as its trigger. Making a really
- big H-bomb by using a normal H-bomb as its trigger instead is, I would expect,
- entirely possible.

You are correct. I understand that the larger Soviet nuclear tests, 50 and 100 megatons in yield,
were in fact staged devices such as you describe.

Peter Wezeman
anti-social Darwinist
Loading...