Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 [2] 3

Author Topic: Well then...  (Read 3116 times)

WillowLuman

  • Bay Watcher
  • They/Them Life is weird
    • View Profile
Re: Well then...
« Reply #15 on: November 08, 2014, 06:55:24 pm »

Over two thousand?

How many would you need to put a noticeable crack into the Earth's crust?
Depends on where you detonate them. Those 2000 nukes were spaced out through the entire time Nukes have existed.
Logged
Dwarf Souls: Prepare to Mine
Keep Me Safe - A Girl and Her Computer (Illustrated Game)
Darkest Garden - Illustrated game. - What mysteries lie in the abandoned dark?

Cryxis, Prince of Doom

  • Bay Watcher
  • Achievment *Fail freshman year uni*
    • View Profile
Re: Well then...
« Reply #16 on: November 08, 2014, 07:01:47 pm »

I'm sure if you detonated more than one in the Mariana Trench (or whatever it is called) you could make a decent crack
Logged
Fueled by caffeine, nicotine, and a surprisingly low will to live.
Cryxis makes the best typos.

MrWiggles

  • Bay Watcher
  • Doubt Everything
    • View Profile
Re: Well then...
« Reply #17 on: November 08, 2014, 09:27:48 pm »

I dont even think if you detonated the entire worlds arsenal of nukes at the bottom of the Mariana Trench it would breach to the mantel. You're talking huge numbers. Gigatonnes of force at work.
Logged
Doesn't like running from bears = clearly isn't an Eastern European
I'm Making a Mush! Navitas: City Limits ~ Inspired by Dresden Files and SCP.
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=113699.msg3470055#msg3470055
http://www.tf2items.com/id/MisterWigggles666#

WealthyRadish

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Well then...
« Reply #18 on: November 08, 2014, 09:43:05 pm »

If you managed to nuke the moon enough to alter its orbit and have it crash into the Earth, that'd probably breach the crust. And prevent life from returning for a billion years. Maybe forever. Not sure how many nukes that would take, though.
Logged

Zanzetkuken The Great

  • Bay Watcher
  • The Wizard Dragon
    • View Profile
Re: Well then...
« Reply #19 on: November 08, 2014, 09:46:14 pm »

Might be cheaper to use an asteroid that comes within near orbit.
Logged
Quote from: Eric Blank
It's Zanzetkuken The Great. He's a goddamn wizard-dragon. He will make it so, and it will forever be.
Quote from: 2016 Election IRC
<DozebomLolumzalis> you filthy god-damn ninja wizard dragon

WealthyRadish

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Well then...
« Reply #20 on: November 08, 2014, 09:48:38 pm »

I guess when you're trying to permanently destroy all life on the planet, doing so on a reasonable budget is important.
Logged

Zanzetkuken The Great

  • Bay Watcher
  • The Wizard Dragon
    • View Profile
Re: Well then...
« Reply #21 on: November 08, 2014, 09:52:19 pm »

I guess when you're trying to permanently destroy all life on the planet, doing so on a reasonable budget is important.

I'm gonna Sig this when I get a good computer.
Logged
Quote from: Eric Blank
It's Zanzetkuken The Great. He's a goddamn wizard-dragon. He will make it so, and it will forever be.
Quote from: 2016 Election IRC
<DozebomLolumzalis> you filthy god-damn ninja wizard dragon

Eric Blank

  • Bay Watcher
  • *Remain calm*
    • View Profile
Re: Well then...
« Reply #22 on: November 08, 2014, 09:55:02 pm »

Technically, one nuke would be plenty to put a crack in the Earth's crust. A really small one. The Earth just doesn't give a fuck about such a thing.
Logged
I make Spellcrafts!
I have no idea where anything is. I have no idea what anything does. This is not merely a madhouse designed by a madman, but a madhouse designed by many madmen, each with an intense hatred for the previous madman's unique flavour of madness.

Graknorke

  • Bay Watcher
  • A bomb's a bad choice for close-range combat.
    • View Profile
Re: Well then...
« Reply #23 on: November 09, 2014, 09:03:06 am »

Was it America or Russia or multiple nations that detonated nukes in orbit to see what they would do?
Murrica
Operation Fishbowl
It's their plot to break through the glass ceiling that formed there after the biblical great flood.
INVERTED EARTH IS REAL MAN!
Logged
Cultural status:
Depleted          ☐
Enriched          ☑

martinuzz

  • Bay Watcher
  • High dwarf
    • View Profile
Re: Well then...
« Reply #24 on: November 09, 2014, 09:16:39 am »

how many nukes would it take to create enough impulse to alter earth's orbit, I wonder
Logged
Friendly and polite reminder for optimists: Hope is a finite resource

We can ­disagree and still love each other, ­unless your disagreement is rooted in my oppression and denial of my humanity and right to exist - James Baldwin

http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=73719.msg1830479#msg1830479

Cryxis, Prince of Doom

  • Bay Watcher
  • Achievment *Fail freshman year uni*
    • View Profile
Re: Well then...
« Reply #25 on: November 09, 2014, 10:51:10 am »

I think it would be more efficient to use the nukes for fuel in reactors powering gigantic engines if we were going to use them to move something
Logged
Fueled by caffeine, nicotine, and a surprisingly low will to live.
Cryxis makes the best typos.

Il Palazzo

  • Bay Watcher
  • And lo, the Dude did abide. And it was good.
    • View Profile
Re: Well then...
« Reply #26 on: November 09, 2014, 12:02:54 pm »

how many nukes would it take to create enough impulse to alter earth's orbit, I wonder
One. It's a matter of how noticeable you'd want it to be.

If you managed to nuke the moon enough to alter its orbit and have it crash into the Earth, that'd probably breach the crust. And prevent life from returning for a billion years. Maybe forever. Not sure how many nukes that would take, though.
Let's estimate it. To a good approximation, what we need to do is decelerate the Moon to zero orbital velocity. This involves bleeding off all of its kinetic energy in its current orbit, which takes about 7*10^28 Joules of work. Assuming an explosion on the surface can at best transfer half of its energy to the Moon, and taking an average nuke to have half a megaton yield, we'd need 7*10^13 nukes. That's over 14 billion times the number of nukes the US has got stockpiled.

Notice, it takes merely twice as much to blow up the Moon completely. We could go the extra mile.
Logged

i2amroy

  • Bay Watcher
  • Cats, ruling the world one dwarf at a time
    • View Profile
Re: Well then...
« Reply #27 on: November 09, 2014, 01:24:45 pm »

I dont even think if you detonated the entire worlds arsenal of nukes at the bottom of the Mariana Trench it would breach to the mantel. You're talking huge numbers. Gigatonnes of force at work.
Yeah, basing my estimate off the Mariana Trench Explosion What-if XKCD figures I'd estimate you would probably be needing something like a million nukes before you even reached the "mass extinction" level, let alone the planet cracker level. (Though you would cause horrible hurricanes with even 1 nuke.

On moon nukes:
I'm not quite sure I agree with your numbers there. When I run the numbers I'm getting about 3.8*10^28 J for the kinetic energy, only about 2/3rds of what you are getting. Cut that down to the only 96% of the energy needed to cause a decaying orbit (as opposed to trying to stop it dead), and assuming half-megaton bombs as you did (which should release a total of 2.1*10^15 J each, assuming you somehow directed 100% of that into stopping the moon), I'm only getting a total of 1.737*10^13 bombs, about  1.7 billion times the amount the US currently has (and that's including a rough estimate of all nukes currently scheduled to be dismantled in the count).

Of course at that point if you wanted to destroy the world you could just glass the surface. A halfmegaton bomb gives us a fireball size of 882473 m^2 (thanks to this helpful site). Assuming we were able to channel the explosions into a better shape then circles, we could glass the entire surface of the planet (land and water) with only about 577 million bombs evenly spaced out. That's only like 24,000 times the worldwide total (once again estimating in decommissioned by not yet destroyed nukes).

Carrying this with some (very) rough estimates about yield, etc., I'm guessing the current nuclear stockpile plus retired weapons could probably glass about 1 ten millionth of a percent of the land area of the earth, or about 3030 square miles (about double the size of rhode island).
Logged
Quote from: PTTG
It would be brutally difficult and probably won't work. In other words, it's absolutely dwarven!
Cataclysm: Dark Days Ahead - A fun zombie survival rougelike that I'm dev-ing for.

WillowLuman

  • Bay Watcher
  • They/Them Life is weird
    • View Profile
Re: Well then...
« Reply #28 on: November 09, 2014, 01:33:04 pm »

I think it would be more efficient to use the nukes for fuel in reactors powering gigantic engines if we were going to use them to move something

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_pulse_propulsion
Logged
Dwarf Souls: Prepare to Mine
Keep Me Safe - A Girl and Her Computer (Illustrated Game)
Darkest Garden - Illustrated game. - What mysteries lie in the abandoned dark?

Il Palazzo

  • Bay Watcher
  • And lo, the Dude did abide. And it was good.
    • View Profile
Re: Well then...
« Reply #29 on: November 09, 2014, 01:37:14 pm »

@i2amroy:
KE doesn't match because I forgot to divide by two. 7 is a rounded number, and I think I was remarkably precise for a astronomy problem, as I hadn't rounded it up to 10.

With the effective yeld, you get twice as much because you assumed 100% efficiency, whereas(as stated in my post) I assumed only half is usable, as the other half goes directly into space upon detonation.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3