4 ms·

I've always figured there's no point in worrying about giant planet destroying meteors, if one comes and we can't stop it, well we're all fucked. What can ya do

I've always figured there's no point in worrying about giant planet destroying meteors, if one comes and we can't stop it, well we're all fucked. What can ya do at that point? If it can't be stopped and it can't be changed...well I guess we had a decent ride...at least it'll probably look cool before we're all vaporized.

whatshisface 5y ago
What if it can be stopped in theory, but only if humanity pulls together and gets something right for once?
- dimator 5y ago
  Then we're toast.
- EamonnMR 5y ago
  An object that side won't be dissuaded with any of the firepower available to us. We'd be better off trying to build bunkers or something.
  - edgyquant 5y ago
    Can we not attach rockets to it just to nudge enough to barely not hit it? I don’t think anyone would suggest we “America fuck yeah” a meteor with firepower.
    - EamonnMR 5y ago
      A comet maybe but a dwarf planet... No way
  - elihu 5y ago
    I think it's largely a matter of how much advance warning we have. If we discover an object hundreds of kilometers in diameter on an orbit that will intersect with Earth in 100 years, then we'll have a better opportunity to nudge it early on so it misses entirely or develop a big enough bomb to turn it into a pile of gravel and ice chips that will (mostly) miss the Earth. The biggest fusion bomb detonated on Earth was Tsar Bomba at 50 megatons, though the full yield is thought to have been more like 100 if the Russians hadn't deliberately nerfed it over radiation concerns. Is there a theoretical upper limit to the yield of fusion bombs? I assume no one is building them bigger simply because there's no realistic military use for such things that wouldn't be better served by smaller accurately targeted nuclear bombs. Tsar Bomba was detonated in 1961, and no one has seen fit to repeat the experiment, though I suppose one or more of the major nuclear powers may have a modern warhead with equivalent yield that they just haven't tested or announced to the world. Wikipedia is saying that there's thought to be a practical limit of around 6 megatons of yield per metric ton of bomb mass [1], and actual nuclear devices have achieved a little over 5, so I guess after some point there's not much reason to make a bigger bomb when you can just make two smaller ones. This scenario is starting to sound a bit like a long-running Factorio game where the goal is to launch a rocket once a minute. With, say, a one year lead time could the economies of Earth launch a starship-style rocket with a half-dozen or so Tsar Bomba sized warhead once per day indefinitely? I think so. Would it be enough to destroy a dwarf planet? Probably not, but maybe it could knock loose enough chunks to nudge it into a slightly different orbit. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapon_yield https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapon_yield
- grawprog 5y ago
  Well, sure if it happens, i just meant in that whole inevitable no matter what doom scenario thing. I just mean, worrying about that or being scared is not really worth it. If it happens it happens. There's better things to dedicate that energy towards. Save the worrying about things like that for the people being paid to come up with solutions in the extremely rare chance this happens within any of ours, our children's or our grand children's lifetimes, after that I dunno, I'll probably be dead by then.

whatshisface 5y ago

What if it can be stopped in theory, but only if humanity pulls together and gets something right for once?

dimator 5y ago
Then we're toast.
EamonnMR 5y ago
An object that side won't be dissuaded with any of the firepower available to us. We'd be better off trying to build bunkers or something.
- edgyquant 5y ago
  Can we not attach rockets to it just to nudge enough to barely not hit it? I don’t think anyone would suggest we “America fuck yeah” a meteor with firepower.
  - EamonnMR 5y ago
    A comet maybe but a dwarf planet... No way
- elihu 5y ago
  I think it's largely a matter of how much advance warning we have. If we discover an object hundreds of kilometers in diameter on an orbit that will intersect with Earth in 100 years, then we'll have a better opportunity to nudge it early on so it misses entirely or develop a big enough bomb to turn it into a pile of gravel and ice chips that will (mostly) miss the Earth. The biggest fusion bomb detonated on Earth was Tsar Bomba at 50 megatons, though the full yield is thought to have been more like 100 if the Russians hadn't deliberately nerfed it over radiation concerns. Is there a theoretical upper limit to the yield of fusion bombs? I assume no one is building them bigger simply because there's no realistic military use for such things that wouldn't be better served by smaller accurately targeted nuclear bombs. Tsar Bomba was detonated in 1961, and no one has seen fit to repeat the experiment, though I suppose one or more of the major nuclear powers may have a modern warhead with equivalent yield that they just haven't tested or announced to the world. Wikipedia is saying that there's thought to be a practical limit of around 6 megatons of yield per metric ton of bomb mass [1], and actual nuclear devices have achieved a little over 5, so I guess after some point there's not much reason to make a bigger bomb when you can just make two smaller ones. This scenario is starting to sound a bit like a long-running Factorio game where the goal is to launch a rocket once a minute. With, say, a one year lead time could the economies of Earth launch a starship-style rocket with a half-dozen or so Tsar Bomba sized warhead once per day indefinitely? I think so. Would it be enough to destroy a dwarf planet? Probably not, but maybe it could knock loose enough chunks to nudge it into a slightly different orbit. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapon_yield https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapon_yield
grawprog 5y ago
Well, sure if it happens, i just meant in that whole inevitable no matter what doom scenario thing. I just mean, worrying about that or being scared is not really worth it. If it happens it happens. There's better things to dedicate that energy towards. Save the worrying about things like that for the people being paid to come up with solutions in the extremely rare chance this happens within any of ours, our children's or our grand children's lifetimes, after that I dunno, I'll probably be dead by then.