5 ms·

The description is pretty scary. More worrisome is what are the chances of an event like this being mistaken for a nuclear attack and triggering a nuclear war.

The description is pretty scary. More worrisome is what are the chances of an event like this being mistaken for a nuclear attack and triggering a nuclear war. For example, if such an event happened to a major city in the US, how could you confirm that it was a bolide, and how do you convince the public calling for retaliation that it was not a nuclear attack.

adriancr 5y ago
We'd ideally get early warnings of asteroids. Also, nukes don't get automatically launched (unless you're Russia at high alert and activated dead hand), that's why leaders exist.
- q1w2 5y ago
  Unlikely. The one that hit a couple years ago in Russia was not detected at all because it came from the solar side.
ClumsyPilot 5y ago
We have radars you can see nuclear missile coming. Also you have radiation. In any case, how do you retaliate if you have no idea who attacked you?
- SideburnsOfDoom 5y ago
  > In any case, how do you retaliate if you have no idea who attacked you? You get to choose who you want to attack, go invade your preferred targets? It worked for the US about 20 years ago. It's not a hypothetical, it's recent occurrence.
- EForEndeavour 5y ago
  > We have radars What if your strategic enemy secretly figured out how to evade detection? > also you have radiation. Ah, the lack of radiation explains it: this city-killing explosion was the horrible work of a top-secret kinetic impactor weapons program developed by [insert strategic enemy here]! > how do you retaliate if you have no idea who attacked you? The same way the USA justified invading Iraq: lie. The inevitable blizzard of online disinformation wouldn't help things either.
  - Cthulhu_ 5y ago
    > What if your strategic enemy secretly figured out how to evade detection? They probably already do; stealth tech is a thing, as are hypersonic long distance missiles. Plus submarines, to bring the nukes in real close, reducing response time.
    - kadoban 5y ago
      Or just a suitcase bomb and person. (I'm sure there are _some_ detectors in ports and airports, but doubt they're infalible).
  - jjk166 5y ago
    What's to stop these people from just nuking themselves and claim it was their strategic enemy's stealth strike? If people want to go to war, it doesn't make a lot of sense to wait around for an asteroid.
    - SideburnsOfDoom 5y ago
      Are you asking "what is a false flag operation?" or "when did the USA last do this (that we know of, outside of conspiracy theories) ?". The Wikipedia article (1) answers the first, and the the second was 1964 (2). Obviously, less expensive means are typically used than "just nuking themselves". 1) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_flag https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_flag 2) https://allthatsinteresting.com/gulf-of-tonkin https://allthatsinteresting.com/gulf-of-tonkin
      - jjk166 5y ago
        Neither, I am asking if you're going to do a false flag, why wait for an incredibly improbable scenario to use as pretext as opposed to just fabricating such a pretext? The whole point of the False Flag is the False part.
        SideburnsOfDoom 5y ago
- danjac 5y ago
  It wouldn't take much: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Able_Archer_83#False_alarm_from_the_Soviet_missile_early_warning_system https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Able_Archer_83#False_alarm_fro... " false alarms were caused by a rare alignment of sunlight on high-altitude clouds underneath the satellites' orbits. "
  - jjk166 5y ago
    The odds of erroneously detecting a missile launch and then a meteor exploding over a city at the exact time and place predicted by that fake missile's trajectory is astronomically small.
- fred_is_fred 5y ago
  We invaded Iraq after 15 Saudis flew planes into the WTC and the Pentagon - so it doesn't matter if you know who did it or not.
the8472 5y ago
> More worrisome is what are the chances of an event like this being mistaken for a nuclear attack and triggering a nuclear war. Before worrying about the second-order effect maybe we should worry about having no defenses against such impacts.
nabla9 5y ago
There exists protocols to differentiate nuclear detonation from all other large explosions. Satellites dedicated for this purpose have gamma ray, x-rays, and neutron detectors. They would instantly rule out nuclear explosion. Air sampling and nuclear forensics makes it possible to even identify the culprit from the radionuclides.
- VLM 5y ago
  nukes have a peculiar "famous" double flash Also don't forget the EMP effects of a large nuke. Just because a large nuke on the surface doesn't "vaporize all global electronics magically" doesn't mean it would be unmeasurable. I am curious how unclassified the detail level can be for seismographic analysis. Certainly, oil prospectors can output detailed 3-d models given prior preparation and "generic earthquakes" have nearly instant results for depth of the earthquake and precise location. Anyway my point is the destruction in the linked article was spread along a 100 KM (or so..) SW to NE line simultaneously whereas nukes are obviously point sources. I suppose incredibly unluckily a meteor could come precisely 90 degrees straight down to fool such analysis but those impacts are statistically unlikely. It would seem pretty trivial given enough seismographs on the ground and enough global computing power to instantly detect the difference between a single point source and a geographically long linear impact source.
  - nabla9 5y ago
    Because IAEA coordinates and monitors NPT-treaty there is lots of open source information about the subject. Seismographic analysis has become really accurate. 0.1 t .. 10 t aka (extremely-low-yield testing) can be concealed from seismographs. Very-low-yield testing between 10 t and 1-2 kt is very hard to conceal, and everything from low-yield testing up (>20kt) can be detected with certainty.
wrycoder 5y ago
There are satellites continuously monitoring the Earth for nuclear bursts. The latter have a characteristic double pulse of optical radiation, even in the case of a simple fission device. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_MASINT#Space-based_Nuclear_Energy_Detection https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_MASINT#Space-based_N...

adriancr 5y ago

We'd ideally get early warnings of asteroids. Also, nukes don't get automatically launched (unless you're Russia at high alert and activated dead hand), that's why leaders exist.

q1w2 5y ago
Unlikely. The one that hit a couple years ago in Russia was not detected at all because it came from the solar side.

ClumsyPilot 5y ago

We have radars you can see nuclear missile coming. Also you have radiation. In any case, how do you retaliate if you have no idea who attacked you?

SideburnsOfDoom 5y ago
> In any case, how do you retaliate if you have no idea who attacked you? You get to choose who you want to attack, go invade your preferred targets? It worked for the US about 20 years ago. It's not a hypothetical, it's recent occurrence.
EForEndeavour 5y ago
> We have radars What if your strategic enemy secretly figured out how to evade detection? > also you have radiation. Ah, the lack of radiation explains it: this city-killing explosion was the horrible work of a top-secret kinetic impactor weapons program developed by [insert strategic enemy here]! > how do you retaliate if you have no idea who attacked you? The same way the USA justified invading Iraq: lie. The inevitable blizzard of online disinformation wouldn't help things either.
- Cthulhu_ 5y ago
  > What if your strategic enemy secretly figured out how to evade detection? They probably already do; stealth tech is a thing, as are hypersonic long distance missiles. Plus submarines, to bring the nukes in real close, reducing response time.
  - kadoban 5y ago
    Or just a suitcase bomb and person. (I'm sure there are _some_ detectors in ports and airports, but doubt they're infalible).
- jjk166 5y ago
  What's to stop these people from just nuking themselves and claim it was their strategic enemy's stealth strike? If people want to go to war, it doesn't make a lot of sense to wait around for an asteroid.
  - SideburnsOfDoom 5y ago
    Are you asking "what is a false flag operation?" or "when did the USA last do this (that we know of, outside of conspiracy theories) ?". The Wikipedia article (1) answers the first, and the the second was 1964 (2). Obviously, less expensive means are typically used than "just nuking themselves". 1) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_flag https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_flag 2) https://allthatsinteresting.com/gulf-of-tonkin https://allthatsinteresting.com/gulf-of-tonkin
    - jjk166 5y ago
      Neither, I am asking if you're going to do a false flag, why wait for an incredibly improbable scenario to use as pretext as opposed to just fabricating such a pretext? The whole point of the False Flag is the False part.
      - SideburnsOfDoom 5y ago
danjac 5y ago
It wouldn't take much: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Able_Archer_83#False_alarm_from_the_Soviet_missile_early_warning_system https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Able_Archer_83#False_alarm_fro... " false alarms were caused by a rare alignment of sunlight on high-altitude clouds underneath the satellites' orbits. "
- jjk166 5y ago
  The odds of erroneously detecting a missile launch and then a meteor exploding over a city at the exact time and place predicted by that fake missile's trajectory is astronomically small.
fred_is_fred 5y ago
We invaded Iraq after 15 Saudis flew planes into the WTC and the Pentagon - so it doesn't matter if you know who did it or not.

the8472 5y ago

> More worrisome is what are the chances of an event like this being mistaken for a nuclear attack and triggering a nuclear war. Before worrying about the second-order effect maybe we should worry about having no defenses against such impacts.

nabla9 5y ago

There exists protocols to differentiate nuclear detonation from all other large explosions. Satellites dedicated for this purpose have gamma ray, x-rays, and neutron detectors. They would instantly rule out nuclear explosion. Air sampling and nuclear forensics makes it possible to even identify the culprit from the radionuclides.

VLM 5y ago
nukes have a peculiar "famous" double flash Also don't forget the EMP effects of a large nuke. Just because a large nuke on the surface doesn't "vaporize all global electronics magically" doesn't mean it would be unmeasurable. I am curious how unclassified the detail level can be for seismographic analysis. Certainly, oil prospectors can output detailed 3-d models given prior preparation and "generic earthquakes" have nearly instant results for depth of the earthquake and precise location. Anyway my point is the destruction in the linked article was spread along a 100 KM (or so..) SW to NE line simultaneously whereas nukes are obviously point sources. I suppose incredibly unluckily a meteor could come precisely 90 degrees straight down to fool such analysis but those impacts are statistically unlikely. It would seem pretty trivial given enough seismographs on the ground and enough global computing power to instantly detect the difference between a single point source and a geographically long linear impact source.
- nabla9 5y ago
  Because IAEA coordinates and monitors NPT-treaty there is lots of open source information about the subject. Seismographic analysis has become really accurate. 0.1 t .. 10 t aka (extremely-low-yield testing) can be concealed from seismographs. Very-low-yield testing between 10 t and 1-2 kt is very hard to conceal, and everything from low-yield testing up (>20kt) can be detected with certainty.

wrycoder 5y ago

There are satellites continuously monitoring the Earth for nuclear bursts. The latter have a characteristic double pulse of optical radiation, even in the case of a simple fission device. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_MASINT#Space-based_Nuclear_Energy_Detection https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_MASINT#Space-based_N...