9 ms·
Carl Sagan, nuking the moon, and not nuking the moon
- perilunar 3y agoWhy nuke the moon? Detonating a series of nukes in high earth or lunar orbit would demonstrate just as much capability with far fewer risks. Hell, you could even detonate them in an elaborate pattern (stars and stripes?) just to show off.
- sethammons 3y agoObviously much smarter people than me were coming up with the reasons to not nuke the moon. I'm not convinced. Learning how the nuke acts in a vacuum is interesting science. Seeing it from Earth is something of a power play. Affecting the moon's natural radiation and potentially destroying some undiscovered life seems really unlikely to me. But again, I'm about the furthest thing from an expert. I'm shocked we've not nuked it "just because," like the whales, you got to nuke somethin' (Simpson's reference; no, I don't support nuking whales, though, I'm pretty sure we have, and I think that is much worse than nuking the moon).
- Jerrrry 3y agoThe smartest people on the planet wanted to nuke the moon; it was a great idea. It wouldn't make the classic mushroom cloud - it would be a spectacular sphere of luminescence; and by far the most powerful display of power to had ever been accomplished by man. In fact, von Neumann, citing his infamous Chaos Theory, wanted to preemptively strike the USSR. It's the stuff we didn't do we don't want to come to light the most.
- ImPostingOnHN 3y agoIndeed, it was less than half a decade later that Operation Fishbowl [0] commenced, a series of high-altitude nuclear tests, and they were pretty awe-some displays. 0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Fishbowl https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Fishbowl
- retrac 3y agoIt would affect the Moon's natural radiation. It would vaporize plutonium and other isotopes and this would be attracted by the Moon's gravity and eventually settle as a powder all over the Moon. (We did it to the Earth already. You can't find anywhere on the planet without detectable plutonium in the air or water.) This is maybe now less of a concern, now that we have samples returned for background comparison. Blowing up the Moon would still be a very compelling scientific experiment. I can't think of a cheaper or easier way to get spectroscopy of a sample from below the surface. And aside from the fallout (literal and political) there's not much downside. Wikipedia has an article about the proposal: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_A119 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_A119
- arethuza 3y ago"the flash of explosive light would have been faintly visible to people on Earth with their naked eye" That makes it sound like one of the reasons for cancelling it would have been that it really wouldn't have been that impressive.
- eszed 3y agoIf you picked the right spot at the right time of the month, could you get a mushroom cloud in "profile"? That would look pretty cool, though maybe still not large enough to see with the naked eye. I don't have a good intuition of the scales involved. [Edit: Or, wait: a mushroom cloud depends on atmosphere, doesn't it? So... What would a blast-created cloud of dust look like in a vacuum? Just a cloud? Yeah, not so impressive a visual.]
- thfuran 3y ago>This is maybe now less of a concern, now that we have samples returned for background comparison. As I understand it, the remaining Apollo samples are basically considered contaminated by earth now.
- photochemsyn 3y agoOn a galactic scale, I wonder what the average time is between a species evolving intelligence, mastering technology, then using that technology to wipe themselves out of existence? That's the most likely answer to the question, 'where are all the aliens?'
- Jerrrry 3y agoIt is one of the leading Late filters; that excellence in the species cannot compensate for the inefficiencies in extracting energy to continue existing; leading to environmental/social problems, inevitably leading to either environmental collapse, preventing space colonialism, or social collapse. Nuclear energy is a popular crux, but not needed per se. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cCzpYxedIe0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cCzpYxedIe0
- snapcaster 3y agoI'm not convinced it's a Fermi paradox solution. I'm not saying civilizations don't sometimes destroy themselves but a). the one civilization we know of didn't do it yet and b). doesn't this require something inherent to life for this to explain the fermi paradox? it seems like this just moves the question from "where are all the aliens" to "why does every civilization regardless of environment/planet/etc. ALWAYS destroy themselves" which doesn't seem like an easier question to answer?
- bee_rider 3y agoA suffers from survivorship bias, right? The civilization in which we exist can’t have destroyed itself yet if we are to have made that observation.
- snapcaster 3y agoSure, but compared to what? I don't know what you would call the bias of "imaginging bad stuff happening in the future, and for some reason the bad stuff is inevitable regardless of planet, lifeform, etc."
- 3y ago
- Vagantem 3y agoRelated animated video from Kurzgesagt - "What if We Nuke the Moon?" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qEfPBt9dU60 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qEfPBt9dU60
- riffic 3y agolike the Mr. Show sketch: "America can, should, must, and will blow up the moon."
- jkern 3y agoWe're earthlings. Let's blow up earth things
- sprabbage 3y ago"He'll do the job, no questions asked." Classic.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- zck 3y agoThis one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GTJ3LIA5LmA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GTJ3LIA5LmA
- Spastche 3y ago"I walked on the moon. Did a pushup. Ate an egg on it. What else can you do with it?"
- tzs 3y agoNote that by "nuking the moon" they just mean exploding a nuclear bomb on the moon mainly to show your enemies that you can and perhaps learn some interesting thing about the moon by watching the physical effects. There was someone who wanted to go a bit farther than just a bomb or two [1]. He wanted to completely destroy the moon. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Abian https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Abian
- mr_toad 3y agoThe internet had a better class of crazy back in those days.
- pvaldes 3y agoRemind us that we need a protocol as species to remove people from the power ASAP if they turn insane.
- arethuza 3y ago"The proposed nuclear destruction of the Moon has been rejected by astronomers on several grounds" That made me laugh. I wonder if this is where Neal Stephenson got the idea for Seveneves which has the opening line "The moon blew up with no warning and with no apparent reason."
- ikari_pl 3y agospoiler: we never learn the reason (it's not important to the story)
- MeImCounting 3y agoI think it is important! It is an unspeakable unknowable dread hanging over the entire story. Its brought up later in the book and remains a very scary, very foreboding mystery. It implies either an unfathomably powerful and malicious force or an unfathomably powerful and uncaring force, both of which are terrifying.
- mtillman 3y ago
- jchanimal 3y agoI can't help but think of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seveneves https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seveneves about the aftermath of the splitting of the moon.
- SamBam 3y agoOr Life As We Knew It for a good YA novel, post-apocalyptic survival after a huge asteroid nudges the moon to a different orbit and destroys the climate on earth.
- ihaveajob 3y agoMy god, I saw this comment and thought it'd be fun to pick up something by Neal Stephenson. After all, I loved Cryptonomicon back in college. But it's 880 pages! As a slow reader, this is sadly not something I'll ever get to.
- consumer451 3y agoFWIW, I read it in just a few days because I became so engrossed by the story.
- nfriedly 3y agoListen to the audio book. I did, and it's very good. I wouldn't call myself a slow reader, but I just don't have the time to sit and read paper books very often. Instead I listen to audio books while driving, doing chores, etc. I have a family member who is a slow reader, but thanks to audiobooks, finishes over a hundred books a year.
- The_Colonel 3y agoYou've been misled by the publisher. Seveneves has about 600 pages. After that, the pages are filled with some kind of fan fiction sort-a related, but pretty dumb, novella (confusingly named "Part Three"). Now, seriously. While the first two parts are great, the third is awful. You can actually skip the part 3, it is completely superfluous (and again, dumb), the story works without it better.
- bombcar 3y agoBeen there - I even have the shirt. https://www.imao.us/docs/NukeTheMoon.htm https://www.imao.us/docs/NukeTheMoon.htm
- wormius 3y ago"Tonight we can, will and must blow up the moon." "Earth First: We're earthlings, we should blow up earth things. No to blowing up the moon!" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GTJ3LIA5LmA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GTJ3LIA5LmA
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- kyleyeats 3y agoPersonally, I'm in favor of nuking the Moon. The Moon is moving away from the Earth at a steady rate. I consider this an act of secession. Not only would nuking the Moon teach it a lesson, it might also keep it in our orbit. All we have to do is nuke the far side of it enough times to stop the outward movement. If we do it too much, it's an easy fix-- just nuke the near side. Anyone who opposes this idea is for a moonless Earth, and all the chaos that would bring. I call them anti-tiders. They're the most despicable people on the planet.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]