How will we defend ourselves from a Incoming Asteroid if Obama Rids us of Nukes.

[del]

Can anyone give a serious response. What if the asteroid today was actually headed towards us. What would the solution be to deflect it?

Never fear!

I have been praticing on saving the world for 25 years

that little flying saucer used to piss me off

 

[geauxtohell]

Never fear!

I have been praticing on saving the world for 25 years

 

[goldcatt]

PLANETARY DEFENSE CONFERENCE PART 2: MITIGATION PROPOSALS

"Harris emphasized that asteroid mitigation is not a job for leftover ICBMs and warheads, that experimental nuclear explosions in space are politically difficult, and of course the cost of risk prevention should not exceed its value.

Several speakers discussed the use of nuclear explosives either for destruction or deflection. David Dearborn (Livermore National Lab) discussed coupling of nuclear blast energy into NEOs. Nuclear explosives provide by far the most efficient packaging of energy (a million times more energy than the same mass of chemical explosive). For deflection, he noted that only by applying the force vector along the trajectory do we change the total angular momentum of the NEA and provide a shift that is cumulative over many orbits. Forces applied in other directions to change inclination or eccentricity do not produce cumulative effects (except in unusual resonant return cases).

With conservation of momentum, we can readily calculate how much reaction mass must be ejected based on mass of asteroid, velocity of material ejected, and required change in asteroid velocity. For deflection, must keep delta v much less than escape velocity. Standoff explosion heats rock and vaporizes material to exert reaction force. The explosion needs to be within 1 radius or we lose most of energy. For a delta-v of 1 cm/sec on kilometer-scale object, we need to vaporize the top 2 cm. X-rays dont penetrate deep enough, but neutrons are more penetrating and give centimeters of heating. We could deflect a 1 km object by cm/s with a few megatons explosion of a neutron-rich nuclear device. "

Yes, dear. But do you have any idea what cm/s means when you're talking about deflecting an orbiting object?

It would work only if the nukes are loaded on those spaceship thingys and sent out to meet the little buggers. From interplanetary space big enough nukes could, theoretically, nudge their velocity and/or orbital trajectory just enough that over time it turned a hit into a near miss - long before they hit Earth's gravity well. We're talking a year, two years, three before the actual impact scenario. And that's cutting it close - a hundred thousand miles is an incredibly close shave in astronomical terms. How long will it take to shift an asteroid 100,000 miles at the rate of a centimeter per second?

That's spaceships capable of interpanetary travel - which we don't have. And they would be used to meet asteroids we don't spend enough time and resources looking for. Land-based missiles and ICBM's launched from low-orbit satellites are of no value whatsoever, their range means we would have to wait until the target was already well within Earth's gravity well. In other words, these hypotheses are currently just as much science fiction as the rainbow powered unicorns.

But you keep patting yourself on the back, brainiac.

So what we see above is a concession to the First Sergeant... that HE was right and SHE, along with her Progressive gal-pals were WRONG... But as is always the case when one is dealing with Progressives.... The debate begins with the Progressives denying the thesis... then when they're refuted, they demand that it doesn't matter... refusing to admit they were wrong; dead wrong; totally wrong, utterly indisputably wrong... and decide to change the subject or shift the position of their failed argument.

Again... it's the typical result of Progressive reasoning: Deceit and Fraud.

Happens every time... in nearly every point of contest: from the Blue dress, to 9-11. In the case of this thread, it went like this:

Progressive: "ROFL! Did you just claim that Nuclear warheads were something which SCIENCE is actually considering to change the course of a Planet killing asteroid? Why that's PREPOSTEROUS! You watch too many MOVIES! Whatta RUBE!"

American: "Uh Yeah... I did... and it's a fact."

Progressive: "You're a FOOL! First the Earth isn't threatened by such, and second ONLY A FOOL would even CONSIDER using Nukes to save the planet from a collision with an Asteroid. That's Science FICTION... not Science FACT!You're a moron whose to be belittled and berated for your clownish beliefs..."

American: "Well... If that's how ya feel, that's fine and all; but here's a synopsis of the thinking on the issue from the worlds foremost experts, which readily states that the earth has no potential alternative except nulcear warheads; with no current program being so much as considered, let alone funded, that might provide any potential alternative.

So despite what you claim and the passion which you hold in believing it, the incontrovertible fact is, you're wrong: See!"

Progressive: "Well uh... SO what? It doesn't matter... We don't have the means to launch the nukes to the asteroids to do anything about it, so it's still science FICTION like we SAID!"

Now at that point the Progresive has conceded the argument; they simply refuse to be held accountbale for their failure...

And of course this can go on indefinitely...

American: "Well actually, that's not true, we don't need anything more than what we already have to launch our nukes... you've been misinformed again. The Nukes would be launched so as to intercept the asteroid body at a certain time and place; such being dependent upon the information available once it is determined that it will collide with earth... Not distinct at all from the launching of scientific probes which we've sent throughout the solar system.

(Now Miss Progressive: this is where you return to dismiss the latest refutation of your ignorance; you'd probably love to demand some evidence, but you're leary to do so, because that always tends to reflect poorly on your credibility.)

... and so it goes.

No, you're just a brain dead tool.

Learn English.

 

[Si modo]

The more I think about it, the more I think US Spammer Reatrd and Pubes need to conduct an experiment to see if their harebrained idea has any merit.

Boys, go find an express train. A smallish one will do as long as it's going fast enough.

Stand directly in front of it with your .22's. When it gets close enough to actually hit it, fire away.

Let us know if you manage to break any windows before it smears you across the next three counties.

Now wait just a minute, there, missy! No word problems allowed in this thread. I see more short circuits in our future.

 

[goldcatt]

Yes, dear. But do you have any idea what cm/s means when you're talking about deflecting an orbiting object?

It would work only if the nukes are loaded on those spaceship thingys and sent out to meet the little buggers. From interplanetary space big enough nukes could, theoretically, nudge their velocity and/or orbital trajectory just enough that over time it turned a hit into a near miss - long before they hit Earth's gravity well. We're talking a year, two years, three before the actual impact scenario. And that's cutting it close - a hundred thousand miles is an incredibly close shave in astronomical terms. How long will it take to shift an asteroid 100,000 miles at the rate of a centimeter per second?

That's spaceships capable of interpanetary travel - which we don't have. And they would be used to meet asteroids we don't spend enough time and resources looking for. Land-based missiles and ICBM's launched from low-orbit satellites are of no value whatsoever, their range means we would have to wait until the target was already well within Earth's gravity well. In other words, these hypotheses are currently just as much science fiction as the rainbow powered unicorns.

But you keep patting yourself on the back, brainiac.

<<<blah, blah, blah>>>

You really need to see a doctor.

Hooked on phonics didn't work for him.

 

[goldcatt]

The more I think about it, the more I think US Spammer Reatrd and Pubes need to conduct an experiment to see if their harebrained idea has any merit.

Boys, go find an express train. A smallish one will do as long as it's going fast enough.

Stand directly in front of it with your .22's. When it gets close enough to actually hit it, fire away.

Let us know if you manage to break any windows before it smears you across the next three counties.

Now wait just a minute, there, missy! No word problems allowed in this thread. I see more short circuits in our future.

Sorry mom, I'll be more careful with my toys next time.

 

[bodecea]

<<<blah, blah, blah>>>

You really need to see a doctor.

Hooked on phonics didn't work for him.

And he certainly has this fetish for very overweight girls...I bet he beats off to "The Biggest Loser."

 

[rdean]

PLANETARY DEFENSE CONFERENCE PART 2: MITIGATION PROPOSALS

"Harris emphasized that asteroid mitigation is not a job for leftover ICBMs and warheads, that experimental nuclear explosions in space are politically difficult, and of course the cost of risk prevention should not exceed its value.

Several speakers discussed the use of nuclear explosives either for destruction or deflection. David Dearborn (Livermore National Lab) discussed coupling of nuclear blast energy into NEOs. Nuclear explosives provide by far the most efficient packaging of energy (a million times more energy than the same mass of chemical explosive). For deflection, he noted that only by applying the force vector along the trajectory do we change the total angular momentum of the NEA and provide a shift that is cumulative over many orbits. Forces applied in other directions to change inclination or eccentricity do not produce cumulative effects (except in unusual resonant return cases).

With conservation of momentum, we can readily calculate how much reaction mass must be ejected based on mass of asteroid, velocity of material ejected, and required change in asteroid velocity. For deflection, must keep delta v much less than escape velocity. Standoff explosion heats rock and vaporizes material to exert reaction force. The explosion needs to be within 1 radius or we lose most of energy. For a delta-v of 1 cm/sec on kilometer-scale object, we need to vaporize the top 2 cm. X-rays dont penetrate deep enough, but neutrons are more penetrating and give centimeters of heating. We could deflect a 1 km object by cm/s with a few megatons explosion of a neutron-rich nuclear device. "

Yes, dear. But do you have any idea what cm/s means when you're talking about deflecting an orbiting object?

It would work only if the nukes are loaded on those spaceship thingys and sent out to meet the little buggers. From interplanetary space big enough nukes could, theoretically, nudge their velocity and/or orbital trajectory just enough that over time it turned a hit into a near miss - long before they hit Earth's gravity well. We're talking a year, two years, three before the actual impact scenario. And that's cutting it close - a hundred thousand miles is an incredibly close shave in astronomical terms. How long will it take to shift an asteroid 100,000 miles at the rate of a centimeter per second?

That's spaceships capable of interpanetary travel - which we don't have. And they would be used to meet asteroids we don't spend enough time and resources looking for. Land-based missiles and ICBM's launched from low-orbit satellites are of no value whatsoever, their range means we would have to wait until the target was already well within Earth's gravity well. In other words, these hypotheses are currently just as much science fiction as the rainbow powered unicorns.

But you keep patting yourself on the back, brainiac.

So what we see above is a concession to the First Sergeant... that HE was right and SHE, along with her Progressive gal-pals were WRONG... But as is always the case when one is dealing with Progressives.... The debate begins with the Progressives denying the thesis... then when they're refuted, they demand that it doesn't matter... refusing to admit they were wrong; dead wrong; totally wrong, utterly indisputably wrong... and decide to change the subject or shift the position of their failed argument.

Again... it's the typical result of Progressive reasoning: Deceit and Fraud.

Happens every time... in nearly every point of contest: from the Blue dress, to 9-11. In the case of this thread, it went like this:

Progressive: "ROFL! Did you just claim that Nuclear warheads were something which SCIENCE is actually considering to change the course of a Planet killing asteroid? Why that's PREPOSTEROUS! You watch too many MOVIES! Whatta RUBE!"

American: "Uh Yeah... I did... and it's a fact."

Progressive: "You're a FOOL! First the Earth isn't threatened by such, and second ONLY A FOOL would even CONSIDER using Nukes to save the planet from a collision with an Asteroid. That's Science FICTION... not Science FACT!You're a moron whose to be belittled and berated for your clownish beliefs..."

American: "Well... If that's how ya feel, that's fine and all; but here's a synopsis of the thinking on the issue from the worlds foremost experts, which readily states that the earth has no potential alternative except nulcear warheads; with no current program being so much as considered, let alone funded, that might provide any potential alternative.

So despite what you claim and the passion which you hold in believing it, the incontrovertible fact is, you're wrong: See!"

Progressive: "Well uh... SO what? It doesn't matter... We don't have the means to launch the nukes to the asteroids to do anything about it, so it's still science FICTION like we SAID!"

Now at that point the Progresive has conceded the argument; they simply refuse to be held accountbale for their failure...

And of course this can go on indefinitely...

American: "Well actually, that's not true, we don't need anything more than what we already have to launch our nukes... you've been misinformed again. The Nukes would be launched so as to intercept the asteroid body at a certain time and place; such being dependent upon the information available once it is determined that it will collide with earth... Not distinct at all from the launching of scientific probes which we've sent throughout the solar system.

(Now Miss Progressive: this is where you return to dismiss the latest refutation of your ignorance; you'd probably love to demand some evidence, but you're leary to do so, because that always tends to reflect poorly on your credibility.)

... and so it goes.

Only 6% of scientists are Republicans according to PEW Research. It's one thing to be stupid, another to be stupid and "smug". It's "astounding". Really.

This is what you assume. "Big thing" "Big boom" "Thing gone". Astounding.

Hit the water in a pond with a "baseball bat". How far do you move that pond? That's what a nuclear explosion to a 10 mile wide meteor is like. Why won't it fly apart? We will leave that to you to figure out.
Stupid and smug. What a dangerous combination. But oh so funny.

 

[Si modo]

You really need to see a doctor.

Hooked on phonics didn't work for him.

And he certainly has this fetish for very overweight girls...I bet he beats off to "The Biggest Loser."

I should neg you just for giving me such a visual. Grrrrr. ()

 

[blu]

Can anyone give a serious response. What if the asteroid today was actually headed towards us. What would the solution be to deflect it?

serious response:

nukes are actually really bad for asteroid destruction because they will break it into smaller peices of unknown, potentially large size. at that point instead of 1 big asteroid, you just created lets say 10 medium sized one. all ten of which will cause immense damage and make damager more widespread than if just 1 big one hit.