fenderzilla Posted June 19, 2014 Share Posted June 19, 2014 So I have a question. It involves thermonuclear weapons, gas giants, stars, and to some extent terraforming and evil geniuses. So let’s get started.Thermonuclear warheads are pretty much atomic bombs wrapped in hydrogen. The fission explosion from the atomic bomb releases enough energy to ignite fusion in the hydrogen. The fusion aids the explosion and makes it bigger, but most of the energy comes from the fission bomb (correct me if I’m wrong, but I think that’s the gist of it).So what that means is that a nuke releases enough energy to ignite hydrogen fusion. Fusing hydrogen releases a lot of energy too. What I’m wondering is if fusing hydrogen releases enough energy to fuse more hydrogen.For example: if a nuclear warhead were detonated in Jupiter’s lower atmosphere, the bomb would start fusion in the surrounding hydrogen clouds (Jupiter is nearly all hydrogen). I wonder if the fusing hydrogen clouds would then cause the inert hydrogen around them to start fusing, too. If that worked, the fusion would spread through all of Jupiter like fire.If you nuked Jupiter, would it turn into a star?I mean, it doesn’t have nearly enough mass to ignite fusion for itself, but if we lit the match, would it burn?How much energy would it output, since it would be like a sub-sub-brown dwarf? What would that mean for potential terraforming of the Galilean moons? What would that mean for us earthlings? Would the radiation from another star bake us or irradiate us or give us all sunburns?Well I wanna know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vger Posted June 19, 2014 Share Posted June 19, 2014 Earth's atmosphere has a pretty ample supply of hydrogen. That still wasn't enough for a nuke to bake the whole planet (though there were some who expressed fear of that possibility before the first nuclear test). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fenderzilla Posted June 19, 2014 Author Share Posted June 19, 2014 Earth's atmosphere is what, 0.000055% hydrogen? jupiter's is like 89% that's a big difference. Also, jupiter gets a lot denser further down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveofDefeat Posted June 19, 2014 Share Posted June 19, 2014 This has been discussed. The amount of nukes you would need to start a nuclear fusion reaction in Jupiter would probably just blow Jupiter up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpaceGremlin Posted June 19, 2014 Share Posted June 19, 2014 When Shoemaker-Levy 9 struck Jupiter it released an energy equivalent of 6,000,000 megatons of TNT. No nuke is going to hurt Jupiter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cantab Posted June 19, 2014 Share Posted June 19, 2014 It wouldn't work. Fusion requires the nuclei to be crushed together under immense pressures. In a thermonuclear warhead the fission stage isn't surrounded by hydrogen, it's side-by-side with the fusion stage, and one of the biggest challenges is to contain the immense energy released by the fission bomb in order for the nuclei in the fusion stage to fuse.The atmosphere of Jupiter is just too rarefied, even in its core, for sustained fusion to be possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peadar1987 Posted June 19, 2014 Share Posted June 19, 2014 I sent something similar this in to xkcd's "what if" section.Basically it was "what would happen if you added the stoichiometric amount of oxygen to the atmosphere of a gas giant..."I am guessing a pretty monstrous explosion... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crazyewok Posted June 19, 2014 Share Posted June 19, 2014 (edited) Why would you want to go round nuking random planets in our solar system? Edited June 19, 2014 by KasperVld Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seret Posted June 19, 2014 Share Posted June 19, 2014 (edited) Why would you want to go round nuking random planets in our solar system?I suspect the OP's question was somewhat hypothetical, and not a serious suggestion for space policy. Edited June 19, 2014 by KasperVld Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ralathon Posted June 19, 2014 Share Posted June 19, 2014 (edited) Why would you want to go round nuking random planets in our solar system?Because a small second sun to thaw out the Jovian system would create some very very nice backup earths on Ganymede and Callisto? Edited June 19, 2014 by KasperVld Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crazyewok Posted June 19, 2014 Share Posted June 19, 2014 (edited) Because a small second sun to thaw out the Jovian system would create some very very nice backup earths on Ganymede and Callisto?Just "nuking" it wont work.It would be a hell of a lot more complicated than that.Plus a project on a Solar system body that big? It that something we want to play with? Edited June 19, 2014 by KasperVld Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winter Man Posted June 19, 2014 Share Posted June 19, 2014 (edited) Why would you want to go round nuking random planets in our solar system?Helioforming.The main obstacle as I think has been said is the pressure required to maintain a fusion reaction. If Jupiter could sustain fusion, it would already be doing so and be a brown dwarf. It's a nice idea, but it won't work as-is. The Mars trilogy had the nice idea of floating 'fusion lanterns' close to the surface that would suck hydrogen in, fuse it in a man-made fusion reactor and dump all the energy as light, making it as 'good as' a star for making the moons more habitable. Edited June 19, 2014 by KasperVld Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peadar1987 Posted June 19, 2014 Share Posted June 19, 2014 I don't think it was an entirely unreasonable question. Not everybody has a strong scientific background, and asking questions like this is far better than just assuming whatever you want to believe is correct, and becoming an anti-vaccine advocate or something.Plus, no matter how stupid a question might be, jumping to the conclusion that someone is American because they asked it says far more about your own prejudices than it does about them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert VDS Posted June 19, 2014 Share Posted June 19, 2014 (edited) Why would you want to go round nuking random planets in our solar system?You might have missed the what if part. He doesn't want to nuke it, he only wants to know what would happen. Edited June 19, 2014 by KasperVld Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crazyewok Posted June 19, 2014 Share Posted June 19, 2014 You might have missed the what if part.Still it I find it curouis one mental attitude if there wondering of "whats if" are about bombing and nuking random stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crazyewok Posted June 19, 2014 Share Posted June 19, 2014 (edited) -snip-It [the question] stems not from what I think is stupid but that old cold war plan the USAF had about nuking the moon to scare Russia. http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/11/28/us-planned-to-blow-up-the-moon_n_2202767.html Edited June 19, 2014 by KasperVld Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ralathon Posted June 19, 2014 Share Posted June 19, 2014 (edited) It would be a hell of a lot more complicated than that.And a rocket is a hell of a lot more complicated than a cola bottle with some mentos. But the principle is the exact same: Mass comes out of a nozzle and conservation of momentum dictates the craft moves.Plus a project on a Solar system body that big? It that something we want to play with?Why not? There seems to be no nearby intelligent competition, so as far as we can tell the solar system is ours to do with as we please. If we want to turn Jupiter into a second sun and have the resources to do so, why wouldn't we? Edited June 19, 2014 by KasperVld Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crazyewok Posted June 19, 2014 Share Posted June 19, 2014 Why not? If your only argument is "Because I say so!" then you are operating on even less information than the OP is. Mocking people for not knowing things, even if you yourself know barely anything about nuclear physics is the height of arrogance.Jupiter takes far more energy in through hits from Meteorites that a Nuke will ever do. Plus if I remember it already has its own fission reactions going on at its core. A punny Human nuke will be like a fire cracker.Why not? There seems to be no nearby intelligent competition, so as far as we can tell the solar system is ours to do with as we please. If we want to turn Jupiter into a second sun and have the resources to do so, why wouldn't we?Because what if it goes wrong? What could its affects me on earth? We have nearby intelligent competition, they are called humans on earth. Not saying its a bad idea to ignite a second sun but more Data would be needed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KasperVld Posted June 19, 2014 Share Posted June 19, 2014 (edited) Thread locked for spring cleaning.Thread reopened, please keep things on-topic and not ad hominem. I'll be keeping an eye out. Edited June 19, 2014 by KasperVld Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chiboko Posted June 19, 2014 Share Posted June 19, 2014 most of the energy comes from the fission bomb (correct me if I’m wrong, but I think that’s the gist of it).the fission bomb triggers a fusion reaction in the hydrogen; due to a deliberate lack of containment the fusion reaction essentially goes supernova on a very small scale. Fission warheads alone have never achieved more than 500 kilotons compared to the 50 megatons achieved by fission triggered fusion warheads.TLDR: Most of the energy comes from the fusion reaction and a thermonuclear weapon is quite literally a second sunrise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nuke Posted June 19, 2014 Share Posted June 19, 2014 hydrogen doesn't fuse so well. thats why stars have to be pretty big to ignite. if six teratons of comet fragment impacts cant initiate fusion on jupiter, tsar bomba would not be able to scratch it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cpast Posted June 19, 2014 Share Posted June 19, 2014 (edited) the fission bomb triggers a fusion reaction in the hydrogen; due to a deliberate lack of containment the fusion reaction essentially goes supernova on a very small scale. Fission warheads alone have never achieved more than 500 kilotons compared to the 50 megatons achieved by fission triggered fusion warheads.TLDR: Most of the energy comes from the fusion reaction and a thermonuclear weapon is quite literally a second sunrise.It can actually vary based on the warhead. Some thermonuclear weapons surround the fusion stage with unenriched uranium, which triggers a second round of fission, producing a lot of power (generally a pretty substantial portion of the destructive power of the bomb, for practical weapons; Tsar Bomba derived almost all its energy from fusion, but it wasn't a practical weapon). fenerzilla may also be thinking of boosted fission weapons, which use small amounts of fusion to massively increase fission yield.Additionally, fusion bombs don't fuse regular hydrogen. They fuse deuterium and tritium, which takes a much, much smaller amount of energy. Edited June 19, 2014 by cpast Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sirrobert Posted June 19, 2014 Share Posted June 19, 2014 Jupiter takes far more energy in through hits from Meteorites that a Nuke will ever do. Plus if I remember it already has its own fission reactions going on at its core. A punny Human nuke will be like a fire cracker.Because what if it goes wrong? What could its affects me on earth? We have nearby intelligent competition, they are called humans on earth. Not saying its a bad idea to ignite a second sun but more Data would be needed.That's why it's a hypothetical question, and not a proposal.Human technology advances by asking "but what if I did that?"The actual question is about igniting fusion. The nuke is just a proposed option (and has been awnsered to not work) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FenrirWolf Posted June 19, 2014 Share Posted June 19, 2014 Still it I find it curouis one mental attitude if there wondering of "whats if" are about bombing and nuking random stuff.I find it curious that one would attribute an honest scientific inquiry to mental issues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cpast Posted June 19, 2014 Share Posted June 19, 2014 I find it odd people are assuming that fenerzilla is making a serious proposal that we should actually nuke Jupiter, instead of just being curious whether Jupiter could sustain a fusion reaction if one were ignited. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts