Nuking an incoming asteroid is a daft idea - as all NASA's plans seem of late

SUBMAN1 · 07-30-08, 01:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by August

Quote:

Originally Posted by SUBMAN1

Quote:

Originally Posted by August

And a nuke, detonated in it's path would not have that capability?

On a solid object it would. Not the other way around though - you would just break it up and it would continue on its path. Multiple impacts of smaller objects is much more devastating that one large object. This makes the problem worse, and more wide spread.

-S

I didn't say detonate on the object but in front of it. IE between the object and the earth. It shouldn't matter whether it's a solid, liquid or gas.

It makes a big difference in the models. There was never any want to impact it on the surface in the first place - and I am assuming you knew that, but maybe you don't. The full force of a nuke can only be felt if detonated at Alt. Same physics work here on Earth since any ballistic missile will detonate in the sky sending the force of the impact down. I will post models on that shortly if I can find them.

And it makes a huge difference in the models in that when asteroids were considered all completely solid, the nuke model works and it alters course. When the model turns to a lesss dense material such as a giant dirt clod (like my analogy?), the parts simply split into sections and continued more or less on the same course, resulting in multiple impacts. It is kind of like the blast wave simply goes through the object instead of against it.

-S