689
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] ShellMonkey@lemmy.socdojo.com -1 points 5 months ago

I wonder what the costs would be to just literally launch it into the sun. Let it all get recompiled in the big fusion furnace and out of our hands. Of course if the rocket failed during launch you have a real big problem, but that part aside.

[-] Dagwood222@lemm.ee 3 points 5 months ago

The Space Shuttle Challenger has entered the chat.

Not sure anyone would sign off on sending potential dirty bombs into space.

A few years back people were floating the idea of sending up orbital solar farms that would collect power and beam it to the surface.

[-] TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee 2 points 5 months ago

Not sure anyone would sign off on sending potential dirty bombs into space.

At least not anymore.... We did a successful test of a nuclear powered ramjet in the 60's with project Neptune. But I guess that was before people were afraid of dirty bombs welded into the shape of cruise missiles.

[-] Dagwood222@lemm.ee 1 points 5 months ago

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_A119

You probably know about it, but I thought I'd throw it into the mix.

tl, dr = the Air Force was planning on detonating an atom bomb on the moon because shit like that made sense in the Cold War.

[-] splatt9990@lemmy.ml 1 points 5 months ago

There was also a plan to explode nuclear bombs on shorelines to create artificial harbors, and of course the infamous Project Orion, a manned interstellar spaceship powered by exploding hydrogen bombs. Doing unhinged shit with nukes was all the rage back then I guess

[-] Dagwood222@lemm.ee 1 points 5 months ago

If you haven't seen it, "The Three Body Problem" is a good series with a lot of wild ideas.

They use the hydrogen bomb spaceship idea.

[-] SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca 0 points 5 months ago

Be honest, if you had a lot of nukes lying around, you wouldn't at least consider nuking the moon?

Also when you think about it, nuking the Moon is way less insane than nuking the Earth over 2000 times.

[-] Dagwood222@lemm.ee 1 points 5 months ago

https://youtu.be/fLQiihXTFZk

The video was inspired by an idea used in 'The Three Body Problem' series.

the tl, dr is that atom bombs could be used to make a spaceship.

[-] echodot@feddit.uk 2 points 5 months ago

Even if we had a magic 100% reliable rocket it still wouldn't be a good idea to send it into space. You'd have to have a stupidly powerful magic 100% reliable rocket to get into a solar intercept orbit, otherwise it would just hang around the Earth for a very long time and eventually come back down as nuclear fire dust.

It's not as if storing it underground is an unsafe strategy so it seems like a pointless exercise.

[-] ShellMonkey@lemmy.socdojo.com 1 points 5 months ago

Thus the 'aside from launch failure's part. No rocket scientist here, but way I figure if we can send probes to do flyby photos of the outer planets how hard can it be to hit the biggest thing in our system?

Lift costs might be stupidly high too, but more a would it be possible thought.

[-] echodot@feddit.uk 1 points 5 months ago

Because the other planets are in orbit of the sun like the Earth is. The sun itself is stationary, so not only do you have to go all the way over there, you also have to cancel out the rotation of the Earth.

this post was submitted on 20 May 2024
689 points (97.1% liked)

Greentext

4305 readers
637 users here now

This is a place to share greentexts and witness the confounding life of Anon. If you're new to the Greentext community, think of it as a sort of zoo with Anon as the main attraction.

Be warned:

If you find yourself getting angry (or god forbid, agreeing) with something Anon has said, you might be doing it wrong.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS