OT- Impact of an asteriod hitting Eastern USA [Archive]

tesco samoa

November 23rd, 2003, 02:50 AM

spacebadger i was commenting on the size of usa vs the whole world...

Rocks, aliens, big waves, overly large apes, earthquakes, Superman, Giant Ants, CHUD, ETC... They all love NYC.... ( Except the Ants... THEM love LA )

Take the freaks and mutants away from Australia and the rest of the world has nothing http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

DavidG

November 23rd, 2003, 03:37 AM

Originally posted by SpaceBadger:
So small in size? Out of all the nations on Earth, the USA is something like 5th or 6th in both geographical size and population. That's small?

SpaceBadger Compared to the mighty Canada? You bet! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif (no fair counting population http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif )

Taz-in-Space

November 23rd, 2003, 07:21 AM

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by SpaceBadger:
So small in size? Out of all the nations on Earth, the USA is something like 5th or 6th in both geographical size and population. That's small?

SpaceBadger
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Compared to the mighty Canada? You bet! (no fair counting population )

If it happened to NORTHERN Canada; would anybody notice? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

(Hey - a Taz gotta ask such things!) http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif

oleg

November 23rd, 2003, 07:51 AM

Originally posted by Atrocities:
Yet even further proof that the attack was masterminded by some evil dooers from outer space. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif It might be indeed true ! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif Why bother with some fancy Phasers and Anti-Matter bomb if you can discretly change the orbit of some small space rock !?

rextorres

November 23rd, 2003, 08:20 AM

Originally posted by Atrocities:
If something like this happened, what would the Democrats say? "George Bush fialed to protect us from space terrorist!"

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif I would say that instead of spending $100B or so of my tax dollars on the Haliburton War he probably should have invested a small fraction of that money in Asteroid Defense.

deccan

November 23rd, 2003, 10:27 AM

Originally posted by tesco samoa:
P.S. is it me or does all the cool stuff happen to the usa.... So small in size but large in stuff happening.... Remember that the U.S.A. has more scientists and more of a research budget to land mass than other countries as well. It may be that interesting things have happened in other countries, but the scientists there simply haven't found out about them.

Cyrien

November 24th, 2003, 03:40 AM

Fifth or Sixth? I think not. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Land Area:
1 Russia 17,075,400
2 Canada 9,976,140
3 United States 9,629,091
4 China 9,596,960
5 Brazil 8,511,965
6 Australia 7,686,850
7 India 3,287,590
8 Argentina 2,776,890
9 Kazakhstan 2,717,306
10 Sudan 2,505,810

Population:
1 China - 1,256,167,701
2 India - 1,017,645,163
3 United States - 274,943,496
4 Indonesia - 219,266,557
5 Brazil - 173,790,810
6 Russia - 145,904,542
7 Pakistan - 141,145,344
8 Bangladesh - 129,146,695
9 Japan - 126,434,470
10 Nigeria - 117,170,948

More stuff to look at about rating countries. Kinda silly but can be fun. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif (http://www.worldatlas.com/geoquiz/thelist.htm)

[ November 24, 2003, 01:41: Message edited by: Cyrien ]

Taz-in-Space

November 24th, 2003, 06:07 AM

On that world atlas site I found:

Russia 17,075,400 sq km, (6,592,846 sq miles)
Canada 9,330,970 sq km, (3,602,707 sq miles)
China 9,326,410 sq km, (3,600,947 sq miles)
United States 9.166,600 sq km, (3,539,242 sq miles)
Brazil 8,456,510 sq km, (3,265,075 sq miles)
Australia 7,617,930 sq km, (2,941,283 sq miles)
India 2,973,190 sq km, (1,147,949 sq miles)
Argentina 2,736,690 sq km, (1,056,636 sq miles)
Kazakhstan 2,717,300 sq km, (1,049,150 sq miles)
Sudan 2,376,000 sq km, (917,374 sq miles)

Seems to be some disagreement on who's third largest!

Taz-in-Space

November 24th, 2003, 06:49 AM

A double post 42 minutes later...

Hey I think that's a record!!!! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

[ November 24, 2003, 06:02: Message edited by: Taz-in-Space ]

gregebowman

November 24th, 2003, 05:10 PM

Even though it's probably 25 years or so since I've read Robert A. Heinlein's The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress, there was one thing in that book that always stuck in my mind. IIRC, the moon population was rebelling and trying to become an indepent state. In one scene, the moon miners, insteading of sending moon rocks in a controlled descent to earth, rigged the machinery so that they were using it as a weapon and hitting whatever targets they wanted to. I've always wondered that if we could ever get a moon colony going, if such a weapon could be made and we could take shots at whoever we wanted to. Imaging sending a big rock at Tehran? Or Syria? Or maybe once China makes whatever move they have in mind?

oleg

November 24th, 2003, 05:31 PM

Originally posted by gregebowman:
Even though it's probably 25 years or so since I've read Robert A. Heinlein's The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress, there was one thing in that book that always stuck in my mind. IIRC, the moon population was rebelling and trying to become an indepent state. In one scene, the moon miners, insteading of sending moon rocks in a controlled descent to earth, rigged the machinery so that they were using it as a weapon and hitting whatever targets they wanted to. I've always wondered that if we could ever get a moon colony going, if such a weapon could be made and we could take shots at whoever we wanted to. Imaging sending a big rock at Tehran? Or Syria? Or maybe once China makes whatever move they have in mind? So that is why China wants to set up a moon base by 2025 http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Cyrien

November 24th, 2003, 05:55 PM

Originally posted by Taz-in-Space:
On that world atlas site I found:

Russia 17,075,400 sq km, (6,592,846 sq miles)
Canada 9,330,970 sq km, (3,602,707 sq miles)
China 9,326,410 sq km, (3,600,947 sq miles)
United States 9.166,600 sq km, (3,539,242 sq miles)
Brazil 8,456,510 sq km, (3,265,075 sq miles)
Australia 7,617,930 sq km, (2,941,283 sq miles)
India 2,973,190 sq km, (1,147,949 sq miles)
Argentina 2,736,690 sq km, (1,056,636 sq miles)
Kazakhstan 2,717,300 sq km, (1,049,150 sq miles)
Sudan 2,376,000 sq km, (917,374 sq miles)

Seems to be some disagreement on who's third largest! Not really the problem is in definitions. Yours is Land Area mine was actually (I mislabeled it) Total Area.

Total Area is international borders and so counts inland water bodies etc. The other is just the land, and subtracts any area covered in water. The US has about twice the water area of China so Total Area is larger for US while Land Area is larger for China. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif

Cyrien

November 24th, 2003, 06:17 PM

And something fun to make your own comparisons with other nations. (http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/geo_lan_use_oth&id=ch&id=us)

Captain Kwok

November 25th, 2003, 07:03 AM

CBC television in Canada had an interesting 2hr program at 8pm EST tonight called "Asteroid! The Doomsday Rock". I thought it was done rather well - especially compared to those normal Discovery Channel/TLC ones that are on sometimes. It covered the actually Groups/agencies that are responsible for identifying and tracking many of the asteroids that could potentially harm Earth at some point and developing possible methods for diverting a potential impact. Interesting stuff.

narf poit chez BOOM

November 25th, 2003, 07:06 AM

i always thought a bunch of nukes would pretty much take care of any asteriod. but maybe i'm just revieling a liking for brute force. nah. i think the hammer's already did that. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Roanon

November 25th, 2003, 07:28 AM

Originally posted by narf poit chez BOOM:
i always thought a bunch of nukes would pretty much take care of any asteriod.You're lookking too much cheap american TV http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif Vacuum = no atmosphere = no air pressure = pretty ineffective nukes. Even if you make very deep tight holes into an asteroid and bLast there, you will probably end up with just several pieces hitting earth instead of one. It would be more effective if you cover the asteroid in white paint and let the sun deflect it.

Erax

November 25th, 2003, 05:40 PM

Originally posted by tesco samoa:
Rocks, aliens, big waves, overly large apes, earthquakes, Superman, Giant Ants, CHUD, ETC... They all love NYC.... ( Except the Ants... THEM love LA )No way ! You forgot Tokyo !

tesco samoa

November 25th, 2003, 05:53 PM

that is true...

narf poit chez BOOM

November 25th, 2003, 11:01 PM

well, if you nuked one side of it, you could deflect it.

Roanon

November 25th, 2003, 11:18 PM

Originally posted by narf poit chez BOOM:
well, if you nuked one side of it, you could deflect it. lol, really stop looking cheap bad TV films http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif In vacuum, you just DO NOT GET any sigificant kinetic energy from a nuke. You get heat and radiation. ONLY ON EARTH, or within any other atmosphere, you have pressure, and therefore the destructive kinetic energy, resulting from it. Despite what every SciFi film tries to tell you, you do not even hear a bang! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

narf poit chez BOOM

November 25th, 2003, 11:49 PM

yes, i know you don't hear a bang. unless you stick your helmet on the asteriod, in which case the concusive force is transmitted. and there is concusive force, wether there is an atmosphere or not. and several sci-fi auther's have written about using nukes.

PvK

November 25th, 2003, 11:52 PM

What if you bury the nuke fairly deep in a shaft on the asteroid before detonating?

As for "only the US and Tokyo have fun events", I think it depends on what media you listen to. Watch British sci-fi, for instance, and you'll find that 999/1000 omnipotent space beings prefer the British Isles as the keystone of their master plans.

PvK

tesco samoa

November 26th, 2003, 12:18 AM

yea... i know in england you wanna stay away from phone booths ,plants ,underground (dragons )and if there is a wierd thing going on make sure your on a train under a tunnel or something... But as aways if your from London you will end up going to Scotland. ( cannot remember what that series was called but it was very good )

Roanon

November 26th, 2003, 04:54 AM

Originally posted by narf poit chez BOOM:
yes, i know you don't hear a bang. unless you stick your helmet on the asteriod, in which case the concusive force is transmitted. and there is concusive force, wether there is an atmosphere or not. and several sci-fi auther's have written about using nukes. Hmm, if at all, then the "concussive force" will be transmitted regardless if you stick your helmet on the asteroid or not http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif .
I will not continue this. Just let me point out that you might want to reevaluate your physics knowledge if you heavily rely on sci-fi authors. Or mainstream cinema/TV http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

narf poit chez BOOM

November 26th, 2003, 05:18 AM

ok, i just can't understand how you can have what is essentally an explosion without force.

[ November 26, 2003, 03:19: Message edited by: narf poit chez BOOM ]

PvK

November 26th, 2003, 05:46 AM

There would be lots of force, but not much to push against, except the missile itself. That's why I was suggesting burying the bomb in the side of the asteroid.

The "paint it white and let the sun deflect it" is a much more appealing idea, as is intercepting it at a great distance and attaching a solar sail.

PvK

PvK

November 26th, 2003, 05:56 AM

Here's a good PDF document from an Australian military study on planetary asteroid defense, including mention of "the giggle factor". http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

http://www.au.af.mil/au/2025/volume3/chap16/vol3ch16.pdf

PvK

[ November 26, 2003, 03:57: Message edited by: PvK ]

Kamog

November 26th, 2003, 05:58 AM

Hmm, that's a good point, a nuclear explosion produces only radiation and heat.

Well, maybe they can deflect the asteroid by exploding a very big conventional bomb (not a nuclear one). The explosion will generate force from the expanding gases, which can transfer kinetic energy by striking the side of the asteroid.

narf poit chez BOOM

November 26th, 2003, 06:09 AM

i guess the point is that the nuclear missile itself doesn't possess enough mass to transfer enough kinetic energy to the asteriod? but then why does it refer to the force of the nuke in multiple's of tons? in table 7.

Phoenix-D

November 26th, 2003, 04:46 PM

Narf, nuke warheads are always measured in kilotons of TNT, the amount of that required to produce an equvilent explosion.

The problem is in space, you have no air. No air and you have no overpressure, no bLast wave..no concusive effects. Its conciveable that even the space shuttle could survive a fairly near miss with a nuke in space, most of the force is lost.

oleg

November 26th, 2003, 05:10 PM

Originally posted by Phoenix-D:
Narf, nuke warheads are always measured in kilotons of TNT, the amount of that required to produce an equvilent explosion.

The problem is in space, you have no air. No air and you have no overpressure, no bLast wave..no concusive effects. Its conciveable that even the space shuttle could survive a fairly near miss with a nuke in space, most of the force is lost. I doubt that. It is still a HUGE amount of energy reliased. Lack of air removes the shock wave, but insted we will have a stream of sublight-speed particles that are no longer opposed by atmosphere density. We will still have the same sort of "front wave", now propogating with the speed of light. If you remember from nukes explosions, staff around the center was evaporated. It is caused by photons, not a shockwave !

tesco samoa

November 26th, 2003, 05:28 PM

maybe drill into the astroid and release the bomb ??

Phoenix-D

November 26th, 2003, 05:33 PM

Originally posted by oleg:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Phoenix-D:
Narf, nuke warheads are always measured in kilotons of TNT, the amount of that required to produce an equvilent explosion.

The problem is in space, you have no air. No air and you have no overpressure, no bLast wave..no concusive effects. Its conciveable that even the space shuttle could survive a fairly near miss with a nuke in space, most of the force is lost. I doubt that. It is still a HUGE amount of energy reliased. Lack of air removes the shock wave, but insted we will have a stream of sublight-speed particles that are no longer opposed by atmosphere density. We will still have the same sort of "front wave", now propogating with the speed of light. If you remember from nukes explosions, staff around the center was evaporated. It is caused by photons, not a shockwave ! <hr /></blockquote>And the shuttle has these nice heat-resisting tiles. Depends how "near" the near miss is I suppose, though you're right the shrapnel might be nasty.

Roanon

November 27th, 2003, 12:38 AM

Originally posted by oleg:
but insted we will have a stream of sublight-speed particles that are no longer opposed by atmosphere density. We will still have the same sort of "front wave", now propogating with the speed of light. If you remember from nukes explosions, staff around the center was evaporated. It is caused by photons, not a shockwave ! Well, if you think of sublight-speed particles, you should certainly not select photons http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif . Also, there is relatively few resistance to them (or other particles) from atmoshpere density, at least here on earth. Not even on Jupiter. Except on diskworld, I have not yet seen light been slowed down by air http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif .
If you mean alpha particles, neutrons, or anything else like that - the evaporation of the staff in the center may be caused by them, but not via measurable concussive force. This is matter destruction on a molecular/atomic level, and while you may be able to turn a small portion of said asteroid into dust its course will not be affected in any way.

narf poit chez BOOM

November 27th, 2003, 12:49 AM

ok. but i suppose if we really want to know, we're going to have to blow up a nuke in space.

Captain Kwok

November 27th, 2003, 12:56 AM

Originally posted by Roanon:
Except on diskworld, I have not yet seen light been slowed down by air http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif .Are you sure? It happens every day for me...the speed of light here through air on Earth is .9998c - a measly difference of just under 90,000 m/s.

Cyrien

November 27th, 2003, 05:44 AM

In fact certain cosmic particles have exceeded the speed of light... in the earths atmosphere where the speed of light is marginally slower than in a vacuum. Ever heard of Cherenkov radiation? The Sonic Boom of Light Speed? (http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SpeedOfLight/cherenkov.html) http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Also the largest nuke ever detonated on Earth by the old Soviets was not measured in kt but in Mt 50 of them to be exact. Most are kt due to reduced efficiency in larger explosions compared to smaller ones for military purposes. The largest bomb ever built again by the Soviets (same as the one they detonated actually) is 100Mt. If ever used to full effect it could increase global fallout from a nuclear war by 50% all by itself. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif

I love humans.

[ November 27, 2003, 03:46: Message edited by: Cyrien ]

Cyrien

November 27th, 2003, 05:50 AM

Oh yah. And solar sails and painting it white would only work with significant lead time on the asteroid. The current expected lead time on an earth impacting asteroid is not sufficient for such methods to work. You would have to detect it years out and have the system you plan on using on the asteroid already ready to be deployed. After all it has to be setup, launched, get to the asteroid, and then deploy whatever it deploys, and only after sufficient time will it alter the path.

For discovering something a few days or months out about all you could do is launch all the earths nukes at it with your best missiles pray, have a party whatever your pick is and hope enough get their to vaporize it. Nukes won't change the path but enough of them in waves can vaporize just about anything. There are advantages to having an internal explosion core temperature that exceeds the temperaturs of the sun. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif

Cyrien

November 27th, 2003, 06:50 AM

Oh yah. And a triple post! Woo.

I actually saw one of these suckers as it exploded over the city.

El Paso Meteorite? (http://www.meteor.co.nz/ep2.html)

What most save a few experts failed to note was that had it been composed of say iron instead of softer rocks and lighter rocks the city and surrounding areas would be by-by and I wouldn't be here. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif

And no one detected this sucker until it exploded into smaller pieces over the city.