Could nuclear explosions disrupt Earth orbit?

[Wombaticus Rex]

Sorry if this is not the appropriate section, and also thanks very much for this board, I've been reading off here for awhile now, finally signed up to ask this question.



I assumed, based on some half-remembered expert testimony, that a large enough nuclear explosion could disrupt the Earth's orbit.

Now that I consider the monstrous velocities and masses involved, I tend to doubt that's true. I haven't been able to find an article addressing this anywhere, which perhaps means it's not a valid concern.

Can anyone point me towards an answer?

1000 thanks.

[swansont]

My first instinct is to compare the energy to that of a volcano, for which large eruptions would release many megatons of energy. They don't disrupt the orbit, so a nuclear blast shouldn't.

[Wombaticus Rex]

^^Thanks for the move, I realized my error too late.


Anyone know what the amount of force nescessary to disrupt the orbit would be?

[antoniseb]

Hi Wombaticus Rex, welcome to the BAUT forum.

If all of the currently existing nuclear weapons were detonated in a manner to maximize the affect on the Earth's orbit, we would not be able to measure the change to the orbit with today's best equipment.

Even moving a modest sized asteroid in a detectable way would be difficult.

[Wombaticus Rex]

^^Thanks!

[Hamlet]

I assumed, based on some half-remembered expert testimony, that a large enough nuclear explosion could disrupt the Earth's orbit.

Now that I consider the monstrous velocities and masses involved, I tend to doubt that's true. I haven't been able to find an article addressing this anywhere, which perhaps means it's not a valid concern.

Can anyone point me towards an answer?

1000 thanks.

This and this are not exactly what you're asking for, but it shows the amount of energy that is needed to affect the Earth's orbit or rotation.

I hope it helps.

[DyerWolf]

(...admittedly only somewhat related question...)

swansont's comparison of nuclear and volcanic explosions reminded me of a long time question:

In the '80s I remember reading that if there were a true nuclear war, experts feared the likely outcome was "nuclear winter" caused - if I remember correctly - by the explosions moving dirt and other particulates into the atmosphere.

However, after watching programs on Krakatoa (sp?) Pinotubo and St. Helens, I have a hard time believing our bombs could actually move more earth and other particulates into the atmosphere than was produced by these volcanic explosions. Anyone have info on this? Links?

[jlhredshift]

(...admittedly only somewhat related question...)

swansont's comparison of nuclear and volcanic explosions reminded me of a long time question:

In the '80s I remember reading that if there were a true nuclear war, experts feared the likely outcome was "nuclear winter" caused - if I remember correctly - by the explosions moving dirt and other particulates into the atmosphere.

However, after watching programs on Krakatoa (sp?) Pinotubo and St. Helens, I have a hard time believing our bombs could actually move more earth and other particulates into the atmosphere than was produced by these volcanic explosions. Anyone have info on this? Links?

There is more to it than just the explosions themselves. In the aftermath it is supposed that infrastructure would break down and the firestorms created by the detonations would go unchecked and the smoke and ash from the fires would cloud the skies. Thus, nuclear winter.

[Wombaticus Rex]

This and this are not exactly what you're asking for, but it shows the amount of energy that is needed to affect the Earth's orbit or rotation.

I hope it helps.

It does, thank you Hamlet.

[Faultline]

I read some page somewhere talking about Star Wars and the Death Star and how it could possibly blast a planet apart.

Too lazy to google it.

But anyway, the physics number-cruncher said that if you took a ball of antimatter the approximate mass of the Death Star (not the little whimpy RPG version, but the one he estimated based on screen images) and rammed it into the Earth fast enough to cause instant mixing of all antimatter with matter, you'd fall short of the required energy to blast a planet apart into chunky salsa by several orders of magnitude.

Wow.

[Maksutov]

[edit]But anyway, the physics number-cruncher said that if you took a ball of antimatter the approximate mass of the Death Star (not the little whimpy RPG version, but the one he estimated based on screen images) and rammed it into the Earth fast enough to cause instant mixing of all antimatter with matter, you'd fall short of the required energy to blast a planet apart into chunky salsa by several orders of magnitude.

Wow.

Scoville-wise, you'd need about ten times that energy to produce some memorable, sweat-inducing, planetary-waste habanero salsa.

Pass me the nachos, please.

Meanwhile, here's the mild chile smilie for those who can't stand the heat:

[Grand_Lunar]

I recall a high school teacher of mine that claimed that nine nuclear explosions at the right spots on Earth would disrupt it's orbit.
It was only later that I realized that other explosions, like Mount Saint Helens, had a much bigger bang than that.

[Sticks]

But if they happened all at the same spot on the Moon, apparently it would hurl the Moon out of the solar system at relativistic velocities leading it to encounter new aliens every week.

Now didn't they do a TV series based on that one

My apologies for the bump, I have been looking for a specific thread and it looks like I still can find it

[Strange]

Now didn't they do a TV series based on that one

And then there is The Day the Earth Caught Fire (1961) - based on the idea in the OP, and rather good (if implausible) if I remember right.

[swampyankee]

^^Thanks for the move, I realized my error too late.


Anyone know what the amount of force nescessary to disrupt the orbit would be?

Yes

Defining "disrupt" to be "changing it noticeably in a human lifetime," and estimating a 0.5% change in Earth's orbital velocity would do that, we can get some numbers.

Mass of Earth: ~ 6e24 kg
Human Life : ~ 2.2e9 s
Orbital velocity of Earth ~ 3e4m/s

0.5% of 3e4m/s is 150 m/s. Dividing that by a human life gives an acceleration of about 7e-8 m/s/s. F=ma, so the force required is about 4.2e17 N. To put that into perspective, the most powerful current liquid fuel rocket engine produces about 8e6 N.

[JCoyote]

Ultimately, the energy required to make a radical change to the earth's climate by orbital change would do a lot worse things to us a lot sooner...

[WayneFrancis]

^^Thanks for the move, I realized my error too late.


Anyone know what the amount of force nescessary to disrupt the orbit would be?

You walking around disrupts the rotation of the Earth. To disrupt the orbit you'd need something a bit external to the Earth to disrupt its orbit...or some type of super volcano that spews massive amounts of material into space thus working like some type of huge jet engine.

[WayneFrancis]

I read some page somewhere talking about Star Wars and the Death Star and how it could possibly blast a planet apart.

Too lazy to google it.

But anyway, the physics number-cruncher said that if you took a ball of antimatter the approximate mass of the Death Star (not the little whimpy RPG version, but the one he estimated based on screen images) and rammed it into the Earth fast enough to cause instant mixing of all antimatter with matter, you'd fall short of the required energy to blast a planet apart into chunky salsa by several orders of magnitude.

Wow.

from memory it would take all the energy produced by our sun for almost 2 weeks to be able to blow our planet apart like the death star did.

[WayneFrancis]

Ack who raised this post from the dead? Just realized I responded to a 4 year old post.

[Sticks]

Ack who raised this post from the dead? Just realized I responded to a 4 year old post.

My apologies, that was me

I had been trying to track down, unsuccessfully, a thread discussing what a nuclear explosion on the Moon would look like.

[Van Rijn]

My apologies, that was me

I had been trying to track down, unsuccessfully, a thread discussing what a nuclear explosion on the Moon would look like.

Discussed a bit here:

http://www.bautforum.com/showthread....c-bomb-on-moon

Basically, a brief flash, and for smaller ones, not visible to the naked eye.

[wd40]

Atomic explosions deep inside the Earth might bring about your desired effect, as depicted in the 1964 film "Crack in the World"!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lHtZ6Ixeqvs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L4rHz7ENhtY

[WayneFrancis]

My apologies, that was me

I had been trying to track down, unsuccessfully, a thread discussing what a nuclear explosion on the Moon would look like.

That is ok...my fault for not paying attention to the dates of the posts I'm replying to. ... explosion on the moon ... Don't expect a mushroom cloud. You need an atmosphere for that. It would be much more spherical in nature. The biggest sign of the explosion would be the regolith's movement and the resulting crater I'd imagine.

[WayneFrancis]

Atomic explosions deep inside the Earth might bring about your desired effect, as depicted in the 1964 film "Crack in the World"!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lHtZ6Ixeqvs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L4rHz7ENhtY

Wow...a d-grade sci-fi disaster flick that get even more science wrong then most of the bad movies today like 2012, Core, Sun Shine... etc. etc.