It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Fighting tsunamis

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 28 2004 @ 11:01 PM
link   
This is strange question, albeit a relevant question, that might come across sounding pretty nave but is there any way that we can stop, destroy or hamper an impending tsunami? Would it be possible to counteract this wave of energy with created energy heading in its general direction? Im not talking about the science fiction cure all of nuclear weapons but more of a series of powerful bursts of energy. Do we even have anything that could even come close to disturbing that type of energy? Could we in a sense disturb some of this wave enough that the results would be less severe? It would be sort of like when you tap the side of a glass of water and the ripples heading in ward counteract each other, in a sense canceling each other out. This definitely is coming from someone with a great imagination so I would love to hear other theories on this from those that understand the workings of a tsunami much better than I.




posted on Dec, 28 2004 @ 11:13 PM
link   
There probably is a way (nothing is impossible), possibly by sending a tsunami against the coming tsunami (via directional explosion underwater) - which may cancel it out as you say. But i'm not much of a scientist..

- Attero



posted on Dec, 28 2004 @ 11:25 PM
link   
sounds like a probable scenario, I have wondered myself if tornadoes could be similarly stopped with some dynamite or something, since explosions create percussion waves in water, air, and land. You would think though that if it would work, all of the genius scientists would have implemented these tactics by now, but sometimes genius' can overthink things too much overlooking simple solutions. In the mean time, "simpler" minds are too afraid of sounding stupid to speak up! Thats why kids can solve alot of problems that adults were too "smart" to figure out.
For instance, a child would never have invented WMD or even guns for that matter - war would have consisted of one side being a "poopy face" and the other sticking out his tongue in defense!

Forgive me, I think Ive lost it!



posted on Dec, 28 2004 @ 11:31 PM
link   
Hey cOOter, who you calling simple minded!
Seriously though, I know exactly what you mean, but I fear that my theory has probably been thought of, tested, and cast aside as ridiculous by those in the know.



posted on Dec, 28 2004 @ 11:42 PM
link   
no offense intended toward you, really - I was refferring to the way the genius' think of the rest of us ( although, I have been accused of having a genius mind and I was insulted by that-lol) I often wonder why genius' are considered so smart, when the ones I have met, really dont have a clue!

good post though, at least it can never be said again that the idea was never publicly pondered!



posted on Dec, 28 2004 @ 11:53 PM
link   


Would it be possible to counteract this wave of energy with created energy heading in its general direction?


Probably. But in order to create the desired effect you would need an energey wave that is equal to the incoming wave in order to cancel it out.
Small explosions would have little or no effect on it. I'm not sure how much energy is actually in a large tsunami, but I would be willing to bet that a nuclear explosion pales in comparison to the energy of it. I would guess that it would take numerous nuclear explosions to have any effect whatsoever.



posted on Dec, 28 2004 @ 11:54 PM
link   
People, this is why such occurances are called natural disasters, natural occurances, acts of nature, acts of Mother Nature, etc.
Such things can not be prevented. This is like trying to stop or prevent tornado's, hurricane's, earthquake's, etc. It simply isn't going to happen.

The only thing that can be done is what is being done...early warning detection or indicators and subsequent warnings after said occurances. Other than that, prevention or "fighting" against such natural occurances is fruitless, at best.



seekerof

[edit on 28-12-2004 by Seekerof]



posted on Dec, 29 2004 @ 12:07 AM
link   
I'm seeing it in sequences right now.

Tsunami's are caused by earthquakes, earthquakes are caused by plate shiftings, everyone knows this.

In order to 'node' a tsunami you would have to create an ample force that would be equal and opposite to it. Where would you create such a force? Even if you did create such a force where would that force go? Newton's law..

Never-the-less you would have to time the source of such a force to each period of each tsunami peak.

To make the problem even harder as you stated tsunami's travel in circle like motions, but are not concentric - because of the differences in the time and amplitude each plate shift induces. How would you cancel a circle like force unless you completely surrounded it? Cancelling out one portion of the force could be the answer, just around the shoreline, but how would you cover such a huge landscape?

I could be wrong about this, but if i remember correctly, the magnitude of the earthquake that happened recently was equal in force to a thousand nuclear bombs? Please correct me if im wrong in any of the previously stated.

It would be interesting to see how something like this could be done.



posted on Dec, 29 2004 @ 12:14 AM
link   
I don't think I would want to be the scientist in charge of countering the tsunami.
Imagine the liability, if instead of stopping it, someones calculations were just a little off, and it was made much worse.



posted on Dec, 29 2004 @ 12:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by Skibum
I don't think I would want to be the scientist in charge of countering the tsunami.
Imagine the liability, if instead of stopping it, someones calculations were just a little off, and it was made much worse.


This reminds me of when they supposedly tried to stop a hurricane, I believe Camille, and some say they just intensified it so we never found out. I guess it is for the best not to mess with mother nature.



posted on Dec, 29 2004 @ 01:28 AM
link   
Well I suppose it is possible on paper. If we build a massive wall around the land.

In reality, only way to defeat it is to stay away from water.

Surf



posted on Dec, 29 2004 @ 02:52 AM
link   
Yes, a massive wall certainly works, but it's not very cost effective for most areas and there's no guarantee that you won't have a surge bigger then the wall was designed for. Besides it kind of ruins the natural waves that many enjoy.

Hilo, Hawaii had such a wall built after the one that hit back in the 60's.



posted on Dec, 29 2004 @ 03:09 AM
link   
The tsunamis seem to have an incredibly long wavelength, up to several kilometers. Perhaps something similar to an airfoil could be constructed underwater to alter the wavelength and use its own energy against itself.



posted on Dec, 29 2004 @ 12:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by electric
The tsunamis seem to have an incredibly long wavelength, up to several kilometers. Perhaps something similar to an airfoil could be constructed underwater to alter the wavelength and use its own energy against itself.



Sounds plausible but I wonder if we could just simply put tall pylons like they use on overpasses, but much larger off shore say maybe three miles out? You could use a concave shape facing out to sea to try and deflect some enrgy. They wouldn't need to be placed that close together, could be concealed underwater, and they wouldn't really affect the normal tides that much. In a tsunami though they would in a sense disturb the energy just enough so that they might not be as powerful once they reach shore.
Fanciful thinking, but hey I guess it could work. Tear it apart guys!



posted on Dec, 29 2004 @ 01:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by electric
The tsunamis seem to have an incredibly long wavelength, up to several kilometers. Perhaps something similar to an airfoil could be constructed underwater to alter the wavelength and use its own energy against itself.


If you construct something underwater that would stop the lower levels, but the problem is with the higher levels. The lower level stops after coming to the shore, but the top ones keep travelling and they come down fast, wrapping like a blanket.

Surf



posted on Dec, 29 2004 @ 02:35 PM
link   
No effective way - large sea wall will direct energy up and back out but how high do you make it?? 10, 20, 50 100 feet.... Nuke's would be like a mouse fart and as others have noted, undersea or sea based obstructions would only reduce the energy a fraction - you'd have to build a massive artificial barrier a few miles out to have any real effect - like a barrier island or reef. In some place like FL the continental shelf rises too fast and is too close to shore. Even the barrier keys did little to stop the pounding from Andrew and that was what - maybe a 10-20 foot storm surge....



posted on Dec, 29 2004 @ 09:11 PM
link   
Aim a giant heat gun or laser at the wave and evaporate the water.



posted on Dec, 29 2004 @ 09:27 PM
link   
I remember reading a book where they stopped an artificial tsunami but detonating nuclear bombs aboard submarines and stopped it dead above a trench....It was a science-fiction book though, Ice Fire I believe was the name of it....oh well.

What they did in that book wasn't very cost effective and definatly not enviromentally friendly!



posted on Dec, 29 2004 @ 09:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by hatchedcross
What they did in that book wasn't very cost effective and definatly not enviromentally friendly!


Instead of dying by drowning, you die by nuke radiation.

Surf



posted on Dec, 29 2004 @ 10:16 PM
link   
I've been thinking about the Netherlands -country who has long history of fighting with the sea -here you can se an example how they manage to keep North Sea out of their land and in this pdf you can read about ways how to protect coastal areas.
I know that we are not able to protect every island that way from tsunamis (amount of money spent for this project would be unthinkable) -especially when the chance of being hit by tsunami is very small, but yes there are structures which are able to hold huge amount of water - so theoretically it is possible.

[edit on 29-12-2004 by jazzgul]



new topics




 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join