It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


The Lucifer Project (Cassini impacts Saturn in July 2008)

page: 1
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in


posted on Feb, 20 2005 @ 01:20 AM
Now I posted a thread regarding if saturn and Jupiter were really planets and as I continued in my quest to find out I ran into this site where it saids that In 2008 Nasa is going to crash Cassini into saturn and that Cassini payload includes plutonium now here I'm gonna put an insert from that site along with the link you tell me what you think>>>>

Some members of the various agencies involved with Galileo and Cassini surely have considered the potential of a plutonium ignition and there is also evidence to suggest that a reaction is what is secretly hoped for, at least by a few. It was stated by William Cooper, (former United States Naval Intelligence briefing member in the early 70’s) that an elite group known as the “JASON Group”, or certain members of, had been hired full time to work on turning Jupiter into a small star. The “JASON Group” is comprised of the greatest science minds in the world.14

and additional
Why is creating a star from one of our gaseous giants commonly known as the “Lucifer Project”? The potential star’s name was first dubbed “Lucifer” by A.C. Clarke in his novel “2010”. Lucifer is less of an actual deity and more of a concept representative of several ideas here. Lucifer, literally “light-bearer”, represents rebellion, claiming god-ship, bringing enlightenment, and mastering knowledge. Lucifer is a symbol of casting off the overlord and trusting the light from within, the concept of breaking out of the subservient shell of “God’s dominion” and claiming the universe as one’s own to conquer

Lucifer project

[edit on 20-2-2005 by John bull 1]

posted on Feb, 20 2005 @ 02:08 AM
I don't think so. Cassini's plutonium in its RTG (radioisotope thermoelectric generator is not anywhere near enough to start a nuclear run-away reaction, i.e, an atomic bomb; and even if there were enough Pu239 to cause an explosion, the fact that the individual pellets are kept apart by iridum and carbon fiber containers means you couldn't make a bomb out of it even if you wanted to.

And even if a nuclear explosion would be feasible from Cassini (which it isn't), and

Even if there were enough of a kick start to start hydrogen fusing (which there isn't), and

Even if there were enough free hydrogen or deuterium in Saturn's atmosphere to sustain even a temporary fusion (which there isn't),

Saturn simply doesn't have the mass/gravity acceleration to maintain fusion, so the idea of a "new star" doesn't work.

And besides, what do we need another star for, anyway? Cut down on oil consumption by not needing artificial lights to read at night?


posted on Feb, 20 2005 @ 02:23 AM
I can see Jupiter becoming a small star with human intervention.

And besides, what do we need another star for, anyway?

Double growing time of crops, produce more solar energy.

posted on Feb, 20 2005 @ 02:36 AM
Did you guys read this part?

1983 – An unnamed craft or “lost” craft is secretly sent on a course to nudge a comet currently on a near collision course with Jupiter to a direct collision course with Jupiter.

1989 – Galileo is launched with two secret missions: 1) Collect information about the interior of gas giants using data from an upcoming comet collision with Jupiter (SL-9). 2) Impact Jupiter to ignite it, or if that fails, to collect more information about the interior by igniting as far beneath the atmosphere as possible, thereby bringing the interior to the surface.

1990 – William Cooper exposes the reality of the “Lucifer Project” in his book “Behold, A Pale Horse”.

1991 – Galileo’s main antenna supposedly deploys incorrectly. In reality, the antenna is fine and is being used to send the prime data to a few elite “higher-ups”.

1994 – Someone “in the know” helps Shoemaker spot the comet and the proper viewing is set up with Hubble and Galileo, etc. The high quality Galileo-SL-9 imagery and data is kept from the general public.

1994 – Data collected from the SL-9 collision is used to tweak the specifications of the Cassini RTG setup in order to improve the odds of a Saturn ignition.

1997 – Shoemaker is killed in a car crash in Australia. I am not aware of any evidence of foul play.

1997- Cassini is launched for Saturn with a tremendous load of Pu-238 dioxide (72 lbs!), many times the amount actually needed to run the craft’s instruments.

2003 – NASA scientists decide to plunge Galileo into Jupiter after claiming there is no other logical option after initially implying that the craft would be sent to deep space, crashed into a moon, or left in orbit.

2003 (July) Geographer, J.C. Goliathan publishes a report stating that a nuclear reaction is slightly possible if Galileo goes into Jupiter. 25

2003 (early Sept) Physicist, Jacco van der Worp publishes a report warning of what could happen if Galileo plunges into Jupiter citing Goliathan’s report and actually crunching the numbers to prove it. Jacco sites the low probability, but believes the risk is high enough to warrant a warning.

2003 (Sept. 21) Galileo dives into Jupiter at the equator. As was likely expected, nothing happens. Then 4 weeks later:

2003 (Oct. 19) Olivier Meeckers images a “mystery spot” the size of Earth with a streak trailing away near the equator of Jupiter. All other professional telescopes ignore the spot!

2003 (late Oct.) Richard C. Hoagland publishes a report detailing the entire amazing scenario showing that the “mystery spot” is most likely Galileo’s plutonium that had drifted down 700 miles into Jupiter at 1 mph for most of the trip!

2004- Cassini arrives at Saturn to study the system. The start of attempt #2.

2005 (early) - Cassini-launched Huygens probe studies Titan in depth revealing its primordial earthlike attributes

posted on Feb, 20 2005 @ 02:44 AM
iori_komei says:

" can see Jupiter becoming a small star with human intervention."

How? If jupiter had enough mas to sustain fusion, it would have lit up at the same time the Sun did. There would have been enough pressure, due to gravity, to start nuclear fusion in its core. It would shine with its own light, giving the solar system two stars (a commonly observed occurrence in other parts of the Galaxy).

How are you going to force-start fusion if you don't have the tremendous pressure of gravitation? I admit that the gravity well in jupiter has set up tremendous pressure in its core, which is what drives its truly awesome weather patterns. It's also responsible for the really intense radiation and magnetic field around Jupiter.

But the only way you can make Jupiter into a star is to double or triple its mass. How are you going to do that?

(In response to a question regarding the rationale of a star):

"Double growing time of crops, produce more solar energy."

Right. Double the gamma radiation, double the possibility of lethal mutations, and a shift of surface temperature from a low of about 100 deg to up to 500 degrees, depending on where the Earth was in relation to the new "sun".

My guess is that if there suddenly appeared a new sun as far from us as Jupiter is, not all life would perish on the Earth -- there'd probably be a few bacteria left.

But that'd be about it.

posted on Feb, 20 2005 @ 02:47 AM
2nd seed, there's no evidence for any of those things you said about secret missions and stuff. It's just some bozo trying to hoax us.

Did you see where all those assertions are tied to any sort of evidence AT ALL, or do you believe them just because someone says they're so?

posted on Feb, 20 2005 @ 04:33 AM
Lucifer is probably gonna burn like a wet match in a dark cave:

Even the most progressive estimates say that you need like 20 times Jupiter size before spontanious fusion could accur, now I can imagine , with a little artificial help you could get it going on in even smaller sizes but wouldn't bother with anything less than 15 times Jupiter size....

Hoagland sees spiral galaxies in my stirred coffeecream...

posted on Feb, 20 2005 @ 05:12 AM
Here we go again..

We had this discussion before with Galileo and nothing conclusive has happened apart from this vague story of another spot or something, which is probably coincidence. It most certainly did not ignite into another Sun anyway, and if it hasn't already I can hardly believe it's going to

It's been a while now and we still definately don't have another Sun, I really don't see what would be different this time to be honest with Saturn.

And what's this supposed to mean:

2003 (late Oct.) Richard C. Hoagland publishes a report detailing the entire amazing scenario showing that the “mystery spot” is most likely Galileo’s plutonium that had drifted down 700 miles into Jupiter at 1 mph for most of the trip!

What, so suddenly this tiny amounts of plutonium are magnified into something huge? uh? A localised fusion reacting maybe... emmm.. maybe not.

[edit on 20-2-2005 by AgentSmith]

posted on Feb, 20 2005 @ 06:48 AM
Its very doubtable that a reaction will occur to start with, but whats more important is that both Saturn and Jupiters mass are way to small to sustain the reaction for long, heck, combined they wouldn't even be able to sustain the reaction.

If a reaction by pressure would occur, all we would get would maybe a spot like earlyer talked about with the Galileo probe, and at most a whee bit of blast that wouldn't even be visible without a damn good telescope and even better luck.


posted on Feb, 20 2005 @ 07:23 AM
Knowing that people aren't good at reading text from different places...

Problem is that igniting chain reaction requires completely symmetrical and fast implosion which is created with very fast controlled shockwave, just adding external pressure wouldn't cause it, neither talking that when external pressure would be enough to compress plutonium heat would have vaporised whole junk much before that.
And reason why implosion must happen in milliseconds is that otherwise energy release from start of fission reaction breaks reaction mass (/stops further collapsing) even before chain reaction has really started preventing it from achieving significant yield.

Remember those many accidents involving nukes with highly enriched weapon grade material getting "treated badly" and where aircraft crashes (and resulted fire) and other accidents have caused even detonation of explosives without creating critical mass.

January 17, 1966, Palomares, Spain
A B-52 bomber carrying four hydrogen bombs collided in midair with a KC-135 tanker near Palomares, Spain. Of the four H-bombs aboard, two weapons' high explosive material exploded on ground impact, releasing radioactive materials, including plutonium, over the fields of Palomares.

January 21, 1968, Thule, Greenland
Four nuclear bombs were destroyed in a fire after the B-52 bomber carrying them crashed approximately seven miles southwest of the runway at Thule Air Force Base in Greenland. The B-52, from Plattsburgh Air Force Base in New York, crashed after a fire broke out in the navigator's compartment. The pilot was en route to Thule AFB to attempt an emergency landing. Upon impact with the ground, the plane burst into flames, igniting the high explosive outer coverings of at least one of the bombs. The explosive then detonated, scattering plutonium and other radioactive materials over an area about 300 yards on either side of the plane's path, much of it in "cigarette box-sized" pieces.

September 19, 1980, Damascus, Arkansas
Fuel vapors from a Titan II intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) exploded in the missile's silo, blowing off the 740-ton silo door of reinforced concrete and steel and catapulting the missile's nuclear warhead 600 feet.
So while principle might be very simple its implementation is anything else.

Also patterns of Jupiter's atmosphere change continuously because of differential rotation/tornado strength winds so that "targets" in different latitudes doesn't even move at same speed. (winds blow even to different directions)
With 28 day delay position of something in equator would have been entirely different compared to GRS.

Here's nice animations showing how fast patterns/their position change especially in equator. (Jupiter's day ~ 0.41 earth's day)

And there's also error in that page, name is Hoaxland!
Everything claimed by him must be taken with bucket of monomethylhydrazine and nitrogen tetroxide.
He kindly even debunks his own claim...
At this ultra-slow “terminal velocity,” it takes the Galileo plutonium-238 capsules on the order of 700 hours – a month! to fall to a depth inside Jupiter
Now let's remember probe dropped to Jupiter by Galileo. It worked 61 minutes inside atmosphere before signal disappeared... in that time it detected faster than expected rise of temperature. Estimates are that one hour forward from that probe started to melt and ten hours after hitting atmosphere even titanium parts had been vaporized by increasing temperature.

Oh and thinking that dinky small nuke would cause fusion when thousands gigaton explosion caused by comet's impact doesn't ignite it is kinda preposterous.

posted on Feb, 20 2005 @ 07:40 AM
They're insane! Wouldn't creating a new star have negative impacts on the surrounding plantets? It would set the solar system at an unbalance.

posted on Feb, 20 2005 @ 08:06 AM
If it would turn into a sun then i would throw the movement of the planets out because of the gravity a star has. And it seems highly unlikely also it could maybe if they had enough material to produce a reaction then it would maybe produce a shockwave.

posted on Feb, 20 2005 @ 08:25 AM
there isn't even any evidance that Cassini will be dropped into saturn in 2008.

posted on Feb, 20 2005 @ 08:47 AM
Dan't worry, it's already been tried:

Jup didn't turn into a sun then, Sat won't tomorrow.

This site has information that's pretty easy to understand on the whole nuclear fusion process, and may show you why this is not possible.

Finally, Jupiter nor Saturn have the mass needed to become stars. Brown dwarves are examples of little stars who tried, and the smallest of these discovered is about 15 times Jupiter's size (last I checked). We'd need to do a little more than set off a nuke to get one of our gas giants to turn into a star.

Finally, what's being refered to as The Lucifer Project is called High Inclination Sequence by Cassini's developers.


posted on Feb, 20 2005 @ 09:02 AM

Originally posted by Kriskaos
If it would turn into a sun then i would throw the movement of the planets out because of the gravity a star has.
Also wrong, unless you somehow increase mass there wouldn't be any gravitational effects.
(actually fusion causes loss of mass)

And I'll expect they continue Cassini's mission at least with couple years if it's in working condition. Deserting something which works would be extremely stupid (well... but human is stupid animal), sending probes to there costs much.

posted on Feb, 20 2005 @ 12:00 PM
"If it would turn into a sun then i would throw the movement of the planets out because of the gravity a star has. "

Igniting something is not going to increase its mass. However, there are just too many reasons why dropping a subcritical mass of plutonium into a huge gas giant will cause anything other than a bunch of ATS posts to even happen.

Edited to add: Ooops! I was beat to the punch again!

[edit on 20-2-2005 by Off_The_Street]

posted on Feb, 20 2005 @ 05:40 PM
My question isn't whether its possible. Maybe its possible through means not discussed. I have little doubt that it would be doable (again not through the means mentioned, and not with the resources provided).

The real question is WHY. Why would anyone do that? It would completely screw the climate. It would not be beneficial at all (unless we really are going into ice age and this is supposed to counteract it. It would be a pretty silly way of handling it though, so I really shouldn't feed this theory).

So, is there a proposed reason why they would be doing this?

[edit on 20-2-2005 by freeb]

posted on Feb, 20 2005 @ 06:04 PM
Claiming that those planets have not the sufficient mass proves nothing, all those ICBMs sure didn't exploded on their own, but properly lit they blow. Still it can be considered dangerous to make such an impact and if we have that mass of plutonium it is enough for some nuclear reaction there.
I think star on that distance from earth can not affect any important aspect of climate and or temperature, gravitation force staying the same, too.
But it would help utilizing the moons, when we have energy source there, yes and step closer to out of solar system, recharging the batteries when spaceship get there. If Saturn goes star, its radiation would be under 1% of Sun and it would change anything here within 1%. No dramatic changes, because it is smaller then the Sun and farther then the Sun.
One more thing if such stars smaller then those dwarves existed we couldn't notice it because they are weak sources of energy, and they would be very close to their Sun to be noticable.

posted on Feb, 20 2005 @ 07:25 PM

If Saturn goes star, its radiation would be under 1% of Sun and it would change anything here within 1%.

Umm, you are underestimating the magnitude. Yes, it would certainly not be the same as having another sun, but the small amount of radiation we get from the sun largely causes the earth to be the temperature it is, as opposed to absolute zero, which is a huge difference. Calculate a 1% temperature increase from absolute zero. I doubt that it would even have that much effect but it would still cause major havoc.

posted on Feb, 20 2005 @ 11:28 PM
There is this thing called night time that some of us like to have; I would not want an Earth that is light 24/7.

In Arthur C. Clarke's 2061 book, I believe Jupiter is turned into a star by the aliens (it may be in 2010; I'm not sure). But I mean it causes problems back on Earth in the book as well. The star is named Lucifer in the book.

new topics

top topics

<<   2  3  4 >>

log in