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.

 

Possible Chain Reaction That Could Wipe Earth Out

page: 1
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 6 2007 @ 03:31 PM
link   
This is probably going to be a short question and this is probably in the wrong thread but...Does anyone think its possible that something could be created or could have a chemical reaction with the air we breath and just spread across the oxygen of the planet like a flame to gasoline.

PS I have no intentions of trying to create such a thing




posted on Jun, 6 2007 @ 03:42 PM
link   
theoretically if you pumped a mass amount of hydrogen into the atmosphere you would wipe out the earth in short order.



posted on Jun, 6 2007 @ 03:49 PM
link   
Ya I thought of that.....kinda like the Hindenburg accident and look how much hydrogen they had!



posted on Jun, 6 2007 @ 03:53 PM
link   
The creators of the H bomb, when first tested, worried that it would be so powerful that it would cause a chain reaction in the atmosphere, and potentially end all life on the planet. But they tested it anyway, and we made it.


I've always wondered myself if there could be a complex series of events that could cause our atmosphere to dissipate leaving Earth much like Mars is now.

I believe this planet we call home is a bit more durable than many may think.

[edit on 6-6-2007 by UM_Gazz]



posted on Jun, 6 2007 @ 04:24 PM
link   
If a nuke explosion were to be made 'perfect' then the chain reaction would continue through every atom in the atmosphere, land and sea.

Luckely for us in a conventional nuke the reaction is kept to the core material (and only a small percentage of that realeases the energy I believe). In a H bomb the chain reaction continues into the Hydrogen.

A chain reaction means one atom setting off the surrounding atoms - In theroy It *could* continue untill our planet is something like a mini sun. But theres more chance of being eaten alive by a single ant IMO.

Wish I could of seen the blokes face as he was about to press the button for that first H bomb!! talk about a kodac moment



posted on Jun, 6 2007 @ 05:08 PM
link   
No way, As if they still tested it.... Americans...tisk tisk haha just kiddin



posted on Jun, 6 2007 @ 08:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Now_Then
Wish I could of seen the blokes face as he was about to press the button for that first H bomb!! talk about a kodac moment


This is the "official" film of the first H bomb test:




posted on Jun, 6 2007 @ 08:58 PM
link   
you see this is the way i see it...

2012

-our solar systems aligns with the galactic center which is a big balck whole
- the black whole puts stress on our solar system moving the sun and earth from there original positions
- this causes polar shift
- sun spots occur

natural disasters because of the polar shift and suns spots cause

- yellow stone to erupe,
-sea levels to rise
- we experience more comets and asteroids hitting the planet because of the gravity of the sun and black whole.
- a big mess of natural disasters
-



posted on Jun, 6 2007 @ 09:01 PM
link   
The fact that they actually had that thought going around shows on the one hand how so few of them actually understood what they were doing and I would also says that the fact it was not a actually outcome but was feared to be says that they are willing to commit suicide and take everyone with them

Neither fact is untrue today



posted on Jun, 6 2007 @ 09:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Now_Then
If a nuke explosion were to be made 'perfect' then the chain reaction would continue through every atom in the atmosphere, land and sea.

Luckely for us in a conventional nuke the reaction is kept to the core material (and only a small percentage of that realeases the energy I believe). In a H bomb the chain reaction continues into the Hydrogen.

A chain reaction means one atom setting off the surrounding atoms - In theroy It *could* continue untill our planet is something like a mini sun. But theres more chance of being eaten alive by a single ant IMO.


No, it couldn't do any of that. For an atom to be fissile, it needs to be unstable enough so that a stray neutron hitting the nucleus causes it to split. Most atoms are not like that.

For fusion, you can fuse anything, but you need sufficient pressure and temperature. As the explosion expands, the pressure and temperature drop, so no, you could not set of a chain reaction using a nuke in the atmosphere.



posted on Jun, 6 2007 @ 09:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by ATSGUY
you see this is the way i see it...012

-our solar systems aligns with the galactic center which is a big balck whole
- the black whole puts stress on our solar system moving the sun and earth from there original positions- this causes polar shift- sun spots occur- a big mess of natural disasters-


Well, we're all on this ride together, come what may. It may be hard to get used to summer in December, like in Australia.....



posted on Jun, 6 2007 @ 10:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by stumason
No, it couldn't do any of that. For an atom to be fissile, it needs to be unstable enough so that a stray neutron hitting the nucleus causes it to split. Most atoms are not like that.


Never claimed to be a nucluear scientist in my defence.

But I do belive I was correct on one one point. In a H bomb the chain reaction continues beyond the core and on to the hydrodgen, or is it just there to make the bomb lighter? never claimed, sorry done that.

Electron avalanche a medium, such as gas - is that not where most atmospheric detonations occur?

I realise I have gone no further than a wiki page, but it does point to a threshold. Free electrons exist for apx 11 nonoseconds before being captured. Sorta reminds me of chaos theroy - If I pick my nose, are you bothered? (cos I just did)

The wonderfull thing about the internet is there is a possability that my intrest in my OWN nose may possably experiance EXPONENTIAL GROWTH


People could't ride a train through a tunnel a hundred years ago cos their chests would explode. This day there are one or two who go out of their way to ensure that may happen. What a f
d up world



posted on Jun, 6 2007 @ 10:00 PM
link   
ignor

[edit on 6/6/2007 by Now_Then]



posted on Jun, 6 2007 @ 10:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Now_Then
Never claimed to be a nucluear scientist in my defence.


No worries. I'm not either



Originally posted by Now_Then
But I do belive I was correct on one one point. In a H bomb the chain reaction continues beyond the core and on to the hydrodgen, or is it just there to make the bomb lighter? never claimed, sorry done that.


In an H-bomb, the trigger is a "normal" nuke. This pressurises the deuterium core at a high enough temp to trigger a small amount of fusion. A big bang mind you! There is no conceivable way that could carry over into the atmosphere.

The only way I can think of a nuke destroying the atmosphere is if it was big enough to create a fire storm. This wouldn't be a nuclear reaction, but rather a chemical reaction induced by the huge amounts of energy released. A bomb big enough to do that would probably wipe out all life anyway, so it's a mute point.



Originally posted by Now_Then
Electron avalanche a medium, such as gas - is that not where most atmospheric detonations occur?


From what I read on that link, electron avalanches occur daily. It's otherwise known as lightning. I do not believe that electrons can induce a nuclear reaction directly. There is work going on in the UK about inducing fusion reactions with high-powered lasers, but this in itself is using the laser to create a high pressure-high temp environment enough to cause deuterium or tritium to fuse.


Originally posted by Now_Then
I realise I have gone no further than a wiki page, but it does point to a threshold. Free electrons exist for apx 11 nonoseconds before being captured. Sorta reminds me of chaos theroy - If I pick my nose, are you bothered? (cos I just did)

The wonderfull thing about the internet is there is a possability that my intrest in my OWN nose may possably experiance EXPONENTIAL GROWTH



Nice analogy!


Electrons are not to be feared, by the way. Free electrons are otherwise known as an electric current. Even then, an individual electron will not travel from point A to point B in a circuit, but it is rather more like a relay race where you induce electrons to flow a little bit each.



posted on Jun, 6 2007 @ 10:56 PM
link   
I'm not sure about the air but an experiment being done by smashing protons could create a small black hole and has a minuscule chance of destroying the earth.

Here's the original post along with source material.
www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Jun, 6 2007 @ 11:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Now_Then
But I do belive I was correct on one one point. In a H bomb the chain reaction continues beyond the core and on to the hydrodgen, or is it just there to make the bomb lighter? never claimed, sorry done that.


There are actually three distinct 'reactions' involved in the initiation of a hydrogen device. The first is a very precisely shaped and timed conventional detonation...plastic explosive in a very precise shape, wired with a very precise set of deonators. This compresses a mass of some heavy, fissile element. The compressed metal is being simultaneously 'pumped' with neutrons from an external source (Polonium used to be a favorite). With the higher density and higher neutron flux, we get to the second reaction...nuclear fission.

Fission (as someone above mentioned) requires atoms with large, unstable nucleii. Uranium was used in some early weapons because it was easier to use, but Plutonium became the fissile metal of choice for a variety of reasons. The fission reaction generates huge amounts of energy (mostly in the form of heat and light), and a huge pulse of 'extra' neutrons. There's also a not exactly trivial shock wave generated by the energy release. This sudden environment of extreme temperature and pressure (both considerablly higher than the surface of the Sun) makes an ideal environment for the third reaction....nuclear fusion.

Fusion is nothing like fission. Fusion reactions combine small, relatively stable atoms into larger ones. It releases much more energy than fission, but it's much pickier about its surroundings. The act of initiating the device and creating that high pressure / temperature environment causes its destruction...the shock waves and the energy move on (with adverse effects on the target area), and the pressure and temperature begin to fall almost as fast as they went up. Within microseconds, it's too 'cool' and too 'low pressure' to sustain the hydrogen-cycle reaction, and the whole thing snuffs out.

In theory, it's possible to fuse elenemts higher on the periodic table than hydrogen, and some of the reactions liberate even more energy than the hydrogen cycle...but even the next one up the food chain (helium fusion to produce (IIRC) beryllium) requres pressure and temperature an order of magnitude higher than the hydrogen cycle. There is an oxygen cycle fusion reaction (I think it produces iron, but I can't swear to that)...but it requires some of the highest temperatures and pressures ever seen in nature outside a supernova....so if that reaction ever starts in Earth's atmosphere, we have bigger problems than a nuke


In short (too late for that, I know), while there is a lot to worry about with nuclear weapons, a 'runaway reaction' burning up our atmosphere isn't one of the things on that list.



posted on Jun, 7 2007 @ 05:43 AM
link   
Many years ago I had a friend who was on some sort of super-secret squirrel-zoomie nuclear emergency response team. When the Russians had their emergency at Chernobyl, according to my friend, there was some fear that it would become a run away nuclear reaction (apparently it was a lot worse than folks thought) ... And the heavy reaction (of some sort) would become like a mery heavy thing that would fall through the ground and into the core of the Earth, whereupon the natural rotation of the planet would have this very heavy whatchamacallit tearing apart the insides of our planet.

Hate to say it too loud, but I wish I were a) more technical and b) had paid closer attention to what he told me about it. It was simply mind bending and enthralling at the time.


-edited to correcly misspell Chernobil.


[edit on 7-6-2007 by sigung86]



posted on Jun, 7 2007 @ 06:20 AM
link   
Didn't know that about the hydrogen bomb test.

How stupid can you be still testing it? You never know...


I don't know if a massive hydrogen release would kill of the planet. Hydrogen gas is light enough to escape our atmosphere.

-Find a really huge rock in the asteroid belt, calculate it's course/orbit then calculate the orbit that needs the least amount of a nudge (apophis?) to make it collide in say 30 years and then give it that nudge.. and wait.
This proposed asteroid preemptive strike type saving thing can also be used the opposite way


-There's something far easier according to scientists but I'm not sure to post it. there's a chemical so poisonous to us that 1 drop in the global drinking reservoir would be enough to kill all of us. It's also freely available and used a lot in california if you catch my drift.
At least that's what the article says, i'm not sure if I believe it.



posted on Jun, 7 2007 @ 06:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by sigung86
Many years ago I had a friend who was on some sort of super-secret squirrel-zoomie nuclear emergency response team. When the Russians had t[..]

[edit on 7-6-2007 by sigung86]


This is how history get's blown up as it passes further into the past.
The fear wasn't that ti would melt all the way to the core (which would take ages)

Here's what the fear really was (it's still bad).

The water that had hurriedly been pumped into the reactor building in a futile attempt to extinguish the fire had run down to the space underneath the reactor floor. Thus the smoldering fuel and other material on the reactor floor was starting to burn its way through this floor, melting the concrete and changing it to lava. This was made worse by materials being dropped from helicopters, which simply acted as a furnace to increase the temperatures further. If this material had come into contact with the water, it would have generated a thermal explosion, which would have arguably been worse than the initial reactor explosion itself. By many estimates, that would have rendered land in a radius of hundreds of miles from the plant radioactive.


[edit on 7/6/2007 by David2012]



posted on Jun, 7 2007 @ 06:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by stumasonNo, it couldn't do any of that. For an atom to be fissile, it needs to be unstable enough so that a stray neutron hitting the nucleus causes it to split. Most atoms are not like that.

For fusion, you can fuse anything, but you need sufficient pressure and temperature. As the explosion expands, the pressure and temperature drop, so no, you could not set of a chain reaction using a nuke in the atmosphere.


Stu's got the right answer -- our Earth isn't that unstable. If we lived on a planet that was mostly rock-solid uranium and breathed an atmosphere that was mostly radioactive such as uranium gas, then yes, it could happen.

Nor is it possible on other planets in our solar system. Jupiter comes close, but is still too small (by 10 times or more) to actually sustain some sort of fusion (not fission) reaction.



new topics

top topics



 
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join