🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <17951@ksr.com> jfw@ksr.com writes:

 > 
 > cam@syzygy.DIALix.oz.au (Cameron Newham) writes:
 > >So, we nuke the comet which in turn would cause lots of radioactive
 > >debris to fall to earth over a large area.
 > 
 > Wrong.  There would be very little induced radiation, and most of the
 > radioactive material from the bomb would expand in space and miss the Earth.

Wrong.  Do you know what fallout is?  It is dust sucked up at the hypocenter
of a nuclear explosion that becomes radioactive and later falls to earth.

I think you would find pieces of your comet to be tainted with radioactivity
also.

 > As has been pointed out, yes and no.  They aren't going to outgas (so no
 > trick shots) but they'll hold together under a significantly firmer "push"
 > (so you could detonate the nuke quite close for a larger delta-V).

I get the feeling that there has been a serious over-estimate of the ability
of a nuclear warhead to significantly change the delta-v of an asteroid.
Project Icarus (from what I remember) suggested exploding a device at 
the aphelion point so as to move the asteroid away from the earths orbit.
I can't recall anything about doing it "near" the earth.  Anyway, this
would only work if the object was small.

Also, has anyone addressed the problem of guiding such a device to the
precise point at short notice?  What if the object is travelling
retrograde?  A doubt you could lob a nuclear device at an asteroid/comet
with sufficient accuracy.  Especially if we are talking combined
velocities of >30 Km/s.

(and before you point it out - yes, I know asteroids all appear to be
travelling prograde.  There are, without doubt, exceptions.  Just a matter
of finding them. ;)


- cameron.