AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › Will mankind ever develop the technology to destroy the Earth ?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Will mankind ever develop the technology to destroy the Earth ?

post #1 of 47
3/22/07 at 10:10pm
Thread Starter 
When I say destroy, I mean to the point where Earth is torn asunder; reduced to large boulders floating around only connected to one another by their respective gravity.

Even a concentrated blast by all the nuclear weapon at one time would barely make a dent in Earth. Granted, it may destroy most life, but Earth would still be around.
Report employers of illegal aliens at (866) DHS-2ICE
Reply
Report employers of illegal aliens at (866) DHS-2ICE
Reply
post #2 of 47
3/22/07 at 10:24pm
Probably, yes.

If homo sapiens doesn't figure out a way to harness large amounts of power, the next variation of man will, and I would have to consider that this species falls under the bar of "mankind." Personally, I like to wonder about the potential for beneficial evolution when anti-evolution regimes rule the world, as is the case with modern liberal leadership.
Cat: the other white meat
Reply
Cat: the other white meat
Reply
post #3 of 47
3/23/07 at 5:39am
Yes, probably in the form of directed asteroid attacks, like how our moon formed 4 billion years ago by chance.

http://63.114.151.211/release/2001/anim24n.mov

http://www.lpl.arizona.edu/outreach/origin/
Reply
Reply
post #4 of 47
3/23/07 at 6:18am
Reply
Reply
post #5 of 47
3/23/07 at 9:28am
Egad. I hope not. That's where I keep all my stuff!



IRT Topic, IIRC there is no limit on how many stages that can be added to a hydrogen bomb. So in theory, you could build a bomb large enough to do some serious damage to the Earth.
You need skeptics, especially when the science gets very big and monolithic. -James Lovelock
The Story of Stuff
Reply
You need skeptics, especially when the science gets very big and monolithic. -James Lovelock
The Story of Stuff
Reply
post #6 of 47
3/23/07 at 9:44am
I've heard that at some point we will send a little man to the moon. He will be green and have a giant telescope-looking weapon thing and will go on an on about destroying the Earth. No worries though, we are working on a carrot eating talking rabbit to stop him.

To save time, assume I know everything.
Reply
To save time, assume I know everything.
Reply
post #7 of 47
3/24/07 at 9:40pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by iPoster View Post

Egad. I hope not. That's where I keep all my stuff!




Topic could be a downer, thanks for keeping it light.
Not that I can...

I don't doubt that humans will keep learning new things that increase our ability to destroy. Eventually, we will get to the point of being able to destroy whole planets.

UNLESS

we kill ourselves off first. Global warming gone to the extreme; nuclear war followed by nuclear winter or whatnot; engenered bugs that can't be stopped...

I suspect that as we get closer to plannet busters (I don't think we are close yet) we will have developed many more ways to kill ourselves off in the meantime...
Progress is a comfortable disease
--e.e.c.
Reply
Progress is a comfortable disease
--e.e.c.
Reply
post #8 of 47
3/24/07 at 9:49pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bageljoey View Post



Topic could be a downer, thanks for keeping it light.
Not that I can...

I don't doubt that humans will keep learning new things that increase our ability to destroy. Eventually, we will get to the point of being able to destroy whole planets.

UNLESS

we kill ourselves off first. Global warming gone to the extreme; nuclear war followed by nuclear winter or whatnot; engenered bugs that can't be stopped...

I suspect that as we get closer to plannet busters (I don't think we are close yet) we will have developed many more ways to kill ourselves off in the meantime...

Don't worry, the Universe won't miss us... especially if we develop Planet Killing Tech...

On that note, I figure we already have. We have enough Nukes anyways. All you'd really have to do is drop them into strategic locations in mass numbers, Subduction Zones and Volcanoes, then sit back and watch the fireworks. If you really want to make an impact, revive the Yellowstone Supervolcano with those to deal with the USA first. Nuke the Magnetic North, the North, and the South poles, and yeah I'm going on a rant about how destroy this while somehow keeping a straight face so I'll shut up now.

Sebastian
Þ & þ are called "Thorn" & þey represent þe sound you've associated "th" wiþ since þe 13þ or 14þ century. I'm bringing it back.
<(=_=)> (>=_=)> <(=_=<) ^(=_=^) (^=_=)^ ^(=_=)^ +(=_=)+
Reply
Þ & þ are called "Thorn" & þey represent þe sound you've associated "th" wiþ since þe 13þ or 14þ century. I'm bringing it back.
<(=_=)> (>=_=)> <(=_=<) ^(=_=^) (^=_=)^ ^(=_=)^ +(=_=)+
Reply
post #9 of 47
3/24/07 at 11:34pm
DESTROY? No. Make it uninhabitable? Sure. Years ago.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #10 of 47
3/25/07 at 4:32pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slewis View Post

Don't worry, the Universe won't miss us... especially if we develop Planet Killing Tech...

On that note, I figure we already have. We have enough Nukes anyways. All you'd really have to do is drop them into strategic locations in mass numbers, Subduction Zones and Volcanoes, then sit back and watch the fireworks. If you really want to make an impact, revive the Yellowstone Supervolcano with those to deal with the USA first. Nuke the Magnetic North, the North, and the South poles, and yeah I'm going on a rant about how destroy this while somehow keeping a straight face so I'll shut up now.

Sebastian

Yet would even yellowstone and the poles completely DESTROY the earth? Sure that woudl destroy the face of the earth but not really earth itself.
Reply
Reply
post #11 of 47
3/25/07 at 5:19pm
  • e1618978
  • will burn in the Fiery Pit of Hell.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Outsider View Post

Yes, probably in the form of directed asteroid attacks, like how our moon formed 4 billion years ago by chance.

http://63.114.151.211/release/2001/anim24n.mov

http://www.lpl.arizona.edu/outreach/origin/

We know that isn't enough to meet "torn asunder" criteria, because it already happened to the earth and (although the crust was liquidated) the planet only broke into two pieces (earth and moon - at least it eventually formed two pieces).

The asteroid belt used to be considered a broken up planet, but no longer:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asteroid_belt

I think that you would need an internal explosion to get the broken up effect - an antimatter asteroid impacting at half the speed of light or something?
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #12 of 47
3/25/07 at 6:20pm
So...

If someone is willing to do the math(s), all one needs to do is integrate an expression for taking shells of matter from the surface of the earth to infinity until the earth is of zero radius. This will give the total energy required to blast the earth apart.

Anyone? I can't do it right now since I am busy in lab....
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
post #13 of 47
3/25/07 at 6:22pm
There was that little matter of the Death Star... now where did I leave that...

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #14 of 47
3/25/07 at 6:42pm
Alright I did the calculation:

~2 × 10^32 J

Largest nuclear (hydrogen) bomb ever was 2 × 10^17 J...

That would be 10^15 giant ass fusion bombs...

If it were resting antimatter we would need 10^15 kg...
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
post #15 of 47
3/25/07 at 8:17pm
How much more carbon dioxide will it take for the Earth's atmosphere to suddenly switch from a relatively stable state, to a closed-feedback-loop scenario of runaway global heating? Have any unbiased parties tried modeling some extrapolations, and by "unbiased", one has to summarily exclude studies done on behalf of auto-manufacturers or fossil fuel based corporations/utilities etc.

Maybe the Earth-destroying technology is the common internal combustion engine and fossil fuel burning power stations? Is it possible, that within the next (perhaps 300??) years, the Earth might be a Venu- like sphere surrounded by perpetual thick cloud layers, formed by the forced evaporation of the Earth's oceans and lakes, where the surface temperature was way too hot for (most) life to sustain itself?

Whether "rendering the Earth uninhabitable" is the same as "destroying it" is a somewhat moot comparison; "physically destroying the Earth", as in, for example, a direct hit by an asteroid 200 miles across at some 50,000 mph, would also end (most) life.
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
post #16 of 47
3/25/07 at 8:19pm
We could always try one of these!

/votes for gobbled up by a microscopic black hole (the Hyperion solution)
\
You need skeptics, especially when the science gets very big and monolithic. -James Lovelock
The Story of Stuff
Reply
You need skeptics, especially when the science gets very big and monolithic. -James Lovelock
The Story of Stuff
Reply
post #17 of 47
3/25/07 at 10:51pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow Slayer 26 View Post

Yet would even yellowstone and the poles completely DESTROY the earth? Sure that woudl destroy the face of the earth but not really earth itself.

Hmmm.... I'm wondering that myself.... but there's always plan b.

Shove every nuke we have into that crack that leads to the Mantle that some scientists are exploring about right now. try to pack them into the Mantle if possible.... then simultaneously set off all of those nukes and every nuclear power plant on Earth. Just to be on the safe side (HA!) make sure to pack the power plants with all the gun powder manufactured so far, and pack all the other explosives into that same crack to the mantle.

If the Earth doesn't crack in 2 in 30 minutes or less your Pizza is free.

Sebastian
Þ & þ are called "Thorn" & þey represent þe sound you've associated "th" wiþ since þe 13þ or 14þ century. I'm bringing it back.
<(=_=)> (>=_=)> <(=_=<) ^(=_=^) (^=_=)^ ^(=_=)^ +(=_=)+
Reply
Þ & þ are called "Thorn" & þey represent þe sound you've associated "th" wiþ since þe 13þ or 14þ century. I'm bringing it back.
<(=_=)> (>=_=)> <(=_=<) ^(=_=^) (^=_=)^ ^(=_=)^ +(=_=)+
Reply
post #18 of 47
3/26/07 at 6:14am
When i hear scientists are trying to create black holes in laboratories I get very nervous...
Reply
Reply
post #19 of 47
3/26/07 at 6:45am
  • e1618978
  • will burn in the Fiery Pit of Hell.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sammi jo View Post

How much more carbon dioxide will it take for the Earth's atmosphere to suddenly switch from a relatively stable state, to a closed-feedback-loop scenario of runaway global heating?

We have already had all of our carbon in the air, and it peaks out at 12 degrees warmer than now.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:6...ate_Change.png

To get the atmosphere of Venus, we would have to remove Earth's oceans, and pump enough CO2 in to get 90 times as much pressure at sea level. Maybe more, actually, because we are further from the sun, although we would have the advantage of less sulfur which reflects light out of the Venitian atmosphere. And Venus is not "run away", it is stable at 460 degrees C.
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #20 of 47
3/26/07 at 7:32am
Quote:
Originally Posted by googleplex View Post

When i hear scientists are trying to create black holes in laboratories I get very nervous...

When that happens.... well it's the end of the world as we know it.

Probably won't have time to order a Pizza either.

Sebastian
Þ & þ are called "Thorn" & þey represent þe sound you've associated "th" wiþ since þe 13þ or 14þ century. I'm bringing it back.
<(=_=)> (>=_=)> <(=_=<) ^(=_=^) (^=_=)^ ^(=_=)^ +(=_=)+
Reply
Þ & þ are called "Thorn" & þey represent þe sound you've associated "th" wiþ since þe 13þ or 14þ century. I'm bringing it back.
<(=_=)> (>=_=)> <(=_=<) ^(=_=^) (^=_=)^ ^(=_=)^ +(=_=)+
Reply
post #21 of 47
3/26/07 at 7:48pm
I can't stop laughing!

I may have to go to the hospital!

I can't breathe!

gotta hit Submit Reply before I die!

"The whole scheme from Copernicanism to Big Bangism is a factless lie."

Aries1B
"I pictured myself sitting in the shade of a leafy tree in a public park, a stylus in hand, a shiny Apple Tablet computer in my lap, and a pouty Jennifer Connelly stirring a pitcher of gimlets a...
Reply
"I pictured myself sitting in the shade of a leafy tree in a public park, a stylus in hand, a shiny Apple Tablet computer in my lap, and a pouty Jennifer Connelly stirring a pitcher of gimlets a...
Reply
post #22 of 47
3/26/07 at 8:02pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slewis View Post

When that happens.... well it's the end of the world as we know it.

Probably won't have time to order a Pizza either.

Sebastian

How so?
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
post #23 of 47
3/26/07 at 8:09pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aries 1B View Post

I can't stop laughing!

I may have to go to the hospital!

I can't breathe!

gotta hit Submit Reply before I die!

"The whole scheme from Copernicanism to Big Bangism is a factless lie."

Aries1B

Well, that was sort of different. I was actually hoping for an interesting argument, but all I could find was recursive and almost unreadable...

But shouldn't this have been posted in the conspiracy theory thread next door?
Progress is a comfortable disease
--e.e.c.
Reply
Progress is a comfortable disease
--e.e.c.
Reply
post #24 of 47
3/26/07 at 9:59pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aries 1B View Post

I can't stop laughing!

I may have to go to the hospital!

I can't breathe!

gotta hit Submit Reply before I die!

"The whole scheme from Copernicanism to Big Bangism is a factless lie."

Aries1B



Quote:
Originally Posted by hardeeharhar View Post

How so?

If you mean the Black Hole... it'll swallow us...
If you mean the Pizza... well the Blackhole will probably swallow us before the Pizza Arrives.



Sebastian
Þ & þ are called "Thorn" & þey represent þe sound you've associated "th" wiþ since þe 13þ or 14þ century. I'm bringing it back.
<(=_=)> (>=_=)> <(=_=<) ^(=_=^) (^=_=)^ ^(=_=)^ +(=_=)+
Reply
Þ & þ are called "Thorn" & þey represent þe sound you've associated "th" wiþ since þe 13þ or 14þ century. I'm bringing it back.
<(=_=)> (>=_=)> <(=_=<) ^(=_=^) (^=_=)^ ^(=_=)^ +(=_=)+
Reply
post #25 of 47
3/27/07 at 6:33am
Black holes don't swallow things outside their event horizon.
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
post #26 of 47
3/27/07 at 7:35am
If a micro-singularity was ever made, how much mass would it consist of? I imagine it would be have enough mass to fall due to Earth gravity and any mass if came in contact with, the floor, the crust, the mantle, the molten core, would be sucked up into it. It would fall right to the core, even if the hole was not noticable, less than a hair's width in diameter. As it ingested more mass , the event horizon would slowly expand and devour anything it came in contact with, slowly eating our planet in from the inside. Maybe it would stop at our core and just sit there in the middle of the earth, held in place by gravitational equilibrium. But with out a molten core, all techtonic activity would slowly come to a halt. Worse still, we would have lost our magnetic field that protect us from solar wind and it would immidiately affect live on our planet, possibly wiping it out for good, except maybe for life underground.
Reply
Reply
post #27 of 47
3/27/07 at 7:57am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Outsider View Post

If a micro-singularity was ever made, how much mass would it consist of? I imagine it would be have enough mass to fall due to Earth gravity and any mass if came in contact with, the floor, the crust, the mantle, the molten core, would be sucked up into it. It would fall right to the core, even if the hole was not noticable, less than a hair's width in diameter. As it ingested more mass , the event horizon would slowly expand and devour anything it came in contact with, slowly eating our planet in from the inside. Maybe it would stop at our core and just sit there in the middle of the earth, held in place by gravitational equilibrium. But with out a molten core, all techtonic activity would slowly come to a halt. Worse still, we would have lost our magnetic field that protect us from solar wind and it would immidiately affect live on our planet, possibly wiping it out for good, except maybe for life underground.


Even this wouldn't actually happen IF the sigularity was stable as the event horizon radius would much much smaller than the distance between it and nearby matter. By the time it encounters any other matter it will have evaporated due to Hawking Radiation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schwarzschild_radius
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
post #28 of 47
3/27/07 at 1:07pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aries 1B View Post

I can't stop laughing!

I may have to go to the hospital!

I can't breathe!

gotta hit Submit Reply before I die!

"The whole scheme from Copernicanism to Big Bangism is a factless lie."

Aries1B

Wow, I really, REALLY hope that is a spoof site...but you just never know with some people!


/still a flat-earther
You need skeptics, especially when the science gets very big and monolithic. -James Lovelock
The Story of Stuff
Reply
You need skeptics, especially when the science gets very big and monolithic. -James Lovelock
The Story of Stuff
Reply
post #29 of 47
3/27/07 at 1:56pm
Oh it's real. Read some of the "Study material".
Reply
Reply
post #30 of 47
3/27/07 at 2:52pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bageljoey View Post

Well, that was sort of different. I was actually hoping for an interesting argument, but all I could find was recursive and almost unreadable...

But shouldn't this have been posted in the conspiracy theory thread next door?

If you're intent on shooting something destructive at the Earth, Mister Powers, (wait for it) wouldn't it be easier if it *stood still*?!

HA!

V/R,

Aries 1B
"I pictured myself sitting in the shade of a leafy tree in a public park, a stylus in hand, a shiny Apple Tablet computer in my lap, and a pouty Jennifer Connelly stirring a pitcher of gimlets a...
Reply
"I pictured myself sitting in the shade of a leafy tree in a public park, a stylus in hand, a shiny Apple Tablet computer in my lap, and a pouty Jennifer Connelly stirring a pitcher of gimlets a...
Reply
post #31 of 47
3/28/07 at 11:26am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Outsider View Post

Oh it's real. Read some of the "Study material".

I can't believe that site. As an aesthetic aside, perhaps they could update it so its actually legible. I mean, maybe maybe we could use pink, blue and underlined font a little more against a pastel background. It's like I'm looking at internet circa 1993.
To save time, assume I know everything.
Reply
To save time, assume I know everything.
Reply
post #32 of 47
3/28/07 at 2:47pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aries 1B View Post

If you're intent on shooting something destructive at the Earth, Mister Powers, (wait for it) wouldn't it be easier if it *stood still*?!

Aries 1B


If that is what you were thinking when you posted the link...wow. Youre working at a much higher level than me!!!

Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

I can't believe that site. As an aesthetic aside, perhaps they could update it so its actually legible. I mean, maybe maybe we could use pink, blue and underlined font a little more against a pastel background. It's like I'm looking at internet circa 1993.

Yeah. Some people will never understand that highlighting is designed to make something important stand out. Instead, they made something unimportant illegible...
Progress is a comfortable disease
--e.e.c.
Reply
Progress is a comfortable disease
--e.e.c.
Reply
post #33 of 47
3/28/07 at 3:11pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bageljoey View Post


If that is what you were thinking when you posted the link...wow. Youre working at a much higher level than me!!!

Nah, just a lower threshold of humor and an even lower ability to communicate clearly in written form...

PARTICULARLY since I was laughing so hard at that site that I was beginning to gray out!

Not just, "The Earth is Flat".

The author(s) of that site believe(s) that the Earth is standing still and the rest of the universe is whirling around it!!!

I did think that I was going to die, I was laughing so hard.

It's the early part of the 21st century and there's at least one person out there , who's so certain that Copernicus was wrong, that he set up a web site to promote his view. Now that's funny!

V/R,
Aries 1B
"I pictured myself sitting in the shade of a leafy tree in a public park, a stylus in hand, a shiny Apple Tablet computer in my lap, and a pouty Jennifer Connelly stirring a pitcher of gimlets a...
Reply
"I pictured myself sitting in the shade of a leafy tree in a public park, a stylus in hand, a shiny Apple Tablet computer in my lap, and a pouty Jennifer Connelly stirring a pitcher of gimlets a...
Reply
post #34 of 47
3/28/07 at 4:43pm
  • e1618978
  • will burn in the Fiery Pit of Hell.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aries 1B View Post

The author(s) of that site believe(s) that the Earth is standing still and the rest of the universe is whirling around it!!!

Well - all movement is relative. In order to say that something is moving you have to say "moving with respect to X" where X is something else.

Saying that the earth is stationary is a perfectly valid thing to do - you just define all other movement of objects in the universe as being wrt the earth. It does not lead to the least complex mathematical model, though.
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #35 of 47
3/28/07 at 6:56pm
You can quantitatively prove that the earth IS NOT stationary.

The Coreolis force is the most readily proven example.
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
post #36 of 47
3/28/07 at 6:59pm


Already exists: nuclear weapons.
Reply
Reply
post #37 of 47
3/28/07 at 7:00pm
And along a different vein...

www.climatecrisis.net
Reply
Reply
post #38 of 47
3/28/07 at 7:00pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by e1618978 View Post

Well - all movement is relative. In order to say that something is moving you have to say "moving with respect to X" where X is something else.

Saying that the earth is stationary is a perfectly valid thing to do - you just define all other movement of objects in the universe as being wrt the earth. It does not lead to the least complex mathematical model, though.

What I understood them to say was that the universe (our sun, Alpha Centari, Caprica , the ether everything) was orbiting around the Earth.

It's just hysterical.

V/R,

Aries 1B
"I pictured myself sitting in the shade of a leafy tree in a public park, a stylus in hand, a shiny Apple Tablet computer in my lap, and a pouty Jennifer Connelly stirring a pitcher of gimlets a...
Reply
"I pictured myself sitting in the shade of a leafy tree in a public park, a stylus in hand, a shiny Apple Tablet computer in my lap, and a pouty Jennifer Connelly stirring a pitcher of gimlets a...
Reply
post #39 of 47
3/28/07 at 7:35pm
If I am not mistaking, at the peak of the nuclear buildup wacky humanoids had enough energy to vaporize everything on the surface + about 10 yards deep ... yeah I know ... it doesn't answer your question.
MA700LL/A arrived.
---
Latitude D600, PowerEdge 1600SC, OptiPlex GX520
Reply
MA700LL/A arrived.
---
Latitude D600, PowerEdge 1600SC, OptiPlex GX520
Reply
post #40 of 47
3/29/07 at 5:26am
Quote:
Originally Posted by hardeeharhar View Post

You can quantitatively prove that the earth IS NOT stationary.

The Coreolis force is the most readily proven example.

As if that would prove anything to them.....
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: AppleOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › Will mankind ever develop the technology to destroy the Earth ?