I have a theoretical nuke question?

Question

So I previously asked whether anyone HAD test detonated a nuke in space, and received a very resounding "NO", which I had expected. I also know that an explosion in space causes perfect spherical shock waves, as there is [next to] no resistance to create mushroom clouds. My question now is, theoretically, where would be a good place to do such a test so as to not cause massive amounts of radiation to rain down upon the Earth and how big of a payload would you think to be sufficient to conduct it?

Any and all theories welcome. If you have proof to support your theory, I'd like to know that too.

Thanks!

Answer 1

Actually, a nuke in space would not cause a shock wave. A shock wave requires a medium in which to propagate. Basically, you get a lot of gamma, neutron, electron, and ion radiation. If in near earth orbit, the biggest problem it would be from the latter. It would load up the Van Allen belt, making the environment deadly for humans and destructive to electronics for years to come.

Um, kasilas, from referenced DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency) briefing,

"One low-yield (10-20 kt), high altitude (125-300 km) nuclear explosion could disable -- in weeks to months -- all LEO satellites not specifically hardened to withstand radiation generated by that explosion."

Answer 2

The Doc is almost right.

He is wrong about the effect of the nuke. The ion radiation would cause few problems (assuming nothing is near to start with).

The amount of ions in a system is determined by the charge balance. In space the charge balance is set by ionizing effects namely solar wind, and radiation driving the charge balance up (making more numerous and more charged ions), and recombination and charge exchange which drives the balance down.

These are all atomic processes so the timescales are very fast (thou slower than on earth due to the lower pressure). So as there is no medium to hold the heat locally the return to charge state equilibrium would be incredibly fast say a few seconds at very most. Think now long a fluorescent tube stays on when the power is off.

You could guess this by thinking of the amount of energy dumped into the Van Allen belts by the sun every second. Work it out and you'll see it is a h**l of alot more than any nuke or all nukes for that matter.

One more thing the actual reason you don't get bombs in space is there are international treaties to stop this. These treaties were signed to stop the cold war spreading into space. If you look around you can see that the US actually once tried to sidestep this no bombs in space treaty by designing the "rods from god" (look in up it's a very smart and simple sidestep). If you look further you can find much crazier ideas for nukes in space (and on the moon for that matter)

Answer 3

I suppose if you detonated a 'nuke' on the far side of the moon the radiation wouldn't reach the earth. Is there a problem with Nuclear detonations on Earth at the moment?

@

Answer 4

http://infogetting.itfv.co.id

you can get much information in this website, If you will check anyone blue link in website