|
|
|
|
|
by cookingmyserver
911 days ago
|
|
Glad to see this researched more. It has become popular in pop culture science to bring up the "myth" of using nukes to stop/deflect asteroids. Apparently, their incorrect use in a few movies discounts them ever being used. Even "science communicators" have participated in evangelizing the ineffectiveness of nukes, never realizing you don't have to land on the asteroid and drill a nuke into its core to use it effectively. There have already been papers on deflection via the ablation of an asteroid via nuclear detonation, so the idea is not new. However, it looks like with the knowledge gained with the DART mission this research will enable better modeling. |
|
Putting Deuterium and Tritium (well, LiD which becomes D+T) in the middle of a fission bomb doesn't squeeze it hard/long enough to boost the yield of the fission bomb 1000x. Focusing the x-rays from a fission bomb onto a uranium "pusher" and driving it forward with the reaction force of vaporizing uranium does squeeze hard enough to generate fusion yield far in excess of the fission primary.
If this sounds vaguely familiar, you might be thinking of the Hohlraum at the NIF that recently made the press for getting more energy out than was deposited in. That strategy doesn't scale into a power plant but it does a brilliant job of simulating fusion bombs, which is why the DOE / NNSA can pursue it with so much money.