Re: [sl4] giant planets ignation - one more existential risk

From: Alexei Turchin (alexeiturchin@gmail.com)
Date: Thu Dec 11 2008 - 12:03:45 MST


The main problem with giant planet explosion is that people think that
it is ridiculues before considering arguements. So they don''t
consider arguments and don''t find that they are much more convicing
than they thouight a priori. The same problem is with strong AGI.

Samanta: On what basis? I estimate (with no basis but light knowledge
of astronomy and gravitational pressure for hydrogen to fuse) that
this is at least several orders of magnitude too high.

In the mentioned article "detonation of plane atmospheras" was told
that 1 to 300 concentration is enogh for detontion of oceans on the
earth. The pressure in the bowels of Jupiter is much higer.

Samanta: any planet?

Yes, we can even detonate some ammounts of heavy water on the Earth,
if we find large deposits. Such deposits could be on the bottom of
Arctic ocean, where conditions are good for separation of heavy water.
(Because heavy water is 10 percent havier then ordinary water and
freeze on +4 C).

Samanta: we would do it because?

Because it is exellent Doomsaday machine for blackmail of all Solar
system, but it also could happened occasionaly.

Samanta: 1 to 300. That is much, much richer than any naturally
occurring body we know of.

Yes, we don''t know any object with such concentration (except some
nebulas of interstellar gas), but it doesn''t prove that such objects
are impossible. And they are quite probable because deiterium easily
separats from common hydrogen in many natural processes, like
freesing, mass separation and vaporation.

And about the nebula was said: "e.g., the D:H concentration ratio in
the ~10**2 Great Nebula in Orion is about 1:200. " in the article
about theromonuclear detonation.

Samanta: And how would you bring it up to such a concentration exactly
or have it spontaneously become that concentrated?

If in the upper atmosphere of Jupiter the concentration is 1 to 1600,
then in the lower layers it is higher because of mass separation,
which is proved for helium, - helium concentration is lowered in the
upper level of of Jupiter and Saturn atmospheres.

Petter Wingren-Rasmussen :What are exactly the risks involved here?
Having a brief second sun in the sky wouldn't cause much in terms of
permanent damage to the planet.

If all deiterium in the Jupiter reacts it would relize energy of 30
000 years of Sun work in less then 10 seconds.
In this case the Earth will lose its atmosphere and several kilometers
of upper curst.

This risk is different from others, because it will affect ALL Solar
system, and NO spase bases on the Moon etc will save humanity.

Petter Wingren-Rasmussen: However, lets assume its a real risk -
wouldnt it be (relatively) easy to solve by detonating Jupiter while
its on on the opposite side of the sun from earth?

No, becasue the reaction will result in huge nucler radioactive
fallout which would reach the Earth after several days or weeks.

On 12/11/08, Petter Wingren-Rasmussen <petterwr@gmail.com> wrote:
> As far as I understand the question the risk is definitely questionable, and
> OT too for this mailinglist.
>
> However, lets assume its a real risk - wouldnt it be (relatively) easy to
> solve by detonating Jupiter while its on on the opposite side of the sun
> from earth? The first blastwave would hit the sun and after that it would
> just be a second sun for some period of time.
>
> This is wild speculations on my part - my astronomical knowledge is pretty
> much based on popular science books.
>
>
>
> On 12/11/08, Stuart Armstrong
> <dragondreaming@googlemail.com> wrote:
> > Side-stepping the probabilities issues, two points:
> >
> > 1) What are exactly the risks involved here? Having a brief second sun
> > in the sky wouldn't cause much in terms of permanent damage to the
> > planet. Even a longer lasting Jupiter detonation will cause major
> > ecocological damage, but will be survivable.
> >
> > 2) If the risk is of a deliberate detonation as an act of war, or
> > terrorism, then we needn't bother much; we should be working on the
> > political or surveillance situation for the human species, as I don't
> > see how a detonation of Jupiter would be more of a risk than the other
> > weapons people will have develloped in the meantimes.
> >
> > Stuart
> >
>
>



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:01:03 MDT