Will nuking jupiter start a helium/hydrogen fusion reaction?

In summary, Jupiter's upper atmosphere is composed of about 88–92% hydrogen and 8–12% helium. Considering many nuclear weapons have a fusion stage, it is asked whether the explosion would propagate. However, Jupiter does not have the mass to sustain nuclear fusion, and even if it did, it would not explode but would fuse at a relatively constant rate. Additionally, the heat of the comet hitting Jupiter was much greater than any bomb created by humans, making it impossible to increase Jupiter's slow rate of fusion.
  • #1
dazzlepecs
4
0
ala the sun?



Jupiter's upper atmosphere is composed of about 88–92% hydrogen and 8–12% helium



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


considering many nuclear weapons have a fusion stage

would the explosion propogate?


what would rain on my parade?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
No. Jupiter doesn't have the mass to sustain nuclear fusion. If it did, it would already be a star.
 
  • #3
...and even then, it wouldn't explode, it would just be in an equilbrium state, fusing at a certain, relatively constant rate.
 
  • #5
dazzlepecs said:
ala the sun?



Jupiter's upper atmosphere is composed of about 88–92% hydrogen and 8–12% helium



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


considering many nuclear weapons have a fusion stage

would the explosion propogate?


what would rain on my parade?

I would first want to know how the energy of a fusion bomb varied with the volume and how much energy we could pack in some small volume? Say all the energy of the bomb is absorbed by some shell of Jupiter's atmosphere surrounding the bomb. This energy will raise the temperature and density of this small shell of gas. If the energy released by the bomb is large enough the gas will be hot enough and dense enough to ignite? I don't know if you can simply argue that no additional energy is produced, seems there would at least be a little extra from unlikely events? Or is it that you just can't pack enough explosive energy a small enough space for the case of Jupiter?

But what if we had a cold dense star of hydrogen, no thermal motion. Not so dense as to form a neutron star. Now let's set off a fusion bomb, are conditions now different?

Thanks for any help!
 
  • #7
Spinnor said:
I would first want to know how the energy of a fusion bomb varied with the volume and how much energy we could pack in some small volume? Say all the energy of the bomb is absorbed by some shell of Jupiter's atmosphere surrounding the bomb. This energy will raise the temperature and density of this small shell of gas. If the energy released by the bomb is large enough the gas will be hot enough and dense enough to ignite? I don't know if you can simply argue that no additional energy is produced, seems there would at least be a little extra from unlikely events? Or is it that you just can't pack enough explosive energy a small enough space for the case of Jupiter?

But what if we had a cold dense star of hydrogen, no thermal motion. Not so dense as to form a neutron star. Now let's set off a fusion bomb, are conditions now different?

Thanks for any help!

The reason stars are able to form stable fusion reactions is because their enormous gravity is great enough to balance the enormous outward pressure produced by the reaction, and that their high gravity creates the initial pressure needed to ignite the reaction in the first place. You can't just have a "cold dense star" made of hydrogen - if it's so dense to sustain fusion, it will inevitably ignite on it's own. If it's not dense enough, any fusion pressure would cause the star to swell, and then you'd lose the pressure needed to sustain the reaction...
 
  • #8
Mu naught said:
if it's so dense to sustain fusion, it will inevitably ignite on it's own. If it's not dense enough, any fusion pressure would cause the star to swell, and then you'd lose the pressure needed to sustain the reaction...
How do you know that? Surely there's a high activation energy barrier to ignition, and after ignition there's far more energy available to sustain the reaction. (There's plenty of examples in nature, of stable things that just need some external impetus after which they can sustain a very different state.) I don't know whether or not your claim has any truth to it, but don't you need the support of some kind of modeling to be able to be convinced of your statement? (Are you actually trying to argue that the heat of Jupiter's coalescence was enough to ignite any potential fusion processes, and that it has since petered down?)
 
Last edited:
  • #9
It really doesn't have to do with heat in the way a chemical reaction does... what matters is gravitational pressure.

The outward pressure of a nuclear reaction is enormousness... think of the energy released by a nuclear bomb, except millions of times larger and occurring every single second for millions or billions of years on end. If the star doesn't have sufficient mass, this pressure will simply blow the star apart, and the reaction will halt. You need a large enough mass to continue to squeeze the core of the star to at least the critical pressure after you've already fought off the pressure the fusion is generating.

The "activation energy" comes from the gravitation it's self, and should actually be less than the energy needed to sustain the reaction. Therefore, it is impossible for a star to have the mass necessary to sustain the reaction without actually igniting.
 
  • #10
:(

thanks for clarification!
 
  • #11
Although a sustained reaction could not occur, some hydrogen would fuse, would it not? Other than the hydrofen inside the bomb, I mean.
 
  • #12
The heat of the comet hitting Jupiter was easily much more than any bomb we have made or would expect to make.
Jupiter's existing very slow rate of fusion could only be increased by making it more dense in a way that does not poison the fusion chain reaction. Since almost any dense material would poison a chain reaction, I'd say its almost impossible. A possibility might be to get a couple teratonnes of fissionable isotopes in there, so that the core was raised in temperature from what would essentially be an unmoderated gas-core fission reaction.
 
  • #13
Wizwom did you know the last post in this thread before you was almost 2 years ago? :tongue2:
 
  • #14
... and, besides, I don't think PF should condone the unprovoked bombing of an alien planet! :tongue:
 

1. What is a helium/hydrogen fusion reaction?

A helium/hydrogen fusion reaction is a type of nuclear reaction that occurs when two light atomic nuclei, specifically helium and hydrogen, combine to form a heavier nucleus. This process releases a significant amount of energy, which is what powers stars and other celestial bodies.

2. Why is nuking Jupiter being considered as a way to start a helium/hydrogen fusion reaction?

Jupiter is the largest planet in our solar system and is primarily composed of hydrogen and helium. Due to its massive size and gravitational pull, scientists have theorized that triggering a nuclear explosion within Jupiter's atmosphere could potentially compress and heat the hydrogen and helium enough to initiate a fusion reaction.

3. Is it possible for nuking Jupiter to actually start a helium/hydrogen fusion reaction?

While it is theoretically possible for nuking Jupiter to start a fusion reaction, it is highly unlikely. The conditions required for a successful fusion reaction are extremely precise and difficult to replicate. Additionally, the amount of energy needed to trigger a fusion reaction in Jupiter is far beyond our current capabilities.

4. What would be the potential consequences of nuking Jupiter?

Nuking Jupiter would have severe consequences, regardless of whether or not it was able to start a fusion reaction. The explosion itself would likely alter Jupiter's orbit and potentially disrupt the orbits of other planets in our solar system. It could also release a significant amount of radiation and debris into space, potentially affecting other planets and their inhabitants.

5. Are there any alternative methods for starting a helium/hydrogen fusion reaction?

Yes, there are alternative methods being researched for initiating a fusion reaction. These methods involve using powerful lasers or magnetic fields to compress and heat a small amount of hydrogen fuel to the necessary temperatures and pressures for fusion to occur. However, these methods are still in the early stages of development and have not yet been proven to be successful.

Similar threads

  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Sci-Fi Writing and World Building
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
910
  • Mechanics
Replies
1
Views
5K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Nuclear Engineering
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Nuclear Engineering
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • Science Fiction and Fantasy Media
Replies
14
Views
2K
Back
Top