A safer alternative to nuclear weapons?

  • Thread starter Nexus555
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Nuclear
In summary, many young kids use magnifying lenses to barbecue ants with, and a magnifying lens could be a good weapon if it is properly targeted and doesn't burn up the atmosphere. However, the major downside is that it would be just as destructive as a nuclear weapon, without the radiation. Another problem is that once the weapon is deployed, someone will eventually find and disable it.
  • #1
Nexus555
58
0
I was wondering.

We all know nuclear weapons are dirty, dirty weapons. I was thinking that a good weapon would be a magnifying lense. Sounds a little odd, but read on.

Many young kids use these devices to barbeque ant hills. Why not put much larger magnifying lenses into space? There could be a purpolsion system onboard to angle it sideways to the perspective of the Earth and the sun when it isn't in use, and if a global war broke out, it could be moved into the desired place and turned accordingly.

Well, I am against weapons of mass destructions anyways, but wouldn't this be equally as destructive, minus the radiation? One problem I have thought of with this concept is burning the atmosphere wherever the device is used.

Thoughts?
 
Computer science news on Phys.org
  • #2
Good luck sending a billion-ton magnifying glass into outer space! It currently costs some $10,000 per kg to get things into orbit.

- Warren
 
  • #3
Nexus555 said:
I was thinking that a good weapon would be a magnifying lense.

As chroot implies, you would use the other way of focusing light rays, not a lens. Quiz question for the OP -- what is that other method?
 
  • #4
hmm, what if the "targeting system" on your lens was slghtly off, seems rather destrucive to me, to the environment that is, or rather to that which you didn't intend to target whatever it may be
 
  • #5
berkeman said:
Quiz question for the OP -- what is that other method?

Fresnel lens, or array of mirrors.

Personally, I think it is rather ridiculous to try and find a weapon that does as much damage as a nuke, without the radiation. Its rather like trying to develop bullets that don't have lead in them so we can avoid lead poisoning
 
  • #6
The major draw pack of space borne weapons is the space borne countermeasures. A major part of the the StarWars plans of the 80's/90's was countermeasures to take out enemy satellites on day one of the war. These either comprised nuclear triggered single pulse laser systems to take satellites out at range or smaller nuclear charges that would navigate to within range of enemy satellites.
As soon as you deploy an orbital weapons platform somebody will deploy something to shut it down before you had chance to use it.

Mech_Engineer said:
Fresnel lens, or array of mirrors.

Personally, I think it is rather ridiculous to try and find a weapon that does as much damage as a nuke, without the radiation. Its rather like trying to develop bullets that don't have lead in them so we can avoid lead poisoning

But a Solar ray has no long term effects. If you Nuke an area then you can't get into secure it, so you only have opposition depletion not land gain. Carpet bombing or frying the area allows you to get in quick, mob up surviving opposition and secure the position.

Of course securing the land has it's own problems but that is a problem of Politics not Physics
 
  • #7
i prefer weapons that have negative effects on the aggressor as well as the victim. i don't trust people's humanity to stop them from destroying each other but their fear of hurting themselves is a decent deterrant(though not exactly fool proof)
 
  • #8
Nexus555 said:
Many young kids use these devices to barbeque ant hills. Why not put much larger magnifying lenses into space? There could be a purpolsion system onboard to angle it sideways to the perspective of the Earth and the sun when it isn't in use, and if a global war broke out, it could be moved into the desired place and turned accordingly.

Thoughts?

didn't i see this in a recent James Bond movie?
 
  • #9
Sorry but the topic made me chuckle, how can you have a safe weapon of mass destruction? :bugeye: :wink:
 
  • #10
If it descructs safely? :smile:
 
  • #11
Why not focus on something more constructive? How about free medical care instead of nukes? A lot safer alternative if you ask me.
 
  • #12
Suppose a "big" meteorite is going to crash the earth, is it a good option to using mass destruction weapon such as nukeS?
 

Related to A safer alternative to nuclear weapons?

1. What is a safer alternative to nuclear weapons?

A safer alternative to nuclear weapons refers to any technology or strategy that can be used in place of nuclear weapons for purposes of deterrence or defense. This could include conventional weapons, non-lethal weapons, or diplomatic and political solutions.

2. Why is there a need for a safer alternative to nuclear weapons?

Nuclear weapons pose a significant threat to the safety and security of humanity. They have the potential to cause catastrophic destruction and have been used in the past with devastating consequences. Therefore, finding a safer alternative is crucial for promoting global peace and reducing the risk of nuclear war.

3. What are some potential examples of safer alternatives to nuclear weapons?

Some potential examples of safer alternatives to nuclear weapons include developing and implementing stronger diplomatic relations between nations, investing in advanced conventional weapons that can target specific threats, and utilizing non-lethal weapons such as cyber warfare or disabling technology.

4. Is it realistic to completely eliminate nuclear weapons and rely solely on a safer alternative?

While it may not be realistic to completely eliminate nuclear weapons in the near future, it is important to continue researching and developing safer alternatives. These alternatives can serve as a stepping stone towards eventually phasing out nuclear weapons and promoting a more peaceful world.

5. How can scientists contribute to finding a safer alternative to nuclear weapons?

Scientists can contribute to finding a safer alternative to nuclear weapons by conducting research and developing new technologies. They can also collaborate with policymakers and diplomats to find solutions that are both effective and feasible. Additionally, scientists can educate the public and raise awareness about the dangers of nuclear weapons and the importance of finding alternatives.

Similar threads

Replies
25
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • Programming and Computer Science
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • General Discussion
2
Replies
36
Views
5K
  • General Discussion
Replies
1
Views
8K
  • General Discussion
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • General Discussion
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • General Discussion
Replies
31
Views
5K
Replies
133
Views
24K
  • General Discussion
Replies
4
Views
7K
Back
Top