yenchin
- 543
- 3
A timely post: http://blastr.com/2011/09/astronomer-explains-why-w.php"
Last edited by a moderator:
The discussion revolves around the hypothetical scenario of whether a planet can explode like a star, exploring various natural disasters, internal processes, and external impacts that could lead to such an event. Participants examine the differences between stellar and planetary dynamics, as well as the conditions under which a planet might experience catastrophic failure.
Participants express a range of views, with no consensus on whether a planet can explode in the same manner as a star. There are competing interpretations of what constitutes an explosion and the conditions necessary for such an event.
Limitations include the lack of consensus on definitions of explosion, the specific conditions required for a planet to experience catastrophic failure, and the assumptions regarding the internal processes of planets versus stars.
Janus said:The gravitational binding energy of the Earth is 2e32 joules, which is the equivalent of ~5e16 megatons of nuclear yield. The largest nuclear weapon ever built was rated at 50 megatons. so this is the equivalent of 10^15 of these bombs.
The surface area of the Earth is only ~5e14m² which means you would need enough of these bombs to cover the entire surface of the Earth with two bombs squeezed into every square meter.
In addition, each nuclear weapon needs about 15 kg of fissile material such as U 235 for the "trigger". Even if you include the amount of uranium in the oceans, you come up with only ~1/417,000 of the amount needed.