Is it Possible to Stop a Tornado with Explosives?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Dennmann57
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Tornado
Click For Summary
Using explosives to stop a tornado is deemed impractical due to the immense energy driving tornadoes, which would require nuclear-level detonations that could cause more harm than good. The delivery of such explosives poses significant challenges, as predicting tornado touchdown points is difficult. Alternatives like tornado-proof buildings are suggested as a more feasible and cost-effective solution for protecting lives and property. The discussion also highlights the potential for future advancements in meteorological technology to better predict and possibly disrupt tornado formation. Overall, the consensus is that using bombs to combat tornadoes is not a viable option.
  • #31
Hello,
as a Newby on this forum I have found here with Solkars #7, Ophiolite #8, .Scott#26 and 29 and SimonBridge’s comments some very interesting hints & links to my own questions, which had already initiated me to do as .Scott had suggested lately. Here I want to add three points.

1. When following such “a funnel-like cloud” crossing our road on several swings - a series of new observations initiated me to look for possible explanations: The rain which had just fallen on a summer's day gush caused steam to raise in the valley in the Ardenne-forest we were just crossing. As these slowly rising fogs had reached about 20 m high, they suddenly were like vertically attracted directly up into that funnel.
As at home I had been experimenting with electrostatic effects on 'mobilees' suspended from the ceiling of a room, I instantly realized, “here are some very strong electrostatic forces involved”.
Continuing on that road we reached the Belgium NPS of Thiange/Meuse where river-water is used for their cooling towers. 30 km upstream just beyond the border is the French PWR-NPS of Chooz.
When we returned home to Süd-Eifel Area there had just been the first and worst Tornado which had left a narrow track right through forests, orchards and neighboring houses of our Village.
2. Checking for NPS-discharges allowed and dismissed as quasi natural ingredients I found great differences of declaration, origin and completeness of un-retainable gases with no storing-possibility. For such -of course- no government may put limits or restrictions nor demand updating for Retention-Factors which could not be developed for technical and financial reasons.('Ok since 1970' IOWA-Hint)
But just this point appears to be necessary not to stay concealed. Ophiolite#8 put up the hint about the famous Brazil butterfly and that makes sense if referred to as first mentioned on an IAEA meeting in Brazil- that the amount of energy in Hydrogens as 2H and 3H by the weight of a butterfly might cause a tornado, like usual over southwest of the US.
3. 50 Experiments using such matter appear to have been done 2006 /2007 to establish and follow the troughs of the Pacific summer- and winter-monsoons as ‘Cold Surge Vortex’, which could be traced by instrumental flights. Results have been published on the scientific Event of the 7thInternatl. Implementation & Planning Meeting of CEOPS SEA-Meteorologists’ Meeting in Bali 6-8 Sept.2007: we have very good results for the Indochina area.
Considering these Facts will contribute to understanding the Effect of Corolis-Forces in combination with the discharges from the various energy-related Institutions already west of Peking and Japan on lamented increases in number and damaging force on Pacific and Atlantic Weather-Abnormalities.
A biologic load can be anticipated by anybody considering known Fodder & Food-Transmission-Paths as synergistic effects of these Factors influencing enzyme-activities, known since Urey’s work after 1931. A big subject not to be excluded on this Earth- and Weather Forum, as the collateral Effects of expensive experiments of 15 Nations Fusion-Hopes cannot be regarded as negligible any more.
 
Earth sciences news on Phys.org
  • #32
The rain which had just fallen on a summer's day gush caused steam to raise in the valley in the Ardenne-forest we were just crossing. As these slowly rising fogs had reached about 20 m high, they suddenly were like vertically attracted directly up into that funnel.
As at home I had been experimenting with electrostatic effects on 'mobilees' suspended from the ceiling of a room, I instantly realized, “here are some very strong electrostatic forces involved”.

No, you don't need any mythical electrostatics

the inflow winds with severe storms are very strong, even without a tornado present

cheers
Dave
 
  • #33
One could bet sb. would find a way to distract from the point of my Argument.

Discrediting an argument by 'mythical electrostatics' is to prevent anybody think about the implication of the facts given. To which point do You want to have the Literature used , Dave ?

Biological Dangers of Energy-Technology by their problematic gases,
which they are discharging as produced (and have to be allowed to do this legally)
because there is no Method for Retention
nor for Storage (neither short-term nor longterm to avoid biological Harm)
nor for prevention to contact Oxygen (as formerly promised to have the Technology available soon)...

The Consequence is : Formation of OZONE under the Clouds
with uncontrollable consequences for atmospheric Chemistry in the Plumes...

And clusters of organics with attracting properties for electrostatically active parts
forming the poisonous parts f.i. in Englands Pollution now.

Do you know of the Necessity for degassing the "Primary-Coolant Medium" Clean Water
from the "aggressive and corrosive gases formed by the Neutron-bombardment"
named as Cooling process.
The radiochemical instruments to control that gaseous mixture are not programmed
for declaring those PAN-Substances set free as "Volatiles".

And as the inital H2O gives of some steam containing such Organics
(i.e. Carbonated mixture of Hydrogens, Oxygens and Carbon-Isotopes at least with their
partly shortlived daughter & further decay-products)
the procedure is called "AVT" - camouflaging for 'Treatment' (Prophylaxis & Therapy)
what actually stands for "practice of letting fly off what cannot be retained"
and literally means "All Volatiles' Treatment" undeclared unknown, unworthy to think about
 
  • #34
you are going on about all sorts of wild stuff there

I will take heed of it when you show me some peer reviewed papers on all those
thoughts of yours
Some of them, I don't even initially see as having anything to do with storms

so give me some solid scientific facts papers to read and see if you can change my thinking :wink:

cheers
Dave
 
  • #35
Davenn,
I noticed, my reply where I had given some literature by knowledgeable and reputated Authors was cut-off.
So here is my copied end of that short message:
...
And as the initial H2O gives off some steam, containing such Organic Volatiles
(i.e. Carbonated mixture of Hydrogens, Oxygens and Carbon-Isotopes at least with their
partly short-lived daughter & further decay-products)
the procedure is called "AVT" - camouflaging for 'Treatment' (Prophylaxis & Therapy)
what actually stands for "practice of letting fly off what cannot be retained"
and literally means "All Volatiles' Treatment" undeclared unknown, unworthy to think about.

As there are no other practices, this has to go on for... how long ? Anybody has a guess ?

“The Thermodynamic Laws of Water for living Organisms are at variance from our Technical Possibilities and Abilities to keep the toxic properties in limits compatible with long-term Survival “
(Karl Trincher, former Cooperating Researcher of Sacharow, see his work in Urban-Schwarzenberg- Verlag 1982 and in Herder 83, and Hevesy’s Review on Radiomimetic Phenomena 1959)
Cheers,
klasse35
 
  • #36
“The Thermodynamic Laws of Water for living Organisms are at variance from our Technical Possibilities and Abilities to keep the toxic properties in limits compatible with long-term Survival “
(Karl Trincher, former Cooperating Researcher of Sacharow, see his work in Urban-Schwarzenberg- Verlag 1982 and in Herder 83, and Hevesy’s Review on Radiomimetic Phenomena 1959)
Cheers,
klasse35

and what does that have to do with storms and the blowing up/disruption of tornadoes ??


Dave
 
  • #37
klasse35; there are concepts in your posts that I have never met before. Are you perhaps an exotic chef ?
By stirring up an assortment of carefuly selected scientific terms you appear to have made quite a delightful “new age soup”.
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
  • #38
a missile or explosion wouldn't be able to disrupt the wind pattern of a large tonado; it might make it lose strength momentarily but wouldn't be able to stop the wind spinning
 
  • #39
We are a long way from learning all the dynamics that go on in a thunderstorm.
Perhaps outflow boundaries may be a way of vectoring off some of the energy.
If we could through seeding and such, create an outflow boundary,
we might be able to keep the local energy low enough that the tornado does not form.
 
  • #40
Hmmm aoml have a similar statement about the advisability of nuking cyclones...
http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/tcfaq/C5c.html
During each hurricane season, there always appear suggestions that one should simply use nuclear weapons to try and destroy the storms. Apart from the fact that this might not even alter the storm, this approach neglects the problem that the released radioactive fallout would fairly quickly move with the tradewinds to affect land areas and cause devastating environmental problems. Needless to say, this is not a good idea.​
Tornados are a lot less energetic but still... disrupting the supercell thunderstorm they are a part of would be on a similar scale.
You may as well throw sharks at it as well - radioactive sharknado?
I figured it would be as well to have the data-links in one place.
 
  • #41
Couldn't we stop a tornado from forming with a big enough vacuum? Like a manmade structure that opens up on contact with the tornado and sucks it in, of course the purpose of the vacuum would be to counteract the violent winds present during the tornado. I could be way off but it's just a theory .:)
 
  • #42
The short answer is no. You have to eliminate the cause which is the temperature difference between air masses. The cost of any contraption that would actually do something to disrupt a major tornado is VERY large. What do you suppose it would weigh? More than would allow us to move it around. So we would need hundreds of them every square mile. The basic practical elements of this absolutely preclude being able to do anything like this. We strive to improve forecasting, which is attainable.

Please do not post speculative threads like this on PF. We do have a Science Fiction forum. I am going to ask this thread to be moved there.
 
  • #43
jim mcnamara said:
Please do not post speculative threads like this on PF. We do have a Science Fiction forum. I am going to ask this thread to be moved there.

Maybe better to lock this long-dead thread to prevent future reanimations...
 
  • Like
Likes Evo

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K