The Factory Floor

HDE 226868

00:46

@Green It would. I honestly don't see us going anywhere far into the Solar System without private space ventures.

HDE 226868

02:14

> As he prepared for departure after his second visit in 1779, a quarrel ensued as Cook took temple idols and fencing as "firewood" . . . Cook abducted the King of Hawaiʻi Island, Kalaniʻōpuʻu, and held him for ransom aboard his ship . . . Kalaniʻōpuʻu's supporters fought back, killing Cook

Well, that sounds like a couple of consecutive bad decisions.

Era

03:23

Hey, I don't plan to make a thing of this, but can I run some math by you guys to see if I'm making any fantastically obvious errors? It seems too small to be a proper question, but I'd like it if someone would check.

I've been trying to figure out if the ability of my world's pyromancers to convert kcal to heat at distance would lend itself to aeronautics. Taking the smallest balloon on wikipedia, at 14,000 cubic ft, and assuming air weighs 0.08 per cubic ft I ran the numbers through the equation for heat transfer: 512468⋅1⋅(100-20) = 40997440j or 9798 kcal. So my mage faints with the b…

(0.08 lbs I mean.)

Shalvenay

@Era or, perhaps we can say at a safety factor of 50% of mage utilization, we need 4 mages to get the balloon up to temp?

Era

@Shalvenay: That would do it, but I'm not so much asking "how can I make this method actually work" as "for this particular method of inflating a balloon, did I put the right numbers in the right order?" If the answer is yes, then I think the answer for the first question would just become to design a more energy-efficient way to inflate the balloon.

Secret

10:19

> Today, a fruit for thought: How fast does a ripple spread

> When the moment you return to the past and change the history of the timeline, how and why when the ripple arrives

Bellerophon

11:34

@Era I get an answer roughly the same as yours.

Future Historian

12:26

@Bellerophon? Which could the spacecraft more likely survive: a direct hit from a W88 strategic nuclear device or a proximity blast from the same device?

Future Historian

12:44

@FerretCivilization? Direct hit = RIP Visitor spacecraft, right?

In a realistic scenario for a nuclear strike against it, assuming one nuke survives the point defence lasers?

Or would a proximity blast also work?

Ferret Civilization

Still depends on the thickness and what kind of material your using. From what I got from the Arizona Emergency Information Network. The further away from an explosion, the better, ha.

Future Historian

So, a direct hit from a nuclear blast in space = how much damage does the spacecraft get?

And what kind of materials could survive the explosion?

And how thick does the armour need to be?

Ferret Civilization

Depends, already told you anything if it was thick enough, depends.

Future Historian

Obviously, there is thermal radiation, gamma radiation, the EMP blast, so............

Future Historian

13:07

@FerretCivilization? Which is more durable: carbon nanotubes on their own or carbon-nanotubes mixed with some kind of tungsten alloy?

You have 30 mm thick sheet of graphene in the first layer, then a 50 mm thick sheet of tungsten, another middle layer of carbon nanotubes of ~20 mm thick and a 10 mm thick layer of carbon nanotubes mixed with a tungsten alloy, which I need a decent name for the alloy.

So, what would be a good name for a carbon nanotube-tungsten alloy?

@FerretCivilization.

Ferret Civilization

Don't know, just going to put XKCD, "Adding this to the long list of engineering problems which can be waved away by tacking on the prefix “nano-”"

Future Historian

That is why I want to double-check.

Of course there will be engineering problems, but this is a K2 civilisation.

The issue is, whether known science allows such a carbon nanotube-tungsten alloy to even exist.

I am going to ask on the sandbox, just to be safe.

Alright?

Ferret Civilization

Go ahead.

Future Historian

I already did.

:P

Ferret Civilization

Then patience.

Feeds

13:23

0

A: Sandbox for Proposed Questions

Is a carbon nanotube-tungsten alloy possible with current physics? NOTE: I just realised that in chat, I may have had an idea: basically, use some sort of carbon nanotube-tungsten alloy for spacecraft armour, mainly on account of an extraterrestrial spacecraft controlled by a Kardashev Type II c...

Green

14:43

I think my three books: medicine question is my down voted question, ever.

Feeds

0

A: Sandbox for Proposed Questions

How much antimatter enters an ordinary human body on a day-to-day basis? hard-science antimatter In a magic system I recently thought up, mages are individuals who can mentally control antimatter, which includes mentally moving it (essentially telekinesis, but only applying to antimatter), and p...

kingledion

15:07

@Green You'll be happy to know that Physics is your most downvoted (8) followed by Medicine

Chemistry (4) is tied with worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/88661/…

As of right now, at least

Green

@kingledion Hah! Then that whole set of questions is my most downvoted of all time.

Future Historian

@kingledion? Anything that could better protect a spacecraft from a nuclear blast in space, if not carbon nanotubes?

kingledion

I wasn't expecting the future historian inquisition!

@FutureHistorian You want something that absorbs a lot of energy, with a lot of mass

Also, you want something that absorbs a lot of energy per unit mass

Honestly, I would use ice

Cover your spaceship with a few hundred meters of ice, even a direct nuclear hit won't penetrate through that

Future Historian

Because I was thinking of a 4 layer set of armour, mainly of graphene, carbon nanotubes, possibly Inconel and a titanium alloy. Could that work?

Or would it be too much?

kingledion

Ice would be a lot cheaper

2

Future Historian

15:10

It has to be enough to protect it from a nuclear blast, and kinetic weapons.

Green

@kingledion Agreed

Future Historian

@kingledion, yes, but this is a K2 civilisation we are talking about facing 21st Century nuclear weapons.

You think they could care less about cost when they have the capability to harness the energy of a star and start building Dyson Swarms (even if the one they currently have is incomplete)?

But I see the point.

@kingledion? Could the four-layer armour work?

kingledion

Dude, you aren't listening to me. If you are a K2 civilization, and you wrap your mother ship in a km of ice, humans literally can't hurt it.

Future Historian

Oh.

HDE 226868

If you're a K2 civilization, why are you even concerned with humans at all? We're no match for you.

kingledion

15:14

How many nukes does it take to blow up a small moon? Ice is free in space, and absorbs more energy per mass than any of those fancy armors

Don't play patty cakes with the primitives, just put an indestructable ice block in orbit and laugh while they tire themselves out nuking it

Future Historian

Well, technically, this is a spacecraft with a nuclear pulse fusion engine that is separated from its two antimatter stages full of railguns, point defence lasers, nuclear torpedoes and the like.

James

@kingledion Stupid lack of heat transfer in a vacuum!!!!! You know...instead of KHANNNNN!!!!

kingledion

Why?

Future Historian

Probably a battery's worth of particle beam weapons, considering their use of antimatter in interstellar flight.

So..........

kingledion

What do they do with those weapons? Can they blow up an ice-ship?

They need two things: a relativistic kinetic cannon and 1 km of ice

Future Historian

15:16

Well, they do have OTHER members of their own species that dislike each other.

kingledion

Thats it, everything else is a waste of money

Future Historian

Aka: they are NOT a unified species.

HDE 226868

@FutureHistorian No offense, but that's not 21st-century tech. Not by a long shot.

James

@FutureHistorian Good. Outside of literal collective thought unified species make absolutely no sense.

Future Historian

@HDE226868. I am trying to think of technology within the realm of known science.

That can be doable with what we know about physics, but is still puts the Visitors at a technological edge compared to humanity.

So, @HDE226868? What weapon systems could such a 10 km long and 6 km in diameter spacecraft need in the event of combat against other spacecraft from its own species?

HDE 226868

15:19

@FutureHistorian . . . We're not doing that in 82 years.

kingledion

Ok, I just checked it @FutureHistorian. Ice absorbs 4x the energy per mass as titanium or steel, and 15x the energy per mass as tungsten. And thats not even counting its phase transitions to water and steam

Future Historian

@HDE226868. I know. That is NOT us. That is an extraterrestrial species.

HDE 226868

It's been what, 60 years since we put a satellite into space?

Future Historian

This is NOT our spacecraft.

HDE 226868

@FutureHistorian Oh, the aliens are the ones with that?

Future Historian

15:20

It is an extraterrestrial spacecraft trying to conquer Earth.

kingledion

The only things remotely comparable in heat absorption are organic proteins

@FutureHistorian If you aren't using ice, you're just wasting mass

HDE 226868

@FutureHistorian Then what do we the humans have?

kingledion

@FutureHistorian PS, don't you just hate it when someone keeps tagging you in an irrelevant side conversation?

HDE 226868

Because then I revert to my original point, which is that we cannot beat that.

Future Historian

Oh.

Yes, I do.

@HDE226868. The problem is that humanity is trying to launch nuclear weapons against the spacecraft in this scene, which most of the ICBMs and few SLBMs that were launched get shot down with a lone W88 strategic nuclear device going off.

The problem? How do I ensure the spacecraft survives after having one nuke out of a barrage of them survive being blasted by point defence lasers long enough to hit the giant thing?

HDE 226868

15:22

@FutureHistorian Our current ballistic missiles aren't designed to hit a spacecraft. And even if they were . . . @kingledion's point remains.

Future Historian

And that is just the land-based ICBMs that are mostly static and NOT rendered useless by kinetic bombardment already.

@HDE226868. I know that, but........if one of them DOES detonate near the spacecraft or directly hits the spacecraft, how does it survive the 475 kt explosion?

HDE 226868

. . . With ice, perhaps?

kingledion

@HDE226868 Lol

Future Historian

Oh.

sphennings

It's 10km long. 6km in diameter. It will be fine.

HDE 226868

15:25

Still not understanding your object to the ice solution. kingledion has given you numbers; I'm trusting that the math checks out.

sphennings

They probably have anti ship missile technology.

Green

@HDE226868 Hitting spacecraft is a whole different problem. There's only a handful of anti-satelite missiles and they aren't big enough to carry the kinds of nukes being discussed.

Future Historian

Well, technically, it has been accelerated to (and decelerated from) 0.75 c by two 724 km long antimatter rocket stages respectively.

So.....can ice survive that as well?

@HDE226868. My problem is not the ice itself. That I can live with. My problem is how that ice can sustain near-relativistic velocities.

HDE 226868

@Green I'm reminded of a West Wing episode where the US tested an anti-satellite missile against an American satellite that needed to be destroyed/deorbited anyway . . . and missed by about 70 miles.

kingledion

@sphennings Surround it with ice and you have this guy:

Calypso (moon)

There is also an asteroid called 53 Kalypso. Calypso ( kə-LIP-soh; Greek: Καλυψώ) is a moon of Saturn. It was discovered in 1980, from ground-based observations, by Dan Pascu, P. Kenneth Seidelmann, William A. Baum, and Douglas G. Currie, and was provisionally designated S/1980 S 25 (the 25th satellite of Saturn discovered in 1980). Several other apparitions of it were recorded in the following months: S/1980 S 29, S/1980 S 30, S/1980 S 32, and S/1981 S 2. In 1983 it was officially named after Calypso of Greek mythology. It is also designated as Saturn XIV or Tethys C. Calypso is co-orbital with...

HDE 226868

15:27

@FutureHistorian Just like anything else could? You could store the ice shield inside the spacecraft, right?

Future Historian

Problem: we are talking about velocities near 0.75 c during the interstellar cruise, acceleration and deceleration.

James

@kingledion I wonder what that could be like. :eyeroll:

Future Historian

Not to mention the use of antimatter as a rocket propellant.

kingledion

@HDE226868 In fairness to us surface navy types (not dirty submariners) when we did it, it worked:

Operation Burnt Frost

Operation Burnt Frost was the code name given to the military operation to intercept and destroy a non-functioning U.S. National Reconnaissance Office (NRO) satellite named USA-193. The launch occurred on 20 February, 2008 at approximately 10:26 p.m. EST from the USS Lake Erie, which used a Standard Missile-3 (SM-3) to shoot down the satellite. Only a few minutes after launch, the SM-3 intercepted its target and successfully completed its mission, by neutralizing the potential dangers the errant satellite originally imposed. While the threat was mitigated, Operation Burnt Frost has received much...

Future Historian

Besides, there is all kinds of micrometeorites and the like approaching a spacecraft with the energy equivalent of A LOT of Hiroshimas at once at that velocity.

HDE 226868

15:29

@FutureHistorian None of that is going to stop you keeping a very large freezer onboard. If these aliens can survive it, and the rest of the ship can survive it, I think you're fine.

Future Historian

breathes a sigh of relief

HDE 226868

@kingledion Oh, I know it's possible. Just not very easy.

Future Historian

@HDE226868? What about the space combat, though?

Green

@HDE226868 I only know of this test en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ASM-135_ASAT#Test_launches

Future Historian

You know: whenever primitives are NOT the ones getting conquered?

HDE 226868

15:30

@FutureHistorian Why do the aliens need to fight anyone in space?

Future Historian

Their own species?

Obviously.

I never said they had to fight other, more advanced civilisations than they do (the other four in the Galaxy have not encountered them or each other).

Perhaps they still fight amongst each other?

HDE 226868

But we're only talking about Earth. I don't think any of us can create a tactical plan for these species for any sort of situation. We can only - and only vaguely - talk about an attempt to invade Earth.

Future Historian

Say........wars between systems that members of the same species control, because of differences, further exacerbated by FTL travel and communications being NON-EXISTENT.

Still, this is not the first time this species has conquered other worlds, either primitive or by their own species.

@HDE226868. True. So, what do we do about the barrage of nuclear warheads imbound towards the Visitor spacecraft?

Not happening? Vapourised by point defence lasers or survives at least one nuclear blast?

After all: we spotted it in 2019.

They arrive in 2024 to Earth.

That is 5 years to prepare.

3 of them when entering our Solar System, 2 en route to Earth from Saturn.

Green

15:49

@HDE226868 As an additional confounding factor, a certain technology might lend itself to a specific tactic but there's no One True Tactic for a given piece of tech.

Future Historian

16:09

@Green. ^

So, what does this mean for the Visitor Invasion of Earth?

sphennings

@FutureHistorian They're K2 we're not even K1. If they want to invade they will win.

Future Historian

True, but......we can still imagine what happens during the Invasion.

Of course we will get slaughtered (mostly), but.....HOW do we get slaughtered?

sphennings

@FutureHistorian Probably the same way an exterminator views pests. Efficiently and on a massive scale.

Future Historian

Well, I would at least like to know the methods.

And how humans would try (and fail) to stop their initial conquest of Earth.

sphennings

@FutureHistorian Make something up. Oribital wonderflonium waveguide mumblemumble beams.

@FutureHistorian That sounds like you're wanting us to write a 3 book trilogy for you.

Future Historian

16:15

No I do not.

Besides, I already have that in mind anyway.

I just need to ensure that I get them scientifically accurate.

Sorry. It is a habit.

sphennings

@FutureHistorian You're writing science fiction with K2 civilization. You aren't going to be scientifically accurate.

Future Historian

Well, I am at least trying to.

Make a K2 civilisation, no physics-breaking anything.

sphennings

@FutureHistorian Note the word Fiction. It's important. Use it to tell a good story.

Future Historian

Except by that logic, historical FICTION does NOT mean the word HISTORICAL applies. By that logic, I could just make up a story about Napoleon fighting an army of Dinosaurs or Otto von Bismark nuking Russia.

Just as an example.

sphennings

@FutureHistorian We have no idea how a K1 civ will function. K2 is effectively space fantasy.

Future Historian

16:18

Or worse: detective FICTION means you can also throw away accurate detective procedures.

sphennings

@FutureHistorian I'd read that.

Future Historian

So......the SCIENCE part of SCIENCE FICTION is JUST AS IMPORTANT as the FICTION part.

sphennings

@FutureHistorian Every conversation is a contrivance real people don't talk like they do in books.

Bellerophon

@FutureHistorian No, it really, really isn't.

@FutureHistorian They do.

sphennings

@FutureHistorian Science Fiction doesn't mean fiction that is scientific.

Future Historian

16:20

I know that. But the kind I am working on is trying to depict a realistic scenario for how a real world extraterrestrial attack would play out.

sphennings

@FutureHistorian In a detective novel they often skip over the boring bits to get to what makes people want to read the story.

Future Historian

Trying to deviate into science fantasy basically defeats the original purpose of the Visitor series.

Realism in the alien invasion subgenre of science fiction.

sphennings

@FutureHistorian If I wanted real science I'd read a scientific journal.

Bellerophon

Science should never be more important than plot.

Future Historian

@Bellerophon. True, but it can be just as important as the plot in science fiction.

Bellerophon

16:21

When you have science being more important than plot you either get a bad textbook or a boring story.

When they are equally important you pretty much get the same.

Future Historian

Not more important, but EQUALLY important.

sphennings

@FutureHistorian A good story with bad science is still a good story that people will read. A bad story with good science is a waste of everyone's time.

Future Historian

Can I have both?

Bellerophon

No, plot should always be first, then internal consistency, then characters, and then other stuff like science.

6

Future Historian

What? A story cannot have good plot and science?

Because that is kind of what I am trying to do.

sphennings

16:23

@FutureHistorian I've never read a book and said "The plot was horrible but the science was really good."

3

Future Historian

Make a good story without sacrificing the science.

Bellerophon

@FutureHistorian It can, but only if the plot is more important.

The science should never get in the way of the story.

3

Future Historian

Well, I always said that hard science fiction was adapting imagination to technology vs soft science fiction being the technology adapted to imagination.

In this case, I am trying to pull the former without sacrificing too much of the plot.

Green

@Bellerophon @James perma-star this one please.

Future Historian

Work within the constraints of science to make an interesting story.

@Bellerophon? Is it that hard to make a good plot without sacrificing the science?

Bellerophon

16:25

@FutureHistorian Yes.

Future Historian

Well, if anything, I am just going to say: challenge accepted.

sphennings

@FutureHistorian A good story doesn't need science. Furthermore a bad story will not be improved by science.

2

Future Historian

True, but it helps.

:P

Besides, the entire Visitor series is basically created around the point that most media gets a LOT of things about hostile extraterrestrials wrong.

It is my own attempt to deconstruct the genre down to the fundamental level and try to create a good story within a plausible setting from a technological and physics perspective facing against the improbable aspect of hostile first contact.

sphennings

@FutureHistorian Every sentence you write you should be asking yourself "Is this relevant to the story?" Oftentimes scientific explanation isn't. You're wasting both yours and the audiences' time.

Future Historian

@sphennings. True. I should reserve that for some guide to the series book or something.

Say........"The Visitor Series vs Reality" or something.

Bellerophon

16:29

Put in scientific explanation and people will look for holes in it. Leave it out and people will accept what happens.

5

sphennings

@FutureHistorian I've seen too many decent stories ruined by attempts to make them more scientifically accurate.

Future Historian

Mine included, I think?

Hmmmmmmmmm. Well, technically, the entire point of the series was to depict a realistic extraterrestrial invasion scenario.

So, is there any way to make the story good without sacrificing that objective?

Green

@Bellerophon Seconded.

sphennings

@FutureHistorian Sacrifice that objective.

Future Historian

That is.....kind of the OPPOSITE of what I asked.

sphennings

16:31

@FutureHistorian Yes.

Bellerophon

@FutureHistorian Probably. Just don't put in too many explanations of scientific detail.

sphennings

Your story will be improved for doing so.

Future Historian

O_O

Bellerophon

Have the plot drive the story.

Future Historian

At least @Bellerophon is helping.

Besides, I can explain the science in a guide anyway.

The books will have some minor mentions without too much scientific explanation.

I will try my best to realistically depict what an observer would see.

I will explain the science ONLY when needed.

sphennings

16:32

@FutureHistorian If your story needs supplemental material to make sense you're probably doing it wrong.

Future Historian

The majority of it would be in a separate book, if you do not mind.

@sphennings. Tell that to 2001: A Space Odyssey.

At release, it kind of...flunked. As in: people were just too confused by the film's visuals to be able to understand the story.

Then the Clarke novel that was supposed to be out before the film came out and explained everything.

Fast-forward to 2018 and people say it is one of the best films of all time.

sphennings

@FutureHistorian You're not Arthur C. Clarke. Learn why these rules are there then you'll know when they can be broken.

Future Historian

True, but at least I am trying to be.

Besides, I am not looking for sales or publicity anyway.

I am looking for good story WITH good science.

They do not have to counteract one another.

sphennings

@FutureHistorian Also 2001 is not hard science.

Future Historian

It kind of is, except for the blue fetus....thing.

And the lack of radiators.

So.........to a degree, that counts.

It may have used handwavium, BUT IT WAS LIMITED.

sphennings

16:36

@FutureHistorian There can be good stories with good science. I'd hazard a guess that those authors set out just to write a good story.

Future Historian

In fact, Atomic Rockets has helped many authors have both.

And the Martian? Real science except for the sandstorm that kicked off the story's events in the first place.

@Bellerophon? Come to think of it, I already kind of had the lore in mind.

sphennings

@FutureHistorian The Martian knew when to handwave.

Future Historian

Except for the events in 2034 and beyond, I already have the lore down to size.

Wait a minute.

sphennings

@FutureHistorian Note how that story depended on the science. How the story was furthered by the science. The science was there for a reason. It drives the plot.

Bellerophon

@FutureHistorian The Martian is a good example. The science is good but if the story needs something then it happens and the science can be changed to accommodate the story.

Future Historian

16:40

@sphennings? Remember that time when I originally planned the Visitor occupation of Earth to end with the spacecraft's destruction and the overthrow of the GPI by a simultaneous Moonbase infiltration and global Tet Offensive-style operation?

sphennings

@Bellerophon Or ignored. If I remember correctly they don't discuss waste management on the trek. We just assumed that he found a solution.

Future Historian

Well, I may have an idea.

I may be able to bring that back, just figure out a more realistic method of destroying the spacecraft.

sphennings

@FutureHistorian No. You throw around so many ideas that they quickly get filtered out as noise.

7

Future Historian

Oh.

Well, here is the situation.

sphennings

@FutureHistorian Does the destruction of the spaceship further the plot?

@FutureHistorian Can you write a good scene about the destruction?

Future Historian

16:41

That was kind of 10 years after the Invasion anyway.

But it is how I plan the ending of the series' main story to be like.

sphennings

@FutureHistorian If yes then write it and forget the science.

Future Historian

Well, I did mention that there are a few SLBMs left by a few nuclear submarines, but most would be blasted by the Visitors before they can reach the spacecraft, and the railgun would be an obvious weakness. Hmmmmmmmmmmmm. The transport!

Of course!

Ram the transport against the engines on the spacecraft, preferably have a nuclear device in there, then get in the spacecraft, followed by big nuclear explosion.

No wait.

facepalms

I said it wrong.

Leave the Moonbase, and instead of evacuating, try to intercept the spacecraft already en route to Earth before it has a chance to execute Directive 13 and kill the remaining 2.1 billion humans, find a way to get near the spacecraft's engines, then BOOM! Nuclear explosion.

Then again, that thing has survived one nuclear explosion, albeit damaged.

sighs

Well, I think we need more than one nuke.

@Gryphon? Since that thing had survived one nuclear explosion already, albeit having sustained some damage........you think that thing can survive another explosion 10 years later (by which time, the damage is probably already repaired)?

Gryphon

If the explosion is the same size, at the same distance, it seems unlikely that they would have majorly distinct effects.

Future Historian

Or do you think I am going to need to find a different spacecraft to destroy the Visitor spacecraft with before ditching the Moonbase as a nuke goes off?

Preferably armed with either a really powerful railgun or just a few nuclear torpedoes?

@Gryphon? Take note: the spacecraft survived a W88 strategic nuclear device detonated on its face.

Gryphon

If you have something bigger, or its closer, than I could see it destroying it, while the first failed to do so.

Future Historian

16:48

Well.........I do have an idea.

sphennings

@FutureHistorian Is it necessary to the plot that it survives? If yes than it does. If not then it doesn't.

Future Historian

@Gryphon? Which is preferable: a transport with a nuclear device inside equivalent to the warhead inside of an SS-25 nuclear ICBM (800 kt) or a small military spacecraft armed with only a small railgun and 6 nuclear torpedoes, each carrying around 500 kt per torpedo?

Gryphon

Whichever works better for the story.

Future Historian

Well, ignore story for a second. Let us go deep into the science, even though that is exactly what @sphennings wanted me NOT to do. But I am going to do it anyway.

sphennings

@FutureHistorian I'm curious if two characters in your book decided to resolve something by coin toss would you flip a coin or write whatever outcome was required for the plot to progress?

3

Future Historian

16:52

Then again, probably the transport, considering that the Visitors managed to shoot down a nuclear barrage of THOUSANDS of nukes and only one made it through.

HDE 226868

Just a comment about something I've seen further up the transcript. . . I am one of the people on the site who most pushes for scientific accuracy. And I rarely explain the science when I'm writing something. There's just no point.

4

Future Historian

True.

HDE 226868

I made a graph here when I was griping about that sort of thing:

5

Future Historian

Oh well. @HDE226868? So, curious question: is a B61 capable of being modified for use as a suitcase nuke equivalent?

HDE 226868

@FutureHistorian I have no idea whatsoever.

Bellerophon

16:57

@HDE226868 Very true.

Future Historian

Well, so far, I think the B83 would have to do.

That thing is unguided, though, and can go up to a maximum blast yield of 1.2 Mt.

sphennings

@FutureHistorian You're wanting verisimilitude not accuracy. Aim for good enough. A story about invaders from another solar system is pretty fantastical. You have a lot of leniency with what your readers will buy.

Future Historian

@sphennings. Well, how is that fantastical?

AndyD273

@FutureHistorian I guided suitcase nuke? Is that even something you need to worry about? Even slightly?

Future Historian

@AndyD273. No.........

Besides, I probably said it wrong.

So, I need to figure out a way to use nuclear device (probably the B83 on this one) to destroy the Visitor spacecraft before it gets to Earth.

So, what is a B83 capable of (even though it is unguided and has 1.2 Mt blast yield)?

B83 nuclear bomb

The B83 thermonuclear weapon is a variable-yield unguided bomb developed by the United States in the late 1970s, entering service in 1983. With a maximum yield of 1.2 megatonnes of TNT (5.0 PJ, 75 times the 16 kt yield of the atomic bomb "Little Boy" dropped on Hiroshima on 6 August 1945), it is the most powerful nuclear free-fall weapon in the United States arsenal. It was designed at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, and the first underground test detonation of the production B83 took place on 15 December 1984. == History == The B83 was based partly on the earlier B77 program, which was...

AndyD273

17:00

@FutureHistorian Aliens. Traveling from another solar system. And not just gamma-raying us to strip all the minerals from our lifeless planet

Future Historian

@AndyD273? What do you mean?

Oh......I get it.

No need for invasion at all in the first place for pesky primitives like us?

Just RKV Earth and BOOM! Done?

AndyD273

Obviously that's not the story you want to tell, which is fine. The point is that since you have that much buy in from the reader, so while you can and should get as many details right as you can, having more details can hurt the story more than fewer details.

It's kind of the uncanny valley thing.

sphennings

@FutureHistorian Just say "As a last desperate attempt the coordinated governments of earth launched everything remaining in their combined nuclear arsenal. Many shots fell short. Even more were destroyed by the ships point defense systems. "Contact lost" was relayed to superiors in command bunkers around the globe. Later on it would be discovered that the point defense system was rated to have a 93% success rate against planet launched ballistic missiles.

Future Historian

Actually, the missiles were launched during the kinetic bombardment.

sphennings

Unfortunately 93% isn't perfect and if you throw enough nukes at the problem something is going to stick.

Future Historian

17:07

True.

Wait a minute.

sphennings

@FutureHistorian Note how that has absolutely no science in it.

AndyD273

You can make something more believably human by including less human features. The more features you add, the more likely it is that you'll fall into the uncanny valley, and tiny differences will be glaringly obvious

sphennings

I made up a statistic that sounds good.

Future Historian

Understood.

sphennings

I didn't mention a single model of nuke. Or a particular yield.

Future Historian

17:08

We can continue this another time.

sphennings

I have a spaceship that my story requires is nuked. I write a scene where it is nuked.

5

AndyD273

17:49

And remember, million-to-one chances succeed nine times out of ten.

5

sphennings

18:07

@AndyD273 Only if it's exactly 1/1000000. 1/999999 and you're SOL.

AndyD273

Traditionally, one has to say "it's a million-to-one chance, but it might just work!" to invoke this rule. It also has to be exactly a million to one - none of this fiddly "995,351 to 1" business, or whatever other number you might end up with.
So while the list of things that people have accomplished with million to one chances is quite impressive, the list of things they have failed to accomplish with odds a few percentage points off in either direction is probably a lot longer and involves a lot more fatalities.

Green

19:22

I'm looking for recommendations for a Dangerous Books List for my own personal edification. You can interpret "dangerous" however you like.

Green

19:35

Said, another way by a friend of mine: books aren't dangerous, people are dangerous. I want the books that make people dangerous.

James

@Green To Kill a Mockingbird is one of my all time favorites.

Green

@James how is that dangerous? I think I read that one in middle school (or something).

James

@Green Addressing racial integration and equality can be "dangerous"

Pretty sure it has made the banned books list at some point or another.

You could also go with the ever enigmatic Salman Rushdie.

Honestly I only read Satanic Verses because of the controversy and wasn't overly impressed, I was bored with it most of the time.

@AndyD273 lol

Green

@James Was the controversy over Christians complaining that anything that celebrates ideas not in the Bible, is evil? I don't have much patience for that kind of complaining.

James

@sphennings You're not required to do anything, its your story, the only limits are self imposed.

:D

Green

19:42

@James Oh snap! It was controversy with Muslims.

James

@Green No this is the one where muslim clerics basically marked Rushdie for death.

...not sure if it qualifies as a Jihad in the modern non-koranic version but...its been a few years since I paid attention.

Green

@James I'm reading up on the part on Wikipedia right now.

James

I'd also suggest Dostoyevsky, the underground man. It challenges/debates the merits of Free Will and Predermination.

AndyD273

The Anarchist Cookbook

The Anarchist Cookbook, first published in 1971, is a book that contains instructions for the manufacture of explosives, rudimentary telecommunications phreaking devices, and related weapons, as well as instructions for home manufacturing of illicit drugs, including LSD. It was written by William Powell at the apex of the counterculture era in order to protest against United States involvement in the Vietnam War. == Author == After writing the book as a teenager, Powell converted to Anglicanism in 1976, and later attempted to have the book removed from circulation. He was powerless to sto...

James

Friedrich Nietzsche, The Parable of the Madman

AndyD273

19:47

Not sure if you have that one on the list already

James

God is dead. God remains dead. And we have killed him. How shall we comfort ourselves, the murderers of all murderers? What was holiest and mightiest of all that the world has yet owned has bled to death under our knives: who will wipe this blood off us? What water is there for us to clean ourselves? What festivals of atonement, what sacred games shall we have to invent? Is not the greatness of this deed too great for us? Must we ourselves not become gods simply to appear worthy of it?

Oh and the word I was looking for was fatwa not Jihad.

Green

@AndyD273 Aren't there better books for that sort of thing? Sure, it's a classic but isn't there anything a bit more current?

Phreaking tech has changed considerably.

@James This reminds me of a quote from Star Trek:NG where Worf says that the Klingons killed their gods.

Worf tells us about Klingon Gods

►

There it is.

AndyD273

@Green amazon.com/Corrected-Updated-Anarchist-Cookbook-ebook/dp/…

amazon.com/…

Future Historian

20:03

Back...............

AndyD273

amazon.com/Special-Forces-Guide-Unconventional-Warfare-ebook/dp/…

The US military has a lot of books that make people more dangerous...

2

Green

@AndyD273 That is very true.

Future Historian

sighs

At least this is not as big a mess as I originally anticipated.

And no, I am not ditching the realism or story.

James

I have never really watched episodes of the Trek...

@Green Oh and for the record I could make an argument that characters should come first, not plot.

Green

@James I could make a further argument that the two are co-mingled and can't be developed independently. ;)

James

20:08

Yeah that's probably the best one.

Green

Plot and Character are cyclicly intertwined. You can't have a plot without characters to execute it. You can't have characters without them doing something.

Joe Bloggs

I have had a long day and I’m pretty sure I just butchered physics..

AndyD273

@JoeBloggs Physics is tough. I'm sure you only scratched it at worst. Tis but a flesh wound.

Mithrandir24601

@JoeBloggs Oooh :P

butchering physics is fun

Joe Bloggs

I may have used one of the laws of electromagnetism backwards. It’s been that kind of day.

But in my defence a mathematical singularity was involved!

Green

20:13

@JoeBloggs Horray!

Joe Bloggs

VYeah.. trying to work out electromagnetism when approaching a point of radial symmetry.. it just... doesn’t work.

Green

@JoeBloggs You're doing better than I would. I don't even know where to start approaching that kind of a problem.

@JoeBloggs I don't even know what an object like that would look like.

Mithrandir24601

20:56

@JoeBloggs This is total overkill, but you could apply QFT ;)

2

Shalvenay

23:10

hey there @Green @Mithrandir24601 @sphennings

Transcript for