Jump to content

Hyperbole Power - North Korea Claims their H-Bomb is Capable of Wiping out the Whole US at Once


Dad

Recommended Posts

I wonder if NK managed to create and stabilize a micro blackhole of poverty, cause that, based on Hawkings radiation destabilization, would infact created enough radiation, in short enough of a time span, to wipe out a massive portion of the US. Kinda impressed TBH

Seeing that MBH's evaporate in less than time than electrons can flow we couldn't even react. Kinda scare when you realize North Korea has it



Fascinating Watch anyway though
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fund missile defense systems so we can just laugh at this nonsense even if it's true. Everyone knows science rush is the best win strat anyway

 

Does the US actually have any missile defense systems?  From what little I've found, that would be no, and it's a scary funking thought.  I mean, I play Fallout.  That sheet freaks me out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmmmm I thought they did, during the cold war at least, right?

 

As for NK, they are way too isolationist to do anything really. They dont even make alliances or trade with anyone. I mean they could in some way establish a puppet government in developing countries, but I guess making jives is just as entertaining I guess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmmmm I thought they did, during the cold war at least, right?

 

As for NK, they are way too isolationist to do anything really. They dont even make alliances or trade with anyone. I mean they could in some way establish a puppet government in developing countries, but I guess making jives is just as entertaining I guess.

1: incorrect

 

2: also incorrect, they "trade" nothing and get food in return

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Using the following equation:

 

E = [ρ (R/S)^5 ] / t^2

 

where rho is the air density at detonation

R is the radius of the explosion (and since it has to consume the entire US, the circle has to touch all 4 corners of the rectangle made by the length and width measurements)

S is a constant that is extraordinarily close to 1 under any normal circumstance

t is the time it takes for the actual "explosion" part of a nuclear weapon to complete

 

I was able to get a pretty rough estimation of how powerful a bomb that could instantly wipe out the US in one shot would be.  The radius of the circle formed by intersecting the 4 vertices of the rectangle formed by the extreme length and width measurements of the US is roughly 2504214.9032 meters.  For most nuclear arms, the actual explosion lasts under a millisecond, however this time increases as the size of the actual bomb increases.  For the sake of argument, I used 0.05 seconds in order to get a rough average.  Finally, the average density of air at sea level is roughly 1.3 kg/m^3 at relatively normal weather conditions.

 

Now lets plug all that noise into our equation shall we?  Doing so tells us that the energy that an explosion with enough power to instantly cover the entire US in a wave of destruction at detonation would put out a whopping 5.121 x 10^34 Joules of energy.

 

To put that in perspective, the total energy output of the Sun over the course of a single Earth Year is 1.2 x 10^34 J.  That means this bomb would put out over 4 times the energy that the funking Sun gives off over 365 Earth days

 

that's actually the funniest thing I've heard all day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A Micro Blackhole designed to erase the continental United States

 

M in Kg

 

ca4293a50ca0e96b2e08fae9cb7946da.png

 

[(Reduced Planck Constant)(Speed of Light in a Vacuum)^3]/[(8)(Pi)(Newton's Gravitational Constant) M]=(1.694×10^10)/M Joules

 

5.121 x 10^34 Joules=(1.694×10^10)/M Joules

 

M=3.3079 x 10^-25 Kg compared to the mass of a Hydrogen atom of 1.6735575 × 10^-27 Kg

 

Well hot damn, someone needs to give Kim a Nobel prize for his work in nano technology. 

 

But that's honestly terrifying if you look at it. Give or take a few hundred hydrogen atoms if utilized properly could erase the united states from existence..f***ing Asians  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A Micro Blackhole designed to erase the continental United States

 

M in Kg

 

ca4293a50ca0e96b2e08fae9cb7946da.png

 

[(Reduced Planck Constant)(Speed of Light in a Vacuum)^3]/[(8)(Pi)(Newton's Gravitational Constant) M]=(1.694×10^10)/M Joules

 

5.121 x 10^34 Joules=(1.694×10^10)/M Joules

 

M=3.3079 x 10^-25 Kg compared to the mass of a Hydrogen atom of 1.6735575 × 10^-27 Kg

 

Well hot damn, someone needs to give Kim a Nobel prize for his work in nano technology. 

 

But that's honestly terrifying if you look at it. Give or take a few hundred hydrogen atoms if utilized properly could erase the united states from existence..f***ing Asians  

 

That would actually wipe out more than the continental united states.  That energy is of a different type than what you are calculating, based on how black holes actually operate once they are actually created.  Additionally, that quantity I calculated is actually a VAST overestimate.  If it wasn't already clear in my explanation, that equation is specifically used to determine the radius of the nuclear explosion.  By definition the "explosion" starts once the fissure material becomes large enough for neutrons to start readily escaping and releasing thermal energy, until the point where the fissure material breaks apart due to the stress of heat expansion.  In layman's terms, that's literally the Flash before the Boom.  Not the shock wave, not the fireball, exclusively the flash, which takes place over less than a millisecond.  Therefore my calculation was just for a Flash that would cause the US to go poof.

 

It's impossible to determine exactly how far a destructive shock wave will travel without actual testing, but the explosion could probably be roughly half that size for the shock wave to still destroy the fast majority of the continental US.  But even then, it's still astronomically less powerful than any weapon conceived to modern science.

 

Also finally, that video about that first black hole is actually incorrect.  Assuming what we know about theoretical higgs boson interactions holds true, then once you approach sizes infinitesimally smaller than an atom, the black hole actually won't have enough mass to overcome higgs boson interaction, and thus will not be able to actually form.  Especially not with those relations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That would actually wipe out more than the continental united states.  That energy is of a different type than what you are calculating, based on how black holes actually operate once they are actually created.  Additionally, that quantity I calculated is actually a VAST overestimate.  If it wasn't already clear in my explanation, that equation is specifically used to determine the radius of the nuclear explosion.  By definition the "explosion" starts once the fissure material becomes large enough for neutrons to start readily escaping and releasing thermal energy, until the point where the fissure material breaks apart due to the stress of heat expansion.  In layman's terms, that's literally the Flash before the Boom.  Not the shock wave, not the fireball, exclusively the flash, which takes place over less than a millisecond.  Therefore my calculation was just for a Flash that would cause the US to go poof.

 

It's impossible to determine exactly how far a destructive shock wave will travel without actual testing, but the explosion could probably be roughly half that size for the shock wave to still destroy the fast majority of the continental US.  But even then, it's still astronomically less powerful than any weapon conceived to modern science.

 

Also finally, that video about that first black hole is actually incorrect.  Assuming what we know about theoretical higgs boson interactions holds true, then once you approach sizes infinitesimally smaller than an atom, the black hole actually won't have enough mass to overcome higgs boson interaction, and thus will not be able to actually form.  Especially not with those relations.

Sorry, I'm not a physic major or anything, didn't mean to mislead. Would that mean there's a lower limit in what mass can be compressed into a singularity?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry, I'm not a physic major or anything, didn't mean to mislead. Would that mean there's a lower limit in what mass can be compressed into a singularity?

Exactly. However that is entirely dependent on Higgs Boson not only being real, but also it being completely true to theory

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exactly. However that is entirely dependent on Higgs Boson not only being real, but also it being completely true to theory

 

Ummm... the Higgs Boson was pretty much discovered a few years ago in the Large Hadron Collider. They still need to do more tests to see if it fits the predicted models; but so far it's working like predicted. What rock were you under? This was kind of big news.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ummm... the Higgs Boson was pretty much discovered a few years ago in the Large Hadron Collider. They still need to do more tests to see if it fits the predicted models; but so far it's working like predicted. What rock were you under? This was kind of big news.

Seeing we're still finding out things about neutrinos, which we found about a long times ago, I think he means that not all the theories have been verified yet. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ummm... the Higgs Boson was pretty much discovered a few years ago in the Large Hadron Collider. They still need to do more tests to see if it fits the predicted models; but so far it's working like predicted. What rock were you under? This was kind of big news.

Actually, if you actually payed attention to science news, you would have known that the team didn't find conclusive evidence. They did find something interesting, but based off the preliminary data they got a little bit too hype and jumped the gun before the data was fully analyzed. To this day they have yet to replicate the results of that test to conclusively prove or deny its validity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...