User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 2/20/2017 2:06:08 AM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It still doesn't pass the muster of cost/benefit analysis. You are talking about redirecting tons of material that requires an enormous amount of work to be performed/energy to be expended. If you are gonna go full on scifi ala moon is a harsh mistress which is the idea you are channeling I think von neumann probes are a far scarier thought. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
If we start mining in space the material wouldn't be collected and returned exclusively for RFG so I think that would make it more practical. A one shot deal to go out and harvest enough material for a strike or two would be stupid but the impression I got from the question was that we're talking about the future and I imagine that in the future we'll be harvesting resources from moons and asteroids. It still doesn't pass the muster of cost/benefit analysis. You are talking about redirecting tons of material that requires an enormous amount of work to be performed/energy to be expended. If you are gonna go full on scifi ala moon is a harsh mistress which is the idea you are channeling I think von neumann probes are a far scarier thought. It may not pass the muster of cost benefit analysis based on present day technology (which might be part of why we're not using it now) but the premise of the thread seems to be weapons in the future and I believe our continuing to explore space and the collection of resources in space is going to involve changing/improving technology. I think those technological changes will affect our ability to transport things in space and there may be a point where it's more practical to have space stations/satellites with chunks of metal machined from resources collected on moons and asteroids than to maintain a nuclear arsenal. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2017 2:12:23 AM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Bio |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2017 2:24:16 AM EDT
[#3]
Time machine
 Attached File |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2017 2:29:10 AM EDT
[#4]
I'd say it's already been invented and in use for a long time, responsible for many millions of deaths already:
the pen. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2017 2:45:40 AM EDT
[#5]
History eraser button.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2017 2:55:28 AM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Portable black hole generator. Set timer, push button, and get the fuck on the other side of the event horizon. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2017 4:00:08 AM EDT
[#7]
Explosive weapons are unnecessary with advanced technology. Genetically engineered bio-weapons will quickly kill & consume people while leaving valuable hard assets intact. And if hard assets need to be removed clouds of robotic nano termites will consume all man made objects and reduce them to harmless piles that will blow away in the wind. Those two weapons alone can reduce the earth back to a pristine state in 72 hours or less. Then the re-birth can begin.
Its how aliens will remove us from this planet. Better hope they never find us. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2017 4:12:30 AM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Explosive weapons are unnecessary with advanced technology. Genetically engineered bio-weapons will quickly kill & consume people while leaving valuable hard assets intact. And if hard assets need to be removed clouds of robotic nano termites will consume all man made objects and reduce them to harmless piles that will blow away in the wind. Those two weapons alone can reduce the earth back to a pristine state in 72 hours or less. Then the re-birth can begin. Its how aliens will remove us from this planet. Better hope they never find us. You say this so-matter-of-fact. What planet are you from, and when will your leader give you the order to activate? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2017 4:20:31 AM EDT
[#9]
PHOTON TORPEDO
Why is it a thing? A burst of light, like some Kodak flash bulb? Is that how it blows Klingons away from Uranus? Photon torpedoes, explain them. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2017 4:39:07 AM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What was so horrifyingly terrible about Castle Bravo? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Pffft. The Tsar Bomba was halved because they thought the full size model would well and truly fuck the world up. Hell, Castle Bravo was bad enough. The initial three-stage design was capable of yielding approximately 100 Mt, but it would have caused too much nuclear fallout and the plane delivering the bomb would not have enough time to escape the explosion. To limit fallout, the third stage and possibly the second stage had a lead tamper instead of a uranium-238 fusion tamper (which greatly amplifies the reaction by fissioning uranium atoms with fast neutrons from the fusion reaction). This eliminated fast fission by the fusion-stage neutrons, so that approximately 97% of the total yield resulted from thermonuclear fusion alone (as such, it was one of the "cleanest" nuclear bombs ever created, generating a very low amount of fallout relative to its yield).[17] There was a strong incentive for this modification since most of the fallout from a test of the bomb would likely have ended up on populated Soviet territory.[16][18] Far larger detonation than expected due to conversion of fuel that was in a state not expected to participate in the reaction. As I recall. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2017 4:45:09 AM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
With what science can do today, the possibilities are interesting. Combine the lethality of Ebola but with a longer incubation period, and the contagiousness of influenza. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Bio With what science can do today, the possibilities are interesting. Combine the lethality of Ebola but with a longer incubation period, and the contagiousness of influenza. CRISPR Cas9 makes that all possible. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2017 4:48:16 AM EDT
[#12]
I can't believe it's page 3 and nobody has posted weaponized autism yet.
A small scale test of its awesomeness was performed which resulted in the end of world for literally millions of people on November the 8th. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2017 4:52:56 AM EDT
[#13]
Antimatter, but the cost is still prohibitive. It would cost $25 billion to produce one gram of antimatter, which could produce a bomb yield of 43 kilotons. In contrast, one W88 thermonuclear warhead yields some 475 kilotons, and we have a bunch of them.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2017 4:56:48 AM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
CRISPR Cas9 makes that all possible. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Bio With what science can do today, the possibilities are interesting. Combine the lethality of Ebola but with a longer incubation period, and the contagiousness of influenza. CRISPR Cas9 makes that all possible. Damn, did some reading and that's spooky. You want zombies? Cause that's how you accidentally create zombies. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2017 5:07:01 AM EDT
[#15]
Social media.
Destruction doesn't necessarily require a big boom. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2017 5:45:57 AM EDT
[#16]
There already has been one created...........they are called Libtards.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2017 6:35:44 AM EDT
[#17]
Demographics. Over time, birth rates are the most potent weapon.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2017 6:41:33 AM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Oh, we're doing countervalue now. 
That wasn't even what I was questioning. His premise was that Tsar could have "fucked up the world" and Castle Bravo was "bad enough." Bad enough for what?  Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Pffft. The Tsar Bomba was halved because they thought the full size model would well and truly fuck the world up. Hell, Castle Bravo was bad enough. You don't think that a 15 MT detonation would destroy enough to satisfy the human lust for killing? https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/50575/boom-150223.JPG
That wasn't even what I was questioning. His premise was that Tsar could have "fucked up the world" and Castle Bravo was "bad enough." Bad enough for what? What do you know about the Bravo shot? Did you know it was a fuck up? The 15MT yield was well beyond the 5-8MT that was expected. High yield
The yield of 15 megatons was 3 times higher than the 5 Mt predicted by its designers.[2][17]:541 The cause of the higher yield was a theoretical error made by designers of the device at Los Alamos National Laboratory. They considered only the lithium-6 isotope in the lithium-deuteride secondary to be reactive; the lithium-7 isotope, accounting for 60% of the lithium content, was assumed to be inert.[17]:541 It was expected that the lithium-6 isotope would absorb a neutron from the fissioning plutonium and emit an alpha particle and tritium in the process, of which the latter would then fuse with the deuterium and increase the yield in a predicted manner. Lithium-6 indeed reacted in this manner.[citation needed] It was assumed that the lithium-7 would absorb one neutron, producing lithium-8, which decays (through beryllium-8) to a pair of alpha particles on a timescale of seconds, vastly longer than the timescale of nuclear detonation. However, when lithium-7 is bombarded with energetic neutrons, rather than simply absorbing a neutron, it captures the neutron and decays almost instantly into an alpha particle, a tritium nucleus, and another neutron. As a result, much more tritium was produced than expected, the extra tritium fusing with deuterium and producing an extra neutron. The extra neutron produced by fusion and the extra neutron released directly by lithium-7 decay produced a much larger neutron flux. The result was greatly increased fissioning of the uranium tamper and increased yield.[citation needed] This resultant extra fuel (both lithium-6 and lithium-7) contributed greatly to the fusion reactions and neutron production and in this manner greatly increased the device's explosive output. The test used lithium with a high percentage of lithium-7 only because lithium-6 was then scarce and expensive; the later Castle Union test used almost pure lithium-6. Had sufficient lithium-6 been available, the usability of the common lithium-7 might not have been discovered.[citation needed] The fallout from the weapon injured many people and made certain islands uninhabitable. Now I know that to make an omelette you have to break a few eggs, but this shot was made with less than complete understanding about how the weapon would function. My point is that mankind mastered being able to completely destroy the earth before I was even born. Finally, let's be perfectly clear. I have no hate for nuclear weapons. I was borne in the crucible of the perfection of their delivery. My father was an officer in the 394th Strategic Missle squadron at Vandenberg AFB. The MAD concept has done more for world peace than most people realize. Remember that "An armed society is a polite society." Once the Teller-Ulam device was made a viable weapon it was pretty much sit back and have a cup of coffee after that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2017 7:06:59 AM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
My point is that mankind mastered being able to completely destroy the earth before I was even born. for the love of god, @limaxray has debunked this silliness in pretty much every nuclear weapons thread since GD was posted in papyrus. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2017 7:16:01 AM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
for the love of god, @limaxray has debunked this silliness in pretty much every nuclear weapons thread since GD was posted in papyrus. Cite please. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2017 7:18:28 AM EDT
[#21]
It's already here. Muslim population bomb. They immigrate into your country, then using superior birth rate, populate their way into power. Look at Europe. It's been happening there for two decades. And in two generations it will be complete.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2017 7:45:19 AM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It's already here. Muslim population bomb. They immigrate into your country, then using superior birth rate, populate their way into power. Look at Europe. It's been happening there for two decades. And in two generations it will be complete. Sadly, truth |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2017 8:01:38 AM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryInsignificant compared to the powers of the force... |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2017 8:21:04 AM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Grey goo or swarms of trillions of self replicating microscopic nanobots that consume matter to build more bots. Imagine controlled blobs of nanobots that could be directed to consume anything in an area without any sort of fallout. You could even program them to only attack humans or certain buildings, leaving the surrounding area untouched. One of the Deus Ex games features a nano machine bomb that is used by terrorists to wipe out Chicago. Ah yes, the Nanite Detonator, from Invisible War. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2017 8:34:43 AM EDT
[#25]
I was reading some funny scifi and they were talking about unpaired quarks being more powerful than antimatter, frankly I find that colorful description to be a bit strange.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2017 8:39:09 AM EDT
[#26]
Perfecting weather manipulation would be my guess. Have an enemy somewhere, create a drought that lasts decades or enough floods to kill everyone.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2017 8:43:03 AM EDT
[#27]
Accuracy has somewhat made nukes less useful. When we develop a swarm of small missiles that each can target all the individuals on a battle field, or all the armor in theater, why would you even need a nuke?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2017 8:43:17 AM EDT
[#28]
In terms of destructive force, that is, the length of time to recover after employment, it has already been fielded. It is called a wife with a credit card.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2017 8:45:40 AM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Cite please. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
for the love of god, @limaxray has debunked this silliness in pretty much every nuclear weapons thread since GD was posted in papyrus. Cite please. Is that the one fact about nuclear winter is a myth? Aka, All the nukes in the world cannot put up as much dust, nevermind sulfur dioxide (a cooling gas) as the mount Pinetubo eruption did. That eruption only dropped world tempatures somewhere around half, to one degree for about six months. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2017 8:49:55 AM EDT
[#30]
Why do you think everybody wants to land probes on asteroids???
If you can on it you can guide it.... |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2017 9:07:24 AM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
In terms of destructive force, that is, the length of time to recover after employment, it has already been fielded. It is called a wife with a credit card. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2017 9:16:02 AM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryLaugh now but the US will need one once the mars colonies declare independence. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2017 9:17:29 AM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Rods From God / Kinetic Bombardment |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2017 9:20:50 AM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Photon torpedoes, how do they work?Seriously, how do they work?  Antimatter weapon https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weapons_in_Star_Trek#Lirpa |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2017 9:36:18 AM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I was reading some funny scifi and they were talking about unpaired quarks being more powerful than antimatter, frankly I find that colorful description to be a bit strange. Charming description, maybe just some spin on it. Don't know if to be up or down with it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2017 10:03:50 AM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Is that the one fact about nuclear winter is a myth? Aka, All the nukes in the world cannot put up as much dust, nevermind sulfur dioxide (a cooling gas) as the mount Pinetubo eruption did. That eruption only dropped world tempatures somewhere around half, to one degree for about six months. That was not my point |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2017 10:13:16 AM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Books are greater weapons than bombs. At least that's what my liberal friends tell me. 
 Clearly your liberal friends have never had to bludgeon someone to death with a book. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2017 10:25:18 AM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Bio FPNI |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2017 10:26:39 AM EDT
[#39]
Davros' Reality Bomb.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2017 10:29:45 AM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Not really what? Not a big bang? Not 9 km/sec? Not not so much glow? Your cut and pasts isn't helping me with what you mean by not really. You didn't even include a link. Regardless, dropping a piece of inert material and having it do more damage than if it were made of solid explosive sounds pretty destructive to me. Since it doesn't even exist yet AFAIK it's hard to say just how damaging it could be. I think it would be very hard to defend against and could be very effective. Maybe they can form projectiles from moon-rock using robot factories, send them to satellites, and drop that shit on target. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Rods From God / Kinetic Bombardment Read an interesting piece on the RFG / Star Wars programs from the early 90's. If I recall a telephone pole sized rod would have the kinetic energy to level a large city. Yeah, I've seen the telephone pole sized descriptions and the swarm of multiple crowbar sized ones. I gather they would be coming in at around 9km/second. Big bang...not so much glow. Not really; "In the case of the system mentioned in the 2003 Air Force report above, a 6.1 m × 0.3 m tungsten cylinder impacting at Mach 10 has a kinetic energy equivalent to approximately 11.5 tons of TNT (or 7.2 tons of dynamite). The mass of such a cylinder is itself greater than 9 tons, so the practical applications of such a system are limited to those situations where its other characteristics provide a clear and decisive advantage—a conventional bomb/warhead of similar weight to the tungsten rod, delivered by conventional means, provides similar destructive capability and is far more practical and cost effective." Not really what? Not a big bang? Not 9 km/sec? Not not so much glow? Your cut and pasts isn't helping me with what you mean by not really. You didn't even include a link. Regardless, dropping a piece of inert material and having it do more damage than if it were made of solid explosive sounds pretty destructive to me. Since it doesn't even exist yet AFAIK it's hard to say just how damaging it could be. I think it would be very hard to defend against and could be very effective. Maybe they can form projectiles from moon-rock using robot factories, send them to satellites, and drop that shit on target. He's saying that you don't get a really big bang out of it. You get marginally more energy released at the target than a conventionally delivered explosive bomb of the same mass, for the not insignificant cost of having to get it into orbit, maneuver it to the appropriate location, and then de-orbit it. Dropping it out of orbit is going to cost as much energy as putting it there in the first place. In just about any imaginable case, delivering the same amount of destruction via conventional means (or even a conventionally-armed ballistic missile) is much simpler, cheaper, and quicker. Mike |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2017 10:35:19 AM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yes. John Wick. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2017 10:35:49 AM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yes. John Wick. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2017 10:36:45 AM EDT
[#43]
Vegnagun
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2017 10:38:01 AM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Rods From God / Kinetic Bombardment This, something fired from space with the appropriate speed and mass would be devastating with the added benefit of no radiological fallout, unless of course you target something sufficiently radiological. A kinetic weapons platform on the moon would be a absolute game changer and would allow who ever controlled it to control the world since how would you stop a object coming into the earths atmosphere that is traveling at hypersonic speeds with a profile that of a car. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2017 10:58:13 AM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Jason Bourne. Mr. Wick has shown a propensity to make bad decisions. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Yes. John Wick. On the other hand, Bourne spent the majority of his screen time killing the members of the team that developed him, so who wants to be THAT team? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2017 11:03:56 AM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
PHOTON TORPEDO Why is it a thing? A burst of light, like some Kodak flash bulb? Is that how it blows Klingons away from Uranus? Photon torpedoes, explain them. they are just matter/anti matter in a launchable casing |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2017 11:07:19 AM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
He's saying that you don't get a really big bang out of it. You get marginally more energy released at the target than a conventionally delivered explosive bomb of the same mass, for the not insignificant cost of having to get it into orbit, maneuver it to the appropriate location, and then de-orbit it. Dropping it out of orbit is going to cost as much energy as putting it there in the first place. In just about any imaginable case, delivering the same amount of destruction via conventional means (or even a conventionally-armed ballistic missile) is much simpler, cheaper, and quicker. Mike Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Rods From God / Kinetic Bombardment Read an interesting piece on the RFG / Star Wars programs from the early 90's. If I recall a telephone pole sized rod would have the kinetic energy to level a large city. Yeah, I've seen the telephone pole sized descriptions and the swarm of multiple crowbar sized ones. I gather they would be coming in at around 9km/second. Big bang...not so much glow. Not really; "In the case of the system mentioned in the 2003 Air Force report above, a 6.1 m × 0.3 m tungsten cylinder impacting at Mach 10 has a kinetic energy equivalent to approximately 11.5 tons of TNT (or 7.2 tons of dynamite). The mass of such a cylinder is itself greater than 9 tons, so the practical applications of such a system are limited to those situations where its other characteristics provide a clear and decisive advantage—a conventional bomb/warhead of similar weight to the tungsten rod, delivered by conventional means, provides similar destructive capability and is far more practical and cost effective." Not really what? Not a big bang? Not 9 km/sec? Not not so much glow? Your cut and pasts isn't helping me with what you mean by not really. You didn't even include a link. Regardless, dropping a piece of inert material and having it do more damage than if it were made of solid explosive sounds pretty destructive to me. Since it doesn't even exist yet AFAIK it's hard to say just how damaging it could be. I think it would be very hard to defend against and could be very effective. Maybe they can form projectiles from moon-rock using robot factories, send them to satellites, and drop that shit on target. He's saying that you don't get a really big bang out of it. You get marginally more energy released at the target than a conventionally delivered explosive bomb of the same mass, for the not insignificant cost of having to get it into orbit, maneuver it to the appropriate location, and then de-orbit it. Dropping it out of orbit is going to cost as much energy as putting it there in the first place. In just about any imaginable case, delivering the same amount of destruction via conventional means (or even a conventionally-armed ballistic missile) is much simpler, cheaper, and quicker. Mike You might not have followed the other posts about this on page 2. He was responding to the person who said a telephone sized RFG could level a city but quoted me which is why I didn't understand what he was talking about I expect a RFG type weapon would involve materials mined in space from moons or asteroids (in the future...I think everyone agrees it's impractical now which is why it isn't being done. We're talking about possible future weapons) Getting a chunk of metal to do the same damage as if it were made entirely out of explosive is pretty awesome so I think the concept has merit |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2017 11:09:20 AM EDT
[#48]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2017 11:26:56 AM EDT
[#49]
Time Machine
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2017 11:28:48 AM EDT
[#50]
You have just described the sun crusher from the Star Wars expanded universe
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
