Has moving an asteroid swarm using a shock wave from a shaped nuclear blast ever been tested in a computer simulation ?

Has moving an asteroid using an attached rocket ever been tested in a computer simulation ?

Has moving an asteroid using an attached solar sail ever been tested in a computer simulation ?

Tau.Neutrino said:

Has moving an asteroid swarm using a shock wave from a shaped nuclear blast ever been tested in a computer simulation ?

How do you imagine that would work, Tau?

btm said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

Has moving an asteroid swarm using a shock wave from a shaped nuclear blast ever been tested in a computer simulation ?

How do you imagine that would work, Tau?

Computer software running on super computers. America has been doing this for years

Search for simulation nuclear bomb or computer sims of nuclear detonations or a similar search term

Here is one Blast Wave Effects Calculator

https://nuclearweaponsedproj.mit.edu/nuclear-weapon-effects-simulations-and-models/nuclear-weapons-blast-effects-calculator

Most of sims are detonated on a surface not in free space.

The variables would be:

The size and density of the asteroid swarm.

The size in kilotons of the nuclear blast.

The shape of the blast, you want most of the blast concentrated in the direction of the swarm.

The distance from Earth, the further away the less energy required.

maybe some other variables.

Dont dismiss the solar sail, some people might think no,

Consider an asteroid that’s moving in an elliptical orbit close to the sun.

Tau.Neutrino said:

The variables would be:

The size and density of the asteroid swarm.

The size in kilotons of the nuclear blast.

The shape of the blast, you want most of the blast concentrated in the direction of the swarm.

The distance from Earth, the further away the less energy required.

maybe some other variables.

Asteroids don’t swarm. The common picture for most people about the asteroid belt between Mars and Jupiter is large rocks only a few hundred metres or so, like in a fair few sci-fi movies. The reality is that said rocks are more likely to be tens of thousands of kilometres apart, often much further.

Tau.Neutrino said:

Dont dismiss the solar sail, some people might think no,

Consider an asteroid that’s moving in an elliptical orbit close to the sun.

Yep, and a decent sized laser on the ground here, preferably in orbit, to give it a bit of extra push.

Saw an article the other day about this and the real danger is less dense and porous asteroids that will absorb impacts of objects that see to move them or if we go the movie scenario split into many pieces in a nuclear strike but remain a danger in the same general orbit.

Witty Rejoinder said:

Saw an article the other day about this and the real danger is less dense and porous asteroids that will absorb impacts of objects that see to move them or if we go the movie scenario split into many pieces in a nuclear strike but remain a danger in the same general orbit.

see = seek

Spiny Norman said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

The variables would be:

The size and density of the asteroid swarm.

The size in kilotons of the nuclear blast.

The shape of the blast, you want most of the blast concentrated in the direction of the swarm.

The distance from Earth, the further away the less energy required.

maybe some other variables.

Asteroids don’t swarm. The common picture for most people about the asteroid belt between Mars and Jupiter is large rocks only a few hundred metres or so, like in a fair few sci-fi movies. The reality is that said rocks are more likely to be tens of thousands of kilometres apart, often much further.

Depends, yes some are scattered over large areas while some are more concentrated.

Search for asteroid swarm

Witty Rejoinder said:

Saw an article the other day about this and the real danger is less dense and porous asteroids that will absorb impacts of objects that see to move them or if we go the movie scenario split into many pieces in a nuclear strike but remain a danger in the same general orbit.

I’m much rather have a large number of tiny pieces hitting the atmosphere than one big piece.

Spiny Norman said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

Saw an article the other day about this and the real danger is less dense and porous asteroids that will absorb impacts of objects that see to move them or if we go the movie scenario split into many pieces in a nuclear strike but remain a danger in the same general orbit.

I’m much rather have a large number of tiny pieces hitting the atmosphere than one big piece.

Certainly but the best scenario is an asteroid that we can deflect in the first place.

Spiny Norman said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

Saw an article the other day about this and the real danger is less dense and porous asteroids that will absorb impacts of objects that see to move them or if we go the movie scenario split into many pieces in a nuclear strike but remain a danger in the same general orbit.

I’m much rather have a large number of tiny pieces hitting the atmosphere than one big piece.

True, lucky for us most asteroids are on their own.

Witty Rejoinder said:

Spiny Norman said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

Saw an article the other day about this and the real danger is less dense and porous asteroids that will absorb impacts of objects that see to move them or if we go the movie scenario split into many pieces in a nuclear strike but remain a danger in the same general orbit.

I’m much rather have a large number of tiny pieces hitting the atmosphere than one big piece.

Certainly but the best scenario is an asteroid that we can deflect in the first place.

Of course, but don’t really have any spacecraft with the performance to do that.
(Unless we talk about the old Project Orion ….)

Spiny Norman said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

Spiny Norman said:

I’m much rather have a large number of tiny pieces hitting the atmosphere than one big piece.

Certainly but the best scenario is an asteroid that we can deflect in the first place.

Of course, but don’t really have any spacecraft with the performance to do that.
(Unless we talk about the old Project Orion ….)

Maybe for very large asteroids a nuclear thermal rocket engine or 2 might do the job.

lol

SCIENCE said:

lol

Thankfully there are not many swarms.

Less asteroid swarms the better as far as I’m concerned.

surely the solution to a swarm of asteroids is a swarm of tow drones

Scientists offer a new explanation for a mystery surrounding Jupiter’s two massive asteroid swarms

Scientists Warn Giant Asteroid Is Actually Swarm, Nearly Impossible to Destroy

> Has moving an asteroid swarm using a shock wave from a shaped nuclear blast ever been tested in a computer simulation ?

No, wouldn’t work. As Spiny Norman said, asteroids don’t swarm.

On the other hand, I would be very surprised if moving a single asteroid with a nuclear blast hasn’t been simulated. The risk there is that if the asteroid is a rubble pile then it gets blasted to smithereens, which is sometimes a good thing and sometimes a bad thing.

> Has moving an asteroid using an attached rocket ever been tested in a computer simulation ?

Yes.

> Has moving an asteroid using an attached solar sail ever been tested in a computer simulation ?

Yes.

The main problem with those last two is asteroid spin.

Looking up Google scholar. Sometimes these links will only give you abstracts. If that’s the case, search the same title on ArXiv.

Numerical simulations of hypervelocity‐impact experiments for asteroid‐deflection

Limits on the use of nuclear explosives for asteroid deflection

Experimental analysis of laser ablated plumes for asteroid deflection and exploitation

Dynamics and control of gravity tractor spacecraft for asteroid deflection

Electric solar wind sail kinetic energy impactor for asteroid deflection missions

Optimization of tether-assisted asteroid deflection

simulation of nuclear deflection of Planet-Killer-Asteroids

multi-mirror system for asteroid deflection

multi-spacecraft swarms for the deflection of Apophis by solar sublimation