Would it be possible to completely destroy the sun, using current technology (or any feasible future technology)?

Bubblecar said:

Would it be possible to completely destroy the sun, using current technology (or any feasible future technology)?

Don’t think we have anything powerful enough unless perhaps we could re route another sun to rash into it?

Bubblecar said:

Would it be possible to completely destroy the sun, using current technology (or any feasible future technology)?

No.

sibeen said:

Bubblecar said:

Would it be possible to completely destroy the sun, using current technology (or any feasible future technology)?

No.

What would happen if you drove Saturn into the Sun?

Postpocelipse said:

What would happen if you drove Saturn into the Sun?

Postpocelipse said:

What would happen if you drove Saturn into the Sun?

Wouldn’t matter if you drove on the right or left side of the road, you’d still crash and burn.

sibeen said:

Bubblecar said:

Would it be possible to completely destroy the sun, using current technology (or any feasible future technology)?

No.

So what’s the worst damage we could do?

Bubblecar said:

sibeen said:

Bubblecar said:

Would it be possible to completely destroy the sun, using current technology (or any feasible future technology)?

No.

So what’s the worst damage we could do?

roughbarked said:

Postpocelipse said:

What would happen if you drove Saturn into the Sun?

Wouldn’t matter if you drove on the right or left side of the road, you’d still crash and burn.

I wasn’t assuming it would destroy the sun. Just wondering what would occur when Saturns mass is absorbed by the sun rapidly.

Bubblecar said:

Would it be possible to completely destroy the sun, using current technology (or any feasible future technology)?

You can destroy the sun by waiting.

dv said:

Bubblecar said:

Would it be possible to completely destroy the sun, using current technology (or any feasible future technology)?

You can destroy the sun by waiting.

Don’t think I’ve got enough time for that.

dv said:

Bubblecar said:

Would it be possible to completely destroy the sun, using current technology (or any feasible future technology)?

You can destroy the sun by waiting.

the term ‘destroy’ implies that we would be somehow the architects of the plan… I’m not sure simply waiting it out qualifies…

Postpocelipse said:

What would happen if you drove Saturn into the Sun?

nothing much

wookiemeister said:

Postpocelipse said:

What would happen if you drove Saturn into the Sun?

nothing much

might throw planetary orbits out and unleash meteors

Postpocelipse said:

roughbarked said:

Postpocelipse said:

What would happen if you drove Saturn into the Sun?

Wouldn’t matter if you drove on the right or left side of the road, you’d still crash and burn.

I wasn’t assuming it would destroy the sun. Just wondering what would occur when Saturns mass is absorbed by the sun rapidly.

no doubt it would affect the orbital mechanics of the solar system pretty significantly, not to mention it would also have a big impact on the output of solar energy

Bubblecar said:

Would it be possible to completely destroy the sun, using current technology (or any feasible future technology)?

Easy. Simply form a new UN Committee to fight the effects of ‘sunshine pollution’ & introduce a ‘shortwave radiation’ trading market.

Reading about Groombridge 34 Ab and wondering why I have never heard of it and it turns out it is just another name for Gliese 15Ab

dv said:

Reading about Groombridge 34 Ab and wondering why I have never heard of it and it turns out it is just another name for Gliese 15Ab

Yep.

Peak Warming Man said:

dv said:

Reading about Groombridge 34 Ab and wondering why I have never heard of it and it turns out it is just another name for Gliese 15Ab

Yep.

Those astronomers must think we’re monkeys trying to trick us like that.

But I want to see a sci-fi film in which the US president says: “I’m afraid there are no other options open to us. We are going to have to destroy the Sun.”

• But I want to see a sci-fi film in which the US president says: “I’m afraid there are no other options open to us. We are going to have to destroy the Sun.”

I approve…

furious said:

• But I want to see a sci-fi film in which the US president says: “I’m afraid there are no other options open to us. We are going to have to destroy the Sun.”

I approve…

I can’t see that picture, though I would like too…

diddly-squat said:

dv said:

Bubblecar said:

Would it be possible to completely destroy the sun, using current technology (or any feasible future technology)?

You can destroy the sun by waiting.

the term ‘destroy’ implies that we would be somehow the architects of the plan… I’m not sure simply waiting it out qualifies…

Seems a pessimistic view but very well.

I don’t believe there is any method for creating black holes or for changing the nuclear physics of a star that could be termed “feasible future technology”, rather than science fiction.

So I would think the only means at our disposal that doesn’t involve magical physics would be to hit it with another star. Depending on what you choose this would either make it go supernova or accelerate its path towards being a white dwarf.

This would not involve any new physics: just really massive technological means. We could conceive of a long series of passes using nuclear rocketry that could, over very long periods, manipulate large planets in such a way that, again using many passes, drag a star from its current vector into one where it collides with the sun.

The raw KE that would be required to “kill” the sun using, say, Barnard’s star would be (according to my BOTECs) something like 1e39 J. The methodology I have described would be monumentally inefficient, losses at each stage. So perhaps the total energy would be something in the very rough vicinity of 1e41 J.

To put this in perspective, this is about equal to the total amount of energy used by humanity per year, times 1e20. That is, an amount of energy that at current rates we would use in about 100 billion billion years.

That’s such a long time line that it would be pointless since the sun will destroy itself in a few billion years.

The sun itself has an energy output of around 3.5e26 W. If we were to harness all its energy towards the goal of steering Barnard’s star into it, then we’d be looking at more like 10 million years. However, getting to the point where we could do that would also take a very long time. Being in a position to mine that amount of material needed to capture a sizeable chunk of the sun’s power would require millennia of patient accumulation.

Suppose we could sustainably increase our power use steadily, go off earth and colonise a ten thousand nearby stars and turn all of the volatiles and solids of the planets towards our ends. This ain’t happening soon but we could imagine it happening over a period of thousands of years.

It would be basically physically possible for us to, within thousands of years, to be in a position to destroy the sun within thousands of years, without requiring any unexpected leaps in physics.

Bubblecar said:

But I want to see a sci-fi film in which the US president says: “I’m afraid there are no other options open to us. We are going to have to destroy the Sun.”

Making a sci-fi film in which this occurs is well within the realms of present technology.

• Making a sci-fi film in which this occurs is well within the realms of present technology.

It actually sounds like something Kirk would say…

Actually it is not much sillier than the plot of The Core.

the only time in recorded history I can think of when a star was detonated was to shift the andromeda galaxy so it didn’t collide with the Milky Way

the plan was to drop a X bomb into the heart of a star of the andromeda system to knock the galaxy off the collision course with the Milky Way

normally X bombs are used for knocking out black holes that have become problematic

• the only time in recorded history I can think of when a star was detonated was to shift the andromeda galaxy so it didn’t collide with the Milky Way

Well, if you put it like that, iron kills stars too…

it is suspected that at some other time some other intelligence has been at work using X bombs given the wealth of evidence but for whatever reason they have disappeared

wookiemeister said:

… I can think …

This is the bit you got wrong.

furious said:

• the only time in recorded history I can think of when a star was detonated was to shift the andromeda galaxy so it didn’t collide with the Milky Way

Well, if you put it like that, iron kills stars too…

in this case it was discovers X matter reacts violently with ordinary matter especially where high mass distorts time , X matter corrects the time distortion caused by the high mass and a violent explosion ensues as time is converted directly into energy

X matter itself is produced in a special facility in a void to reduce the chance of damage to nearby life or the universal balancing mechanism ( a slide rule was made for technicians to calculate this quickly when determining what and how to do it)

we tend to keep an eye on key stars in the Milky Way to discourage civilisations from andromeda from blowing up our stars instead of their stars

diddly-squat said:

Postpocelipse said:

roughbarked said:

Wouldn’t matter if you drove on the right or left side of the road, you’d still crash and burn.

I wasn’t assuming it would destroy the sun. Just wondering what would occur when Saturns mass is absorbed by the sun rapidly.

no doubt it would affect the orbital mechanics of the solar system pretty significantly, not to mention it would also have a big impact on the output of solar energy

Saturn into the Sun. Sun OK, Life on Earth might have problems.

Bubblecar said:

Would it be possible to completely destroy the sun, using current technology (or any feasible future technology)?

Yes. Drop a black hole on it.

It wouldn’t have to be a very big black hole. Anything bigger than the diameter of an atom will do.

Another, not quite destroy but significant enough to sterilize Earth and greatly shorten the Sun’s lifespan. Proxima centauri is heading this way at quite a decent speed. Deflect its path towards the Sun a bit.

mollwollfumble said:

Bubblecar said:

Would it be possible to completely destroy the sun, using current technology (or any feasible future technology)?

Yes. Drop a black hole on it.

It wouldn’t have to be a very big black hole. Anything bigger than the diameter of an atom will do.

Another, not quite destroy but significant enough to sterilize Earth and greatly shorten the Sun’s lifespan. Proxima centauri is heading this way at quite a decent speed. Deflect its path towards the Sun a bit.

Err, Molly, did you miss the bit about using current technology (or any feasible future technology)?

Bubblecar said:

Would it be possible to completely destroy the sun, using current technology (or any feasible future technology)?

A third and fourth method. A Bussard ramscoop https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bussard_ramjet as all will know gains propulsion by scooping up nearby hydrogen to be fed into a fusion engine.

So make a Bussard ramscoop out of refractory materials such as carbon and tungsten aerogel and crash it head-on into the Sun. The more of the Sun it gobbles up the faster it will go.

Or perhaps even better is to place the Bussard ramscoop on a tight orbit around the Sun and accelerate it to relativistic speeds. As it gets faster so it gets heavier and starts dragging hydrogen by gravity off the surface of the Sun. The hydrogen powers the ramscoop continually faster and faster making it heavier and heavier until it is heavier than the Sun. Then drive the Bussard ramscoop off to a distant star, or even to another galaxy. Take the remains of the Sun along in orbit about the barycentre in order to use it later as fuel for course corrections and slowing down at the destination.

The hydrogen powers the ramscoop continually faster and faster making it heavier and heavier until it is heavier than the Sun.

really? I thought relativistic mass had fallen by the wayside.

http://sciencequestionswithsurprisinganswers.org/2013/06/18/can-you-go-fast-enough-to-get-enough-mass-to-become-a-black-hole/

sibeen said:

mollwollfumble said:

Bubblecar said:

Would it be possible to completely destroy the sun, using current technology (or any feasible future technology)?

Yes. Drop a black hole on it.

It wouldn’t have to be a very big black hole. Anything bigger than the diameter of an atom will do.

Another, not quite destroy but significant enough to sterilize Earth and greatly shorten the Sun’s lifespan. Proxima centauri is heading this way at quite a decent speed. Deflect its path towards the Sun a bit.

Err, Molly, did you miss the bit about using current technology (or any feasible future technology)?

typical scientists

everyone knows the X bomb can do this

ChrispenEvan said:

The hydrogen powers the ramscoop continually faster and faster making it heavier and heavier until it is heavier than the Sun.

really? I thought relativistic mass had fallen by the wayside.

Speaking of, what is the outside limit for the relative speed a particle could obtain from a slingshot approach to the sun and comparatively the same scenario for the Milky Way’s CMBH.

Postpocelipse said:

ChrispenEvan said:

The hydrogen powers the ramscoop continually faster and faster making it heavier and heavier until it is heavier than the Sun.

really? I thought relativistic mass had fallen by the wayside.

Speaking of, what is the outside limit for the relative speed a particle could obtain from a slingshot approach to the sun and comparatively the same scenario for the Milky Way’s CMBH?

If the Oort cloud marks the boundary of the sun’s gravitational exertion what region of the Milky Way would mark the same boundary for M85?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravity_assist#Limits_to_slingshot_use

the Oort cloud merely delineates the extent of the stellar nebular. gravity goes on forever.

ChrispenEvan said:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravity_assist#Limits_to_slingshot_use

the Oort cloud merely delineates the extent of the stellar nebular. gravity goes on forever.

It is a boundary beyond which the Sun’s gravity’s domination diminishes.

gravity diminishes as a square of the distance so there is no point where it starts to diminish.

and the next star is 4 light years away and the OC goes out to about 1 LY, iirc, so not much to “oppose” our sun’s influence.

ChrispenEvan said:

gravity diminishes as a square of the distance so there is no point where it starts to diminish.

Really? I’m trying to figure out the bounds of relativistic mass and gravetic accelaration. It’s an exercise in understanding the characteristics of length contraction.

ChrispenEvan said:

and the next star is 4 light years away and the OC goes out to about 1 LY, iirc, so not much to “oppose” our sun’s influence.

That isn’t the point of my question.

Postpocelipse said:

ChrispenEvan said:

gravity diminishes as a square of the distance so there is no point where it starts to diminish.

Really? I’m trying to figure out the bounds of relativistic mass and gravetic accelaration. It’s an exercise in understanding the characteristics of length contraction.

Did you mean to say “really?”

Really?

Postpocelipse said:

ChrispenEvan said:

and the next star is 4 light years away and the OC goes out to about 1 LY, iirc, so not much to “oppose” our sun’s influence.

That isn’t the point of my question.

I’m trying to put together some scenarios that illustrate the nature of relativistic mass and describe length contraction in context.

buffy said:

Postpocelipse said:

ChrispenEvan said:

gravity diminishes as a square of the distance so there is no point where it starts to diminish.

Really? I’m trying to figure out the bounds of relativistic mass and gravetic accelaration. It’s an exercise in understanding the characteristics of length contraction.

Did you mean to say “really?”

Really?

See my last post. CE has misinterpreted my question somewhere.

Actually, CE just stated something that most of us have learnt along the way. I can’t see a misinterpretation anywhere.

Is this New Physics Made Up Along the Way?

nah, I answered the question.

relativistic mass isn’t a concept that is used anymore. no “mass” is gained. I posted an article that explained this.

Bubblecar said:

Would it be possible to completely destroy the sun, using current technology (or any feasible future technology)?

Another possibility is if you could induce hydrogen fusion in the Sun’s outer layers using a shock wave. The shock wave would propagate inwards towards the core. It wouldn’t destroy the Sun but it would shake it up a bit. As for generating the shock wave, laser and particle beam options immediately come to mind, but may not be powerful enough. A shaped charge seems an easier option, focus the energy from a large nuclear weapon on a small volume of the Sun’s photosphere.

Bubblecar said:

Would it be possible to completely destroy the sun, using current technology (or any feasible future technology)?

E.E.(Doc) Smith describes two technologies for destroying the Sun in his Lensman series. I didn’t mention these earlier because although mathematically possible l consider the physically impossible. But you may disagree.

The first starts with the development of a mathematics that breaks CPT symmetry. i.e. it allows ordinary matter to be changed into antimatter. Turn this into a practical device and toss the asteroid belt at it. Then drop the resulting ball of antimatter on the Sun.

The second relies on wormholes. In Doc Smith’s strategy the far end of the wormhole could be a different universe with different physical laws. Choose an alternative universe with planets made out of tachyons. Direct one such planet or large asteroid through the wormhole aimed at the Sun.

A slightly simpler version of Doc Smith’s second strategy, is to set the end of the wormhole in THIS universe but beyond the visible horizon. Everything beyond the visible horizon is fleeing from us faster that the speed of light. So direct one such planet or large asteroid through the wormhole aimed at the Sun.

Doc Smith does consider OHS issues of both of these. eg. As a planet is slowing down from supra-light to sunlight speeds its mass is temporarily infinite, so the whole universe could theoretically collapse on it in zero time. But physical operators ensure that this will not happen.