[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 1.09 MB, 3508x2480, earth_destruction_by_zevenstorms.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
[ERROR] No.3658969 [Reply] [Original]

how fast should I launch a small stone (0.1Kg) on the ground to blow up the planet?

>> No.3658974

fast

>> No.3658978

sped of light

>> No.3658995

>>3658978

this man is correct in that it would probably have to be about that

>> No.3659000

Can a physicsfag actually do a calculation here? Not OP but I'm genuinely pretty interested - faster than the speed of light? If not, how fast?

>> No.3659008 [DELETED] 

>>3659000
>"faster than the speed of light"
oh shit nigger what are you doing

>> No.3659011

>>3659008

No, I meant to ask if it were actually possible, as if the speed you got at the end was faster than the speed of light it wouldn't be.

Enjoy high school though you fucking cunt.

>> No.3659019

0.1Kg?
any speed you want
you will just puch a hole through it (at best)

>> No.3659024

the escape velocity is the same regardless of mass

>> No.3659035

>>3659019

/thread

>> No.3659052

>>3659019
wouldn't the wave created by the impact vaporize the earth?

>> No.3659058

Answering these kind of questions is why I come to sci,
You'd need roughly 3.7E32 joules to blow up a planet so...
3.7E32 joules= 0.5*0.1*v^2
v = 8.60233x10^16
=2.86943×10^8 c
So a bit more than the speed of light, but I think I was a little over the top with how much I wanted to blow the earth up

>> No.3659078
File: 45 KB, 419x440, 1313703435477.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
[ERROR]

>>3659058
>You'd need roughly 3.7E32 joules to blow up a planet
where did you get that shit?

>> No.3659085

It would punch a hole straight into the core then the core would leak onto the surface and kill us all

>> No.3659091

>>3659058
I am sure you did something wrong there by getting it >= c.

>> No.3659093
File: 114 KB, 1024x768, Star_Wars_Death_Star_38200545907PM743.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
[ERROR]

>>3659058
>>3659078

oh... hai

>> No.3659092

>>3659085
gravity will keep the mantle underground

>> No.3659110

>>3659093

The Death Star isn't a planet.. It's not even a moon. It has noway near the mass of a planet

>> No.3659128

>>3659110
That's no moon...

>> No.3659140

>>3659110
the 2nd death star was above half the size of our moon.

>> No.3659141

We should try it out, for science I mean.

>> No.3659181

>>3659058
Kinetic energy is only <span class="math">\frac{1}{2}mv^2[/spoiler] at velocities which are small compared to the speed of light. For something that energetic you should use the relativistic expression for the kinetic energy, <span class="math">E_k = (\gamma - 1)m c^2[/spoiler], where <span class="math">\gamma = \frac{1}{\sqrt{1-v^2/c^2}}[/spoiler]. This will always give you a v < c, no matter how large you make the kinetic energy.

>> No.3659195

>>3659110
that 3.7E32 joules bullshit was energy output of Death Star for fucks sake

>> No.3659196

>>3659058
see
>>3659181
You need lorentz transforms

>> No.3659203

>>3659140

Size doesn't equal mass..

>> No.3659200 [DELETED] 

>>3659091
Or maybe it's just that throwing a stone straight down at the speed of light wouldn't be enough to blow up the planet.

>> No.3659205
File: 166 KB, 200x200, Relativity.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
[ERROR]

You have to take relativity into account. Animooed gif related

>> No.3659206

>>3658969

Depends what "blowing up the planet" means.

.1 KG at around .5 C could do some ridiculous damage to the biosphere and probably kill everyone on the surface level.

It wouldn't do much to the actual planet though... It's a lot of mass to work through.