AOTC: Slave I's missile yield

For polite and reasoned discussion of Star Wars and/or Star Trek.
Jedi Master Spock
Site Admin
Posts: 2166
Joined: Mon Aug 14, 2006 8:26 pm
Contact:

Ballparking the yield of the Slave I's missile from thermal

Post by Jedi Master Spock » Fri Aug 24, 2007 4:57 pm

We may reasonably expect half the energy of a nuclear-scale event to be released in hard thermal radiation from the warhead in a small fraction of a second. In a vacuum, there is little to hinder this radiation, and it spreads out mostly evenly in a spherical shell, causing immediately noticable thermal effects.

High penetration gamma rays, which make up the majority of the thermal radiation from an object ranging in the millions of degrees. Other forms of thermal radiation do not penetrate as well. Assume that the thermal radiation is absorbed evenly by the first meter of rock, that conduction is negligible over this time scale outside of this meter layer, and that thermal radiation primarily causes heating.

Note that in general, the heat capacity of rock is on the order of 5 GJ/m^3*K, and that rock heated by 1000 kelvins will glow visibly. Accordingly, given that the surface area of a sphere is 4*pi*r^2, and that a kiloton is 4.2 TJ, we have 0.5*4*pi*r^2*5e9/(4.2e12) = 0.03*r^2 kilotons of yield, where r is the radius in meters at which thermal radiation causes rocks to glow red from heat.

Thus, if the radius at which rocks glow a dim red is 50 meters, the yield of the Slave I's torpedo may be expected to be ~75 kilotons. Although the assumptions are somewhat simplified - actual portion of hard thermal radiation and time of release may vary somewhat, along with penetration of heat into rock - this formula, given correct scaling, is at a minimum accurate to within an order of magnitude.

User avatar
Mr. Oragahn
Admiral
Posts: 6865
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:58 am
Location: Paradise Mountain

Post by Mr. Oragahn » Fri Nov 02, 2007 12:06 am

Even if we put the lack of blinding flash aside, there's still the fact that nearby asteroids aren't remotely threatened.

In the end, we could easily be in a case where the initial claimed yield is between 4 or 6 orders of magnitude higher than what's correct.

Which is funny, because that's quite the same ratio we can spot on figures which can be verified.

Post Reply