SDN TL firepower claims revisited

[Mike DiCenso]

There actually is a contrail from the rocket that launched the warhead into space as it ascended.
-Mike

[PunkMaister]

There actually is a contrail from the rocket that launched the warhead into space as it ascended.
-Mike

Off course the contrail as it dissipates in the lower atmosphere thanks...

[Mr. Oragahn]

Not necessarily, as this video of U.S. nuke testing at 300 kilometers shows.
-Mike

Ain't full vacuum yet.

The best thing we can do about nBSG is pretend that it mimics the impression it would leave on a retina.

[Mike DiCenso]

Exactly where in the universe are you going to get "full vacuum" conditions, Oragahn? Maybe slightly less relative to 189 miles (300 km), but not that much more.
-Mike

[Mr. Oragahn]

Exactly where in the universe are you going to get "full vacuum" conditions, Oragahn? Maybe slightly less relative to 189 miles (300 km), but not that much more.
-Mike

The ends of the multiple arms on the edge of the explosion clearly form mini mushroom-like appendages, swirling on both ends of the tip of each plume, revealing a form of friction.
What we see is more than likely the effect of the explosion on the atmosphere below. Besides, unless the video is slowed down as the explosion expands, there's no reason for the plumes to slow down.

[Mike DiCenso]

Exactly where in the universe are you going to get "full vacuum" conditions, Oragahn? Maybe slightly less relative to 189 miles (300 km), but not that much more.
-Mike

The ends of the multiple arms on the edge of the explosion clearly form mini mushroom-like appendages, swirling on both ends of the tip of each plume, revealing a form of friction.
What we see is more than likely the effect of the explosion on the atmosphere below. Besides, unless the video is slowed down as the explosion expands, there's no reason for the plumes to slow down.

Or it is the vaporization of the material making up the warhead and it's rocket stage.
-Mike

[Mr. Oragahn]

Exactly where in the universe are you going to get "full vacuum" conditions, Oragahn? Maybe slightly less relative to 189 miles (300 km), but not that much more.
-Mike

The ends of the multiple arms on the edge of the explosion clearly form mini mushroom-like appendages, swirling on both ends of the tip of each plume, revealing a form of friction.
What we see is more than likely the effect of the explosion on the atmosphere below. Besides, unless the video is slowed down as the explosion expands, there's no reason for the plumes to slow down.

Or it is the vaporization of the material making up the warhead and it's rocket stage.
-Mike

Sure, this happens, but I find it terribly hard to believe that the warhead itself would be massive enough so that even when entirely turned into gas, it would provide enough mass to ionize and glow as such. Plus it would not explain why the appendages twirl on both sides of their distant ends, giving an impression of a 2D mushroom cloud effect. This is ought to happen if there's a fluid medium to dampen kinetics. It also fails at explaining why the plumes slow down.
Where is it written it detonated at 300 km?

[Mike DiCenso]

That footage on YouTube is ripped from "Trinity and Beyond: The Atomic Bomb Movie" DVD. It shows a series of detonations in space or near-space among other kinds of nuclear weapons tests. The lowest altitude I know of in those tests was 30 miles km. You can get a decent summation here in the Wiki article. It looks like the Thor missles were used for the very high atitude tests above 30 km (the one in the footage apparently reached about 50-60 km near limit of where space begins). Unfortunately the Starfish Prime detonations at 400 km were not better photographed.
-Mike

[Mr. Oragahn]

So the footage we see is clearly at the top of the stratosphere or slightly above?
That fits with the lax atmospheric behaviour.

[Mr. Oragahn]

You know, eventually, you could pick the volume ratio Wong used on this page, use the only viable case of demonstrated firepower (the asteroid), go with this upper end (since he bases it on a 40 m wide asteroid), notice that he concludes the LTL has a firepower of 22.5 TW (while there is no clear proof that this shot didn't come from a MTL, and considering the width of the beam, it's more likely that it did), then understand that this is 5.38 KT/s, and then observe that a HTL would therefore be capable of more than 672 KT/s.

You'd ignore the obvious bullshit about photons rocking ships and other cum-smelling interpretations of the Base Delta Zero order.

[l33telboi]

Exactly where in the universe are you going to get "full vacuum" conditions, Oragahn? Maybe slightly less relative to 189 miles (300 km), but not that much more.
-Mike

What I said is pretty much fact, and you can see people on Atomic Rockets saying the exact same thing. A nuke in space would be visible for about a frame, but that's it. Depending on how the camera works, it might not be visible at all. It could be there one second and gone the next.

Why? Because a nuke releases its energy in something between a nanosecond and a microsecond. This is way lower then a single frame. And light (which is the pirmary form of energy you're going to get from a nuke in space) travels at the speed of light. So when a nuke goes, off, this is what happens:

Time 0: The nuke is detonated.
Time 1 microsecond: The nuke has released all its energy.
Time 2 microseconds: The energy from the nuke has already flown past you by the speed of light.
Time 0.04 milliseconds: The camera registers a single frame.

Naturally there's going to be some glowing plasma as well. But plasma tends to spread out and thin out rapidly. By the time a single frame registers, it should already be so diluted that it'd either look like a giant slightly visible gas cloud or then not visible at all.

And the Starfish Prime nuclear tests are apparently at the altitude where nuclear fireballs start to pancake (i.e. the fireball has reached a density roughly the same as the atmosphere itself). Earth's atmosphere reaches pretty far out. The thermosphere for instance ends at 690km, and the exosphere reaches up to about 10,000km. But in terms of distances in space... that's nothing.

[Roondar]

Exactly where in the universe are you going to get "full vacuum" conditions, Oragahn? Maybe slightly less relative to 189 miles (300 km), but not that much more.
-Mike

What I said is pretty much fact, and you can see people on Atomic Rockets saying the exact same thing. A nuke in space would be visible for about a frame, but that's it. Depending on how the camera works, it might not be visible at all. It could be there one second and gone the next.

Why? Because a nuke releases its energy in something between a nanosecond and a microsecond. This is way lower then a single frame. And light (which is the pirmary form of energy you're going to get from a nuke in space) travels at the speed of light. So when a nuke goes, off, this is what happens:

Time 0: The nuke is detonated.
Time 1 microsecond: The nuke has released all its energy.
Time 2 microseconds: The energy from the nuke has already flown past you by the speed of light.
Time 0.04 milliseconds: The camera registers a single frame.

Naturally there's going to be some glowing plasma as well. But plasma tends to spread out and thin out rapidly. By the time a single frame registers, it should already be so diluted that it'd either look like a giant slightly visible gas cloud or then not visible at all.

And the Starfish Prime nuclear tests are apparently at the altitude where nuclear fireballs start to pancake (i.e. the fireball has reached a density roughly the same as the atmosphere itself). Earth's atmosphere reaches pretty far out. The thermosphere for instance ends at 690km, and the exosphere reaches up to about 10,000km. But in terms of distances in space... that's nothing.

So in effect the usual Startrek Photon Torpedo's lack of visible flash when it hits a shield or even some forms of object might not even be so much of a problem then, dependend on the framerate?

In fact, if these and other Sci-Fi explosions are fast enough (i.e. nanosecond range) we'd expect to see very little 'flashes' in space then.. Or am I misinterpretting stuff here?

[Mr. Oragahn]

So in effect the usual Startrek Photon Torpedo's lack of visible flash when it hits a shield or even some forms of object might not even be so much of a problem then, dependend on the framerate?

In fact, if these and other Sci-Fi explosions are fast enough (i.e. nanosecond range) we'd expect to see very little 'flashes' in space then.. Or am I misinterpretting stuff here?

No Lord Roondar, you are essentially correct.
Now, would a shield capture highly energetic particles and fail to drain them out of energy as much as to bring them down below the heat levels where said particles glow?

[l33telboi]

So in effect the usual Startrek Photon Torpedo's lack of visible flash when it hits a shield or even some forms of object might not even be so much of a problem then, dependend on the framerate?

Photon torpedoes have never been much of a problem in that regard, they release their energy almost exclusively as either gamma rays or neutrions, meaning that you won't see much of anything. Of course some of those rays are going to interact with the vaporized casing... but overal photorps shouldn't look like nukes except inside an atmosphere.

In fact, if these and other Sci-Fi explosions are fast enough (i.e. nanosecond range) we'd expect to see very little 'flashes' in space then.. Or am I misinterpretting stuff here?

No, you're right. A single white frame should be seen.

And even that is debatable depending on how you chose to see the 'camera' which we see events from. Is it an actual camera and works as such? Is it an all-seeing eye that doesn't work on the same principles as the camera? Or is it an all-seeing eye seeing it transcribed to a camera with a low framerate? etc.

[Trinoya]

I've still not seen a turbo laser mach the firepower seen in TNG "Skin of Evil" which was a single torpedo being used to destroy an unshielded and disabled shuttlecraft... It's a rather prominent explosion on the planet surface... seemed like over kill for a shuttle if you ask me...