There have been multiple accounts created with the sole purpose of posting advertisement posts or replies containing unsolicited advertising.

Accounts which solely post advertisements, or persistently post them may be terminated.

AncientFutureNow ,

BE AFRAID!

Hey looksie here, they’re not using trans people a scapegoats for this exact moment.

tal ,
@tal@lemmy.today avatar

It is not to drop a weapon on Earth but to possibly use against satellites.

en.wikipedia.org/…/High-altitude_nuclear_explosio…

High-altitude nuclear explosions are the result of nuclear weapons testing within the upper layers of the Earth’s atmosphere and in outer space. Several such tests were performed at high altitudes by the United States and the Soviet Union between 1958 and 1962.

The strong electromagnetic pulse (EMP) that results has several components. In the first few tenths of nanoseconds, about a tenth of a percent of the weapon yield appears as powerful gamma rays with energies of one to three mega-electron volts (MeV, a unit of energy). The gamma rays penetrate the atmosphere and collide with air molecules, depositing their energy to produce huge quantities of positive ions and recoil electrons (also known as Compton electrons). These collisions create MeV-energy Compton electrons that then accelerate and spiral along the Earth’s magnetic field lines. The resulting transient electric fields and currents that arise generate electromagnetic emissions in the radio frequency range of 15 MHz to 250 MHz. This high-altitude EMP occurs between 30 and 50 kilometers (19 and 31 miles) above the Earth’s surface. The potential as an anti-satellite weapon became apparent in August 1958 during Hardtack Teak. The EMP observed at the Apia Observatory at Samoa was four times more powerful than any created by solar storms,[1] while in July 1962 the Starfish Prime test, damaged electronics in Honolulu and New Zealand (approximately 1,300 kilometres (810 mi) away), fused 300 street lights on Oahu (Hawaii), set off about 100 burglar alarms, and caused the failure of a microwave repeating station on Kauai, which cut off the sturdy telephone system from the other Hawaiian islands. The radius for an effective satellite kill for the various Compton radiation produced by such a nuclear weapon in space was determined to be roughly 80 kilometres (50 mi). Further testing to this end was carried out, and embodied in a Department of Defense program, Program 437.

There are problems with nuclear weapons carried over to testing and deployment scenarios, however. Because of the very large radius associated with nuclear events, it was nearly impossible to prevent indiscriminate damage to other satellites, including one’s own satellites. Starfish Prime produced an artificial radiation belt in space that soon destroyed three satellites (Ariel, TRAAC, and Transit 4B all failed after traversing the radiation belt, while Cosmos V, Injun I and Telstar 1 suffered minor degradation, due to some radiation damage to solar cells, etc.). The radiation dose rate was at least 0.6 Gy/day at four months after Starfish for a well-shielded satellite or crewed capsule in a polar circular earth orbit, which caused NASA concern with regard to its crewed space exploration programs.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outer_Space_Treaty

The Outer Space Treaty, formally the Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies, is a multilateral treaty that forms the basis of international space law. Negotiated and drafted under the auspices of the United Nations, it was opened for signature in the United States, the United Kingdom, and the Soviet Union on 27 January 1967, entering into force on 10 October 1967. As of August 2023, 114 countries are parties to the treaty—including all major spacefaring nations—and another 22 are signatories.[1][5][6]

Key provisions of the Outer Space Treaty include prohibiting nuclear weapons in space…

Rapidcreek OP ,

Cause Wikipedia says so? Really?

tal ,
@tal@lemmy.today avatar

What are you referring to?

Rapidcreek OP ,

You insinuate you know what it would be used for. Even more, you trust wiki and the Russians on what it would be used for. It’s like saying you have a gun, but will only shoot birds.

tal ,
@tal@lemmy.today avatar

You insinuate you know what it would be used for.

The phrase “It is not to drop a weapon on Earth but to possibly use against satellites” is not from Wikipedia. It is the subtitle of the article that you linked to; I’m quoting your material and pointing out that there are substantial side effects when using nuclear weapons against satellites.

Rapidcreek OP ,

Even if it is part of an article, I wouldn’t believe it. Putting nukes in space is not minor and they may be used for than one thing.

tal , (edited )
@tal@lemmy.today avatar

Even if it is part of an article, I wouldn’t believe it.

Okay, fine, you’re free to do that, but I don’t see why yelling at me is reasonable. You’re the one who provided the material that you’re complaining about. If you disagree with the article, it seems far more reasonable to provide a top-level comment responding to it saying “I don’t agree with the article here and think that the real intent might be to use a warhead directly against the ground”.

I’m pointing out that even if the intent is as an anti-satellite weapon, which is what your article is saying, it can cause serious collateral damage, not to mention that it is in violation of a treaty to which Russia is party.

EDIT: The only reason that only a relatively few satellites were damaged or destroyed in Starfish Prime was that there were very few satellites orbiting Earth back then. There are far more up there now, and they’d also be affected by a high-altitude nuclear explosion…that’s a lot of countries that stand to have a lot of their infrastructure destroyed.

CrazyFrog97 ,

Wow your ability to completely miscomprehend things is only equal to Philo’s. Interesting that similarity.

goferking0 ,

Similar anger responses as well

agent_flounder ,
@agent_flounder@lemmy.world avatar

Your comment tells us nothing useful, least of all your opinion, unfortunately.

Instead, could you offer your hypothesis and quote and cite some sources?

antidote101 , (edited )

The difficulty will be how to take it out, make it crash land into Putin specifically, have a friendlier person lined up or bribed up to take his place, AND make it look like an accident.

antidote101 ,

Dirty bomb Putin, sync it up to co-incide with the nuke crash landing… Make sure the blast radius is big enough to kill Putin… Have the person who takes over assure everyone it was a freak accident.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • [email protected]
  • random
  • lifeLocal
  • goranko
  • All magazines
    •