Oh god, it's real! shadow@xxxxxx (01 May 2014 08:26 UTC)
Re: [TML] Oh god, it's real! Richard Aiken (01 May 2014 10:59 UTC)
Re: [TML] Oh god, it's real! Ian Wood (01 May 2014 11:12 UTC)
Re: [TML] Oh god, it's real! Phil Pugliese (01 May 2014 18:47 UTC)
Nukes... Kurt Feltenberger (01 May 2014 19:59 UTC)
Re: [TML] Nukes... Craig Berry (01 May 2014 20:09 UTC)
Re: [TML] Nukes... Kurt Feltenberger (02 May 2014 00:24 UTC)
Re: [TML] Nukes... Ian Whitchurch (02 May 2014 00:26 UTC)
Re: [TML] Nukes... Jeffrey Schwartz (01 May 2014 20:16 UTC)
Re: [TML] Nukes... Kurt Feltenberger (02 May 2014 00:25 UTC)
Re: [TML] Nukes... Tim (02 May 2014 05:07 UTC)
Re: [TML] Nukes... Kurt Feltenberger (02 May 2014 13:29 UTC)
Re: [TML] Nukes... Jeffrey Schwartz (02 May 2014 13:10 UTC)
Re: [TML] Nukes... Ian Whitchurch (01 May 2014 21:14 UTC)
Re: [TML] Nukes... Kurt Feltenberger (02 May 2014 00:26 UTC)
RE: [TML] Nukes... Anthony Jackson (01 May 2014 23:23 UTC)
Re: [TML] Nukes... Bruce Johnson (01 May 2014 23:30 UTC)
RE: [TML] Nukes... Anthony Jackson (01 May 2014 23:58 UTC)
Re: [TML] Nukes... Kurt Feltenberger (02 May 2014 00:30 UTC)
Re: [TML] Nukes... Richard Aiken (02 May 2014 04:27 UTC)
Re: [TML] Nukes... Kurt Feltenberger (02 May 2014 13:22 UTC)
Re: [TML] Nukes... Richard Aiken (04 May 2014 06:29 UTC)
Re: [TML] Nukes... Tim (02 May 2014 05:05 UTC)
Re: [TML] Nukes... Kurt Feltenberger (02 May 2014 13:27 UTC)
Re: [TML] Nukes... Jeffrey Schwartz (02 May 2014 14:11 UTC)
Re: [TML] Nukes... Greg Nokes (02 May 2014 18:33 UTC)
Re: [TML] Nukes... Grimmund (02 May 2014 13:26 UTC)
Re: [TML] Nukes... Kurt Feltenberger (02 May 2014 13:34 UTC)
Re: [TML]Nukes... Rob O'Connor (03 May 2014 09:47 UTC)
Re: [TML]Nukes... Phil Pugliese (03 May 2014 16:03 UTC)
Re: [TML]Nukes... Bruce Johnson (03 May 2014 20:23 UTC)
Re: [TML]Nukes... Ian Whitchurch (03 May 2014 22:00 UTC)
Re: [TML] Oh god, it's real! Mike Looney (02 May 2014 15:45 UTC)
Re: [TML] Oh god, it's real! Phil Pugliese (02 May 2014 19:03 UTC)
Re: [TML] Nukes... Tim (03 May 2014 00:34 UTC)
Re: [TML] Nukes... Kurt Feltenberger (03 May 2014 02:34 UTC)
Re: [TML] Nukes... Tim (03 May 2014 07:56 UTC)
Re: [TML] Nukes... shadow@xxxxxx (04 May 2014 04:41 UTC)
Re: [TML] Oh god, it's real! Ian Wood (09 Jun 2014 02:31 UTC)
Re: [TML] Oh god, it's real! Jerry Barrington (02 May 2014 01:09 UTC)
Re: [TML] Oh god, it's real! Grimmund (01 May 2014 12:47 UTC)

Re: [TML] Nukes... Tim 02 May 2014 05:05 UTC

On Thu, May 01, 2014 at 03:59:27PM -0400, Kurt Feltenberger wrote:
> I'm working on a piece of fiction and when I run the numbers on how
> many nuclear warheads the ship can carry, I come up with some rather
> large numbers. This leads me to posing this question to the group:
>
> With the resources of a solar system similar to ours, how many
> nuclear weapons would it be possible to construct?

It's more a question of economic feasibility and technology than
possibility.  Uranium forms a few parts per million of Earth's crust
and can be bred into fissile material.  At most a few kilograms per
weapon is needed, so that's something like 10^15 weapons just from the
uranium in the outer 0.1% of Earth alone with current technology.

That's without considering more expensive ways to produce fissile
material, or more advanced types of weapons that might not need a
fission trigger.

The absolute upper bound is not so much likely to be a number as a
total yield determined by the mass of starship.  That's on the order
of 10 megatons TNT per tonne.  Very much more advanced p-p fusion
could approach 140 MT/tonne, if the technology could be assumed to
exist.  In theory the only upper limit to the number of "weapons"
would then be how small you can make each one (given suitable
technology), though exceptionally small ones would produce a burst of
penetrating radiation rather than macroscopic explosion.

- Tim