From: mikkelhaaheim@gmail.com   
      
   Le dimanche 30 octobre 2016 18:37:33 UTC+1, Thomas Koenig a écrit :   
   > Mikkel Haaheim  schrieb:   
   > > Le dimanche 30 octobre 2016 08:45:06 UTC+1, Thomas Koenig a écrit :   
   > >> 0something0  schrieb:   
   > >>    
   > >> > And with enough Delta-V, we could direct a large-enough asteroid   
   > >> > into say... Eastern US, Far East, Western Russia, or Western Europe.   
   > >>    
   > >> What for?  Nuclear weapons exist for any given level of destruction   
   > >> on Earth.  They can also be "fine-tuned" better than a single   
   > >> asteroid.   
   > >   
   > > Well, three reasons I can think of off the bat:   
   > > It would not require messing around with deadly radiogenic   
   > > material that could kill you if you don't handle it properly.   
   >    
   > Precautions are known and have been demonstrated to work.   
      
   Only when you know the dangers, and the necessary precautions to take.   
   Especially when trying to weaponise something.   
      
   >    
   > Also, don't underestimate the danger of handling stuff such   
   > as hydrazine or red fuming nitric acid.   
      
   Quite right. A good reason why a civilian space-faring population would   
   probably opt for much less volatile systems.   
      
   >    
   > > It does not require the mining and processing of such,   
   > > comparatively rare, material.   
   >    
   > It's available now.   
      
   Only on Earth... and not everywhere, especially in weaponised form.   
      
   >    
   > > It would only require rather simple propulsion physics knowledge,   
   > > as opposed to rather more complicated nuclear physics knowledge   
   > > required to build a working warhead.   
   >    
   > Fission bombs were built in the mid-1940s, thermonuclear bombs   
   > in the early 1950s, so the knowledge is available now.  We do not   
   > yet have the technology to redirect asteroids :-)   
      
   A small number of GOVERNMENTS have the knowledge to build nuclear warheads   
   (thanks to their scinetists and engineers). However, this PRACTICAL knowledge   
   is quite limited. Most countries do not even have the scientists and engineers   
   with the knowledge    
   required to build nuclear power plants (they barely have people trained to run   
   the plants they acquire from other countries), let alone try to weaponise them.   
   OTOH, the technology required to move asteroids DOES exist (depending, of   
   course, on the size of the asteroid in question. We CERTAINLY have the tech   
   KNOWLEDGE to do so. What we do NOT have is anything actually built to do so.   
      
   >    
   > An asteroid strike on Earth by somebody based on Earth would be   
   > extremely stupid.  I'd probably throw away a book with such a   
   > plot device (which, coincidentally, I did, with Stephen Baxter's   
   > "Proxima", although the main stupidity was elsewhere).   
      
   Quite correct, which is why I have been assuming a space-based population.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)