Nuking the Sun, is it possible?

huh?

The thing would probably burn up before it got close. In addition, you'd have to provide the missile with an incredible amount of fuel, as the sun is 91 million miles away.

why would it need so much fuel? If you set it on the right trajectory, then it would just take a couple decadest to get there. You don't need fuel for it to come back obviously. But I would say it would burn up before it gets there.

the biggest nuke we have would have far less effect than a single tiny co2 bubble bursting in a soda can.

First off, the sun is a ball of burning gas, so you couldn't "blow it up". Second, even if it were a burning planet, and you could nuke it, you could only nuke it once, not every year, and we would all die of freezing. You are an idiot.

The sun is effectively a giant nuclear explosion already. It's over 300000 times larger than the earth. A solar flare can release 6x10^25 joules. The largest hydrogen bomb ever released around 8.4x10^16 joules, or about a billionth of the energy of the solar flare. Do you think a piddly little bomb would have any effect whatsoever?

Educated_Observer wrote:

Is it possible to Nuke the Sun with an atomic bomb? I think it is, and that it would look pretty cool. We could do it every fourth of July to create a man made fireworks show greater than any we have ever seen.

You do realize the Sun is a giant nuclear furnace hundreds (if not thousands) of times the size of the Earth itself?

Me thinks you are not as educated an observer as you claim to be.

this is the dumbest thread ever.

No, you can't nuke the sun because 1) it would never get close enough 2)everyone who said anything about fuel is an idiot as you only need fuel to send into space once there it doesnt need fuel to move(how do you think our satellites our moving to the outskirts of our solar system right now? on fuel? get a clue) 3)end of thread[quote]Sam wrote:

Sun wrote:

First off, the sun is a ball of burning gas, so you couldn't "blow it up". Second, even if it were a burning planet, and you could nuke it, you could only nuke it once, not every year, and we would all die of freezing. You are an idiot.

Actually, a little more fundamentally: the sun is itself a continuing thermonuclear "explosion." Secondly, the most massive manmade bombs would have much less effect on the sun than a butterfly's eyelash (yes, I know they don't actually *have* eyelashes) has on the skin of an elephant. Third, the sun is as big as about 1.3 million earths--you could throw the earth itself in there and it would barely make a ripple. A human nuke? Forget it.

Sorry, I may want to retract my previous statement. According to wikipedia, the power output of the Tsar Bomba was the equivalent of about 1.4% of the power output of the sun, which might actually be noticeable (though hardly spectacular).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsar_Bomba

I wouldn't want to blow up the sun, I'd just want to add to the fire. If you dump a can of gas into a campfire, it doesn't put it out now, does it? We would not all die of freezing.

With how large the sun is I imagine it has quite a bit of gravitational pull. We wouldn't need much fuel to get the missile there since the Sun would just pull it in once the nuke got close.

Educated_Observer wrote:

With how large the sun is I imagine it has quite a bit of gravitational pull. We wouldn't need much fuel to get the missile there since the Sun would just pull it in once the nuke got close.

So according to that logic, why hasn't the sun pulled in all the planets? But you don't need extra fuel to get to the sun, just the right trajectory, but the sun's gravity has very little to do with it.

There has to be some way to destroy the sun. How about with a giant water balloon filled with icewater?

Educated_Observer wrote:

I wouldn't want to blow up the sun, I'd just want to add to the fire. If you dump a can of gas into a campfire, it doesn't put it out now, does it? We would not all die of freezing.

With how large the sun is I imagine it has quite a bit of gravitational pull. We wouldn't need much fuel to get the missile there since the Sun would just pull it in once the nuke got close.

Gas cans are on a similar order of magnitude with fires, you stupid f***. A manmade nuclear weapon is less than negligible relative to the sun. It wouldn't 'add' to the fireworks. Hell, I'm not even sure what that would mean... The nuke wouldn't give the sun more fuel, and it wouldn't start any kind of reaction that isn't already there. This isn't even entertaining as a troll thread; you're just a moron.

How many people would it take to pee on the sun to put it out?

Bonzai! wrote:

Gas cans are on a similar order of magnitude with fires, you stupid f***.

You're the stupid f***.

E=mc^2

Mass of Sun = Really big number

c, Speed of light = Really big number

E = Really big number time Really big number squared. This is a really, really, big, big number.

The mass of one raisin converted to energy would provide enough energy to power New York for a day.

The sun's mass = an awful lot of raisins.

Blow Up Sun = Your dead

E=mc^2 can be thought of as mass is really frozen energy. If you "melted" the sun, i.e., converted the potential energy into kinetic activity, our portion of the universe would be "flooded" from the amount of energy released in the process. I'm not saying the sun is a frozen ball of energy. Just an analogy I picked up a while back. The analogy fails to convey that when energy is converted from potential to kinetic forms, it doesn't expand as ice does to water, but, in a much more volatile, "explosive" way.

Sam wrote:

Sorry, I may want to retract my previous statement. According to wikipedia, the power output of the Tsar Bomba was the equivalent of about 1.4% of the power output of the sun, which might actually be noticeable (though hardly spectacular).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsar_Bomba

No need to retract. If you read the previous sentence in the article, it says that the reaction lasted 39 billionths of a second. Definitely not noticeable if coming from the sun.