Well the title pretty much explains it. How much energy is required to destroy a planet. it could range from 10^38 to 10^32. Where does it say that 2% of a zpm can destroy a planet. I posted once that 2% can destroy a planet but i don't know where i found it. does anyone know where it has said that.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
How much energy to destroy a planet
Collapse
X
-
i am going to say a lot of energy can destroy a planet. as for only 2% of a ZPM can do the job well i think more is required. if you wanted to know where you posted your 2% thing, go to your home page amd on the right hand side should be a link that says show all statistics. Then another one should appear saying show all posts. this will show the location and content of all your posts. i hope this helps.Some say that he has only one ear.
And that he solved the Da Vinci Code in 3 minutes.
All we know is he's called
sigpic
-
thanks but thats not what i ment. what i ment was has anybody ever seen in any source (cannon or otherwise) that it says that 2% can destroy a planet. Not where i said it. but thanks for trying. Do you have a number for destroying a planet. Stardestroyer.net says 10^38. starwars.wikia.com under superlaser (since it can blow up a planet) 2.4*10^32. anybody have a NUMBER and a reason why.
Comment
-
The only mention of 2% i can think of is the amount of its total energy the ZPM can output per second. Never seen anything about destroying the planet in SG, apart from a few one liners that a zpm could do it in some unspecified way. As for how much energy would be needed, it depends on the definition of "destroy". The 2.4*10^32 figure (found it here http://www.stardestroyer.net/Empire/...DeathStar.html), while seems science based, assumes that the planet is not only vaporized, but its mass was accelerated to overcome gravitational binding energy. A silly definition of destroy, if you ask me, as a few floating huge chunks of what used to be a planet is just as good a destruction and obviously requires far less energy.
Comment
-
anything above making sure nothing will ever be able to live there again is just overkill. well, that might be a bit overkill itself, but still.sigpic
Spoiler:Originally posted by IMDBRevealing mistakes: Throughout the series, the IDC is received by the SGC before the wormhole has been established.
Comment
-
Build a pair of really really really big magnets. They need to move very,very fast in a polar orbit. Wait till planet explodes. Here the only energy needed is after construction is the energy required to get them up to and keep them at speed in orbit. I bet it is far less than 10x32 The magnets will fsk up the internal magnetic field and with luck start it rotating in a different direction destabilizing the entire planet.
Comment
-
Originally posted by ZPMLOVER View PostWell the title pretty much explains it. How much energy is required to destroy a planet. it could range from 10^38 to 10^32. Where does it say that 2% of a zpm can destroy a planet. I posted once that 2% can destroy a planet but i don't know where i found it. does anyone know where it has said that.
Do you mean ravaging the surface, doing more than that like putting super craters here and there, or literally boiling oceans and kicking the atmosphere off, or pulverizing chunks of the planet or its entire volume?
Comment
-
If we're talking earth, a nuke in Yellowstone park would do the job. wouldn't even have to be a megaton-size. kiloton would do the trick.sigpic
Spoiler:Originally posted by IMDBRevealing mistakes: Throughout the series, the IDC is received by the SGC before the wormhole has been established.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Character View PostThe only mention of 2% i can think of is the amount of its total energy the ZPM can output per second. Never seen anything about destroying the planet in SG, apart from a few one liners that a zpm could do it in some unspecified way. As for how much energy would be needed, it depends on the definition of "destroy". The 2.4*10^32 figure (found it here http://www.stardestroyer.net/Empire/...DeathStar.html), while seems science based, assumes that the planet is not only vaporized, but its mass was accelerated to overcome gravitational binding energy. A silly definition of destroy, if you ask me, as a few floating huge chunks of what used to be a planet is just as good a destruction and obviously requires far less energy.
ZPMs can be set to overload, and the overload threshold can be defined, to range from anything capable of vapourizing a cityship to what will precisely pulverize a planet.
Trinity has shown that a power source charging for a or two dozen minutes gathered enough power to destroy nearly an entire planetary system. Such a device had the power output of 12 ZPMs when working at 50%, which was its last used setting.
Obviously 12 times less that energy is still far far more than enough to turn a planet into superheated ioninze mist several times.
Comment
-
Originally posted by tjoflojt View PostIf we're talking earth, a nuke in Yellowstone park would do the job. wouldn't even have to be a megaton-size. kiloton would do the trick.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Mister Oragahn View PostNot exactly. If you're thinking dividing your planet into large debris, you're just going to need the same energy to move all those massive debris away from each other.
Trinity has shown that a power source charging for a or two dozen minutes gathered enough power to destroy nearly an entire planetary system. Such a device had the power output of 12 ZPMs when working at 50%, which was its last used setting.
Originally posted by Mister Oragahn View PostNope. We've run multiple megaton nuclear tests all over the planet, we're still there.
Comment
-
What i mean by destruction of a planet is the planet and its gravitational field complety destroyed NOT melting the surface or turning the crust into moltan slag. Im talking about blowing the planet to chunks and then blowing up the gravitational field so that the planet can not rebuild itself. This has nothing to do with energy needed to destroy the Planet but I think the total energy contained in a zpm (after a few days and many ours of thought, I know I have no life) is 10^39. I don't have any scientific calculations or numbers to put behind it but, I based it on what a single zpm is capable of doing (to see what they are capable of go to stargate.wikia.com and go the Zero Point Module page and read the overview). It seems that this is got just the right amount. Its not to much but its not to little. My only other estiment of the total energy contained in a zpm is 5e^39. That sounds like it may be to much. I keep swinging my support between the two. I don't know which one to choose. Do any of you have any idea of whether its 5e^39 or 10^39.Last edited by ZPMLOVER; 18 April 2009, 07:04 PM.
Comment
Comment