this post was submitted on 29 Oct 2023
208 points (95.2% liked)

Technology

72360 readers
3178 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

US to build new nuclear gravity bomb::Experts say this new higher-yield nuclear bomb appears intended to pave the way for retiring the older B83 megaton bomb.

all 45 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Colorcodedresistor@lemm.ee 62 points 2 years ago (1 children)

"The physics package contained within the B83 has been studied for use in asteroid impact avoidance strategies against any seriously threatening near earth asteroids. Six such warheads, configured for the maximum 1.2 megatonnes of TNT (5.0 PJ), would be deployed by maneuvering space vehicles to "knock" an asteroid off course, should it pose a risk to the Earth.[10]"

...If you have even half the comprehension to understand that amount of force. fuck...that's a lot of damage.

The crazy bit is that the energies involved in a meteorite large enough to cause serious problems striking earth are like an order of magnitude larger than that. No radiation, sure, but that doesn’t help you much when you’re getting broiled by a ball of plasma.

[–] danc4498@lemmy.world 35 points 2 years ago (4 children)

Maybe do a nuclear gravity power plant first? Provide the tax players cheap clean energy instead of more threats of war.

[–] atzanteol@sh.itjust.works 27 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Why would you drop a power plant?

Gravity bomb

[–] danc4498@lemmy.world 7 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

You wouldn't download a power plant

[–] kmartburrito@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago

Don't copy that floppy

[–] Hotdogman@lemmy.world 24 points 2 years ago (1 children)

But how are we going to protect the power plant without the bomb? /s

[–] danc4498@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago
[–] BaronVonBort@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Honestly… this is kind of how that might happen? Defense spending and research has always been the vanguard of technological development and then it’s waylaid to private sector development and R&D.

Once it’s proven effective they can then reverse engineer it to do something constructive.

Because the US can’t be bothered to find non blow-uppy projects until later.

[–] Strykker@programming.dev 4 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

A nuclear gravity bomb is a standard nuclear bomb that is dropped from a plane, instead of launched on a rocket.

This isn't some kind of new nuclear technology

[–] Kusimulkku@lemm.ee 1 points 2 years ago

nuclear gravity power plant

Lmao

[–] Drbreen@sh.itjust.works 24 points 2 years ago (3 children)

Just in time for the latest conflict in the Middle East.

[–] ours@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago

Yet as the article says: directly linked with the new arms race with Russia and China.

[–] Kusimulkku@lemm.ee 1 points 2 years ago

While glassing Gaza would streamline the conflict a bunch, I doubt these weapons are because of them

[–] altima_neo@lemmy.zip -1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

And sending some to Ukraine for aid

[–] Luisp@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 2 years ago

How about a third proxy war?

[–] Gazumi@lemmy.world 20 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Holy crap! We have been here before and it leads to the brink of extinction due to fecking ego's.

[–] RedWeasel@lemmy.world 7 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Yeah, but this time we can all talk about it in realtime with the rest of the world.

[–] KingThrillgore@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 years ago

Wouldn't be in realtime for very long

[–] Gazumi@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

I do agree, but it's confounded by the story that's told. We have sequentially followed the same arguments for the people that we are asked to fear right now. MAGA are a classic example of "live updates" and very poor thinking

[–] Kusimulkku@lemm.ee 2 points 2 years ago

Did we ever leave?

[–] 0x0@programming.dev 10 points 2 years ago

Of course, just what the world needs, more weapons.

[–] atzanteol@sh.itjust.works 10 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (5 children)

In a follow-up statement, a Pentagon spokesperson said that will include the B-21 Raider stealth bomber the Air Force now has in development with Northrop Grumman. But the U.S. now does not plan to deploy it on the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, the Pentagon said.

This feels so out of date to me. We have guided ballistic missiles, drones, etc. Why are we still thinking about dropping an unguided bomb like this from an aircraft with a human in it? It's >1 megaton ffs - close should be "good enough"?

[–] Joker@discuss.tchncs.de 16 points 2 years ago

Because they can glide a long way and are stealthier without propellant. It’s still a standoff weapon. The B21 is a stone cold killer. It can get in fairly close undetected and drop from high altitude in still relatively safe airspace. The bombs are away without anyone ever knowing it was there. Then you’ve got a stealthy bomb gliding in silently. It probably shows up on radar like a raindrop.

[–] grabyourmotherskeys@lemmy.world 12 points 2 years ago (2 children)

What happens when someone takes control of the guidance? A bomb dropped from the sky is going to obey the laws of physics and that's it.

[–] vale@sh.itjust.works 7 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Laws of physics? What are you, a narc?

[–] Raxiel@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)
[–] RizzRustbolt@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago

I'm so glad someone made it into a movie.

[–] atzanteol@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

You dont just "take over" an inertial guidance system.

[–] grabyourmotherskeys@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

No, but the possibility exists.

[–] vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 years ago

In the same way the atoms that make up you and the atoms that make up a car wont hit eachother if you get hit. Unless there is some massive amount of fuckery theres no stopping a bomb once its dropped.

[–] thelastknowngod@lemm.ee 6 points 2 years ago

Dispersal of liability if something goes wrong?

It's not the ground-based targeting system so that company can't be sued. It's not the onboard nav so that company can't be sued. It's not the software so that company can't be sued. It's not communication latency or interference so we can't blame it on a bad command decision to push forward without more reliable data points.

The only thing that will ultimately result in a nuclear weapon being dropped is if the guy with human eyes is looking at the target, makes a judgement call, and pushes the button.

All that being said, we should not be building more nukes regardless. This is dumb.

[–] bonus_crab@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago

You can probably fit more bomb in the same package if you odnt have to worry about propellant

[–] RedWeasel@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

I would lean to reliability and speed. Ballistic missiles don’t get a lot of testing while the bombers are flown regularly and takeoff/land pretty much anywhere .

[–] imgprojts@lemmy.ml 8 points 2 years ago

No gravity waves generated or anything. But if they dropped one on you, you won't complain about the name. Why not call it the Barbie warhead and Ken missile? Again, no one would come back " excuse me but I did not get any Barbies or Kens when this thing was dropped on my house yesterday and I would like to complain to management"

[–] Grass@sh.itjust.works 6 points 2 years ago

Will they come up with a better name than aeromorph?