Thread: Destroying asteroids with ferromagnetic greenhousegas

Suppose you had the material, wouldn't that take care of them?

First it would heat it,
Then it would melt,
After that there wouldn't be more of that asteroid.

I believe on some asteroids, some magnets would need to be added too, to keep the gasses down.

First: I don't think the greenhouse effect could ever be strong enough to melt an asteroid. Especially as most are coming from the outside of the orbit of the Earth, i.e. they are farther away from the Sun then the Earth.

Second: Even if an asteroid were successfully melted, it would still be a large mass which I wouldn't like falling on my planet.

Originally Posted by Leszek Luchowski

First: I don't think the greenhouse effect could ever be strong enough to melt an asteroid. Especially as most are coming from the outside of the orbit of the Earth, i.e. they are farther away from the Sun then the Earth.

Second: Even if an asteroid were successfully melted, it would still be a large mass which I wouldn't like falling on my planet.

there exists greenhouse gases that are a million times stronger then carbondioxid, perhaps even a billion times, and you are telling me that it wouldn't be enough?

Are you sure about this Leszek Luchowski?

Great picture by the way.

Maybe you are confusing asteroids with comets. Comets are mainly made of ice, while asteroids are rocks. I do not see what greenhouse gas could produce temperatures strong enough to melt solid rock.

And even if you could, what then? Then you have a clump of molten rock, and the larger they are, the more stable they are because of their self gravity. You would have to evaporate them to get rid of them.

Originally Posted by Dishmaster

Maybe you are confusing asteroids with comets. Comets are mainly made of ice, while asteroids are rocks. I do not see what greenhouse gas could produce temperatures strong enough to melt solid rock.

And even if you could, what then? Then you have a clump of molten rock, and the larger they are, the more stable they are because of their self gravity. You would have to evaporate them to get rid of them.

Thank you dishmaster, I meant those rare seen blobs of matter that falls down on earth from outer space, I believe they contain some sorta ice -mostly.

Some asteroids do contain ice, yes.

The solution I prefer is to deeply inject the asteroid with locally harvested liquid water. In this way the hard ones are most manageable. You can push pieces apart much more efficiently than accelerating a single mass with rocket.

Originally Posted by Pong

Some asteroids do contain ice, yes.

The solution I prefer is to deeply inject the asteroid with locally harvested liquid water. In this way the hard ones are most manageable. You can push pieces apart much more efficiently than accelerating a single mass with rocket.

Thank you Pong. I believe that you meant the self sustaining steam beam idea? I liked that one too.

How about enhancing the beam by inducing a charge or magneticfield in the asteroid?

Actually I meant drilling, then injecting liquid water. Water expands as it freezes under pressure to hex-ice. You would have to manoeuvre up to the asteroid and grab on.

Then it is a lot easier to fling two halves apart (e.g. both missing Earth) than pushing one with a rocket.



"Self sustaining steam beam" sounds like a different nutty scheme... I was thinking that an icy object could be accelerated (very slowly!) with solar-heated steam. I imagined some tethered foil mirrors ...kinda sail-like, but their purpose would be to concentrate solar radiation for boiling water off one side of the asteroid/comet. You might need a long exhaust nozzle to protect the mirrors from frosting over, or perhaps another set of far-removed mirrors to defrost the primary mirrors.

Originally Posted by Pong

Actually I meant drilling, then injecting liquid water. Water expands as it freezes under pressure to hex-ice. You would have to manoeuvre up to the asteroid and grab on.

Then it is a lot easier to fling two halves apart (e.g. both missing Earth) than pushing one with a rocket.



"Self sustaining steam beam".

I meant that idea. But add to the meteorite a charge (+/-) so that the preasure becomes higher.


About the foil mirrors: Perhaps if we sprayed the meteorite with glue so that it sticks to all little things in space on the way here, or that the glue absorbed heat but didn't release it.

How about those ideas then?

Sticky glue. You'd have to haul that up into orbit. It is cheaper to exploit local energy (sunlight) and volatiles (water). Also there isn't much stuff for comets to plough through and accumulate... and the typical impact speeds defeat glue anyway. Stuff is either going to embed, or explode off the surface.

Adding heat retention coating. That is kinda aimless isn't it? I think we need to learn more about what's up with those comet jets. As surface ice erodes the dirty aggregates will be exposed - then how do they erode? The Chinese recorded many comets as having arcing tails, sometimes two three or four of them. This suggests a spinning comet... BTW it's also early instance of the swastika symbol, IIRC someone did a paper on the sudden worldwide prevalence of that symbol, attributing it to comet sighting.

Anyway a mirror scheme will have to dodge the plumes. Especially the forceful artificial plume they generate.

I think glue - if it worked at all - would be counterproductive. Correct me if I'm srong, but IMHO any stuff the comet/asteroid encounters on its way will slow it down more if it bounces off than if it sticks.

Originally Posted by Leszek Luchowski

I think glue - if it worked at all - would be counterproductive. Correct me if I'm srong, but IMHO any stuff the comet/asteroid encounters on its way will slow it down more if it bounces off than if it sticks.

I was just making examples of nutty schemes.

Now here's an interesting proposal. how about putting a supercomputer in the asteroid and some electromagnets on the side so one could do precision work with the small rocks that passes by? It's just an idea.