Will we invent a weapon that surpasses the destructiveness

>>34292872
No.

>>34292872
Weaponized Autism

We already have. Building said inventions, now that's the tricky part.

>>34292872
We already have. Bioweapons.

Arguably AI or nanotech could surpass nukes, but the money is in smart, precision weapons, not useless mass waste.

>>34292872
We invented one in 1775.

It's called the "United States Marine"

>>34292872
An antimatter bomb could theoretically yield more explosive force per gram of explosive.

Some sort of device capable of creating a temporary gravitational singularity could engulf entire planets but realistically that's not even close to possible with our current technology.

File: FaceApp_1492047679516.jpg (188KB, 914x914px) Image search: [Google]

188KB, 914x914px

>>34292926

>>34292872
Two nuclear bombs.

>>34292872
Yes. Somebody will learn of a way to make the sun go supernova. Be very afraid if they build a space station that can sustain a certain sized population forever, then suddenly, without warning, it leaves orbit and heads into deep space. No worries, mate. You'll have been dead millions of years when this happens.

>>34292938

>An antimatter bomb

That would still be a nuclear weapon.

A better question would be: Will we ever invent a more efficient nuclear weapon?

>>34292938
>>34292968
Look at that.

We're attracting all of the pseudo-scientists today.

>muh black hole device
>muh supernova

>>34292884
This, memetic warfare is the future

>>34292994
Fucking this, anyways, explosive yield wise antimatter offers the highest energy density, straight up E=mc^2, if we are looking at deaths per kilogram of substance some nerve agents get interesting

File: 1390778435449.jpg (167KB, 716x626px) Image search: [Google]

167KB, 716x626px

>>34292872

>>34292988
Until there is a threat that necessitates the mass use of them there is no practical reason to

>>34292994
>We're attracting all of the pseudo-scientists today.
Seems reasonable for a pseudo-guns image board.

>>34292988
We didn't, it's called a neutron bomb.

File: Alana.jpg (492KB, 1275x1650px) Image search: [Google]

492KB, 1275x1650px

1.) Inversely nuclear weapons.
2.) Antimatter.
3.) Zionists launched by space-time catapults.
4.) Biological warfare: parasites, bacteria/fungus mixtures, Chris-chan, etc.
5.) Mirrors meant solely for OP to look into.

All of the explodey weapons suggested here are nuclear weapons of different kinds and the rest involve either nuclear weapons in their design, or are powered by nuclear power.

That includes anti-matter (mentioned several times), supernovas and black holes.

The ultimate weapon and power source had been invented more than 70 years ago, but we have yet to utilize it's full potential, and probably won't for decades or centuries.

And i bet somebody is going to suggest antimatter again in a few minutes.

>>34292968
That would be really tough since the mass of the sun is way below the Chandrasekhar limit.

>>34292872
Antimatter weapons.

God rods

Orbital dropped nuclear weapons

Rail guns

Nuclear rail gun rounds

Electronic destruction/emp rail gun rounds
Short answer yes.

>>34292872
We have already. It's the famas

>>34293030
Space defense

>>34292872
Relativistic Kinetic Kill Vehicles

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relativistic_kill_vehicle

File: All Hope is Pope.gif (2MB, 350x262px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 350x262px

Will we spank a primate that surpasses the orgasmness of nuclear monkeys?

>>34293254

Guess what you need to propel them?

>>34292872
>we


i'm going to need you to get some type of STEM degree before you start with the, "we" talk.

>>34292872
We already have a weapon to surpass nuclear gear
The Glocknade

>>34293282
A gravity slingshot?

File: IMG_20160921_135919.jpg (3MB, 4208x2368px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4208x2368px

OK OK OK OK OK
GUYS,
what if we bulid a gun strong enough to use use nucklear weapon as a propelant charge, it will shoot, lets say a kinetic round, how powerful will it be? will it be able to shhot through a mountain? how fast will the projectile be? any physists in here that can do the math?

>>34293017
This. Multiculturalism is far more devastating than any nuke.

Metal Gear

>>34292872
>what are jews

>>34293316
What you're talking about is similar to nuclear rocketry and isn't possible unless we can make a material that is strong enough to resist a nuclear explosion reliably.

Which we haven't yet.

>>34293316
One of these wheels is not like the others

File: 39661-Hey-You.jpg (68KB, 384x342px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 384x342px

We already have. Just accidently, or deliberately.

Global warming is going to kill more sheeple than all the world wars combined. It is already fucking up the mideast, and now causing water shortages in the south.

Even if we somehow turn it around by 2020, it will still continue to fuck us over till 2050.

>>34293336
i think that the gun option is more feasible, as you can bulid the gun as heavy as you want, and the projectile tough enough, if you imply we should detonate the bomb with in a ittle distance from the missle, the explosion will not achive its maximum efect,

anyway the question is if we had this magic material

File: IMG_20160921_135335.jpg (3MB, 4208x2368px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4208x2368px

>>34293316
>>34293375
artillery self bump

>>34293375
>the gun option is more feasible
Nah, go read about project Orion, at least that was somewhat feasible (if completely bonkers).

Even with unobtainium i'm not sure nuclear artillery has any tactical value. A rail gun is more reliable and gets you more firepower for less power.

Yeah quantum shit and practical knowledge of singularities

At that point humanity ascends to literal godhood but I believe its not possible that quantum bullshit is downright suspicious

As someone earlier in the thread mentioned, the only realistic weapon that we could create right now that has the potential to surpass the power of the nuclear bomb is a virus.

Biological warfare.

The only problem with that is the fact that bio-weapons are a lot harder to control than a simple bomb.

>>34293316
Russians almost made something like that, for destroying spaceships and shit.

Would a big ass asteroid count? I mean if you find a massive asteroid in space, push it just a little bit in the right direction (using jet propulsion from space craft on its surface) and send it barreling towards Earth, that would technically be the more destructive than a nuke since it can very well kill a majority of life on Earth.

File: 6a00d8341bf7f753ef01b8d1e68b6b970c.jpg (313KB, 2197x1463px) Image search: [Google]

313KB, 2197x1463px

>>34293446
forgot the pic...

>>34293358
Sahara Pump Theory
Green Sahara
Learn them /pol/tard

>>34292872
Biotech if it counts could be most destructive.

And within our current tech someone could build a space probe with a ion propulsion system. Low accel but high Isp Select a earth crossing object and modify it's orbit a bit. There are lists of PHAs. Slow and resource intensive but you could make the surface of earth uninhabitable by more than bacteria.

>>34293316
Sectional momentum of a round increases proportionally to the velocity of the round while the energy required to achieve a higher velocity increases to the square of velocity, so diminishing returns hit you hard. Projectile design dictates penetration more than velocity does here.

File: IMG_20160921_135433.jpg (3MB, 4208x2368px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4208x2368px

>>34293394
with my highschool physics:
tsar bomba yields 57 megaton TNT
equals to 2.38*10^17 jouls
use that to propel a 1 tonne projectile you get 21839780 m/s
assuming you get 100% efficiancy
acording to wikipedia railguns do about 3000 m/s

>>34293316

Even if your shell survives the initial blast, if it's in the Earth's atmosphere its going to go very short distance before turning into a rapidly diffusing ball of plasma. Or it's going to be down-rated enough that you probably don't need nuclear blast to propel it. Either way, not building a mountain killer this way.

In space however, it's not unreasonable to use nuclear weapons to get things moving quite fast, which could be a method of launching a mountain-sized rock at Earth.

Problem is your accuracy is probably limited to one minute of continent.

>>34293476
>assuming you get 100% efficiancy
This is where you fail.

You also forgot the most important factor of any weapon system: logistics.
Even forgetting the nightmare of handling nuclear warheads, the energy and time you need to dedicate to produce them far outweighs equivalent electricity production.

>>34292872
"refugees"
Convince the population to accept a whole bunch of them. Let them breed for awhile.
Soon no more of the original people remain.

>>34292872
Relativistic Weaponry


The sobering truth is that relativistic civilizations are a potential nightmare to anyone living within range of them. The problem is that objects traveling at an appreciable fraction of light speed are never where you see them when you see them (i.e., light-speed lag). Relativistic rockets, if their owners turn out to be less than benevolent, are both totally unstoppable and totally destructive. A starship weighing in at 1,500 tons (approximately the weight of a fully fueled space shuttle sitting on the launchpad) impacting an earthlike planet at "only" 30 percent of lightspeed will release 1.5 million megatons of energy -- an explosive force equivalent to 150 times today's global nuclear arsenal... (ed note: this means the freaking thing has about nine hundred mega-Ricks of damage!)

The most humbling feature of the relativistic bomb is that even if you happen to see it coming, its exact motion and position can never be determined; and given a technology even a hundred orders of magnitude above our own, you cannot hope to intercept one of these weapons. It often happens, in these discussions, that an expression from the old west arises: "God made some men bigger and stronger than others, but Mr. Colt made all men equal." Variations on Mr. Colt's weapon are still popular today, even in a society that possesses hydrogen bombs. Similarly, no matter how advanced civilizations grow, the relativistic bomb is not likely to go away...

>>34293476
You and your fucking metric units.
53,620,000,000,000,000 lb-ft of torque baby!!
53 QUADRILLION

>>34293494
>the energy and time you need to dedicate to produce them far outweighs equivalent electricity production

ok but there is no known way to contain and relese electricity in such a fast burst like an explotion, even a regular chemical one, this is why we dont have railgun rifles.
look man, the railgun is 1000 times more realistic obvioly in almost any way, but the potential of a nucklear powered gun can achive greater moon shattering speeds

>>34292872
>Will we invent a weapon that surpasses the destructiveness of nuclear weapons?

we already have several times.

File: 51FDQlLeBkL.jpg (61KB, 306x500px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 306x500px

>>34293489
did you read this book?

During ww2 a nuke or large conventional dirty bomb was dropped with incendiaries. Two cities were destroyed.

No one used anthrax. Not the brits when they were cornered. Not the Nazis.

And we have better stuff now. Things that can kill any carbon based lifeform and remain dormant in the soil for thousands of years leaving the earth and seas dead and lifeless

>>34293431
sause?

bioweapons aren't 'destructive' you mongs.

Drop all the anthrax you want. If i have a bunker, i'll be perfectly safe.

>>34293631
Can't find it, but someone on here was talking about about a month ago.

Someone in Russia thought it up. Build a large hole in the ground and line it with a shitload of concrete. Fill it with water, put nuclear bomb in middle of water. Attatch metal cap to top. Bomb explodes, instantly boils water, launches cap at approx 10% speed of light.

Probably bullshit, but still kinda cool to think about.

>>34293714
oh man, if only...

>>34292872

Yeah, the contraceptive pill.

File: RTX2X43D-1024x683.jpg (60KB, 1024x683px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 1024x683px

>>34292872
the glorious motherland are working on it, western capitalist dog.

File: how_to_get_a_tan.webm (3MB, 640x360px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 640x360px

not really, since all weapons are based on chemical reactions. nuclear weapons use the splitting and fusing of atoms themselves, so you cannot create something more powerful. it will always be thousands of times more powerful than any conventional chemical reaction.

if you mean more destructive to humans however, sure that's possible. think of a virus/disease which could wipe out billions.

File: __original_drawn_by_erikku_kata235__sample-89cdb49d6823a649429cebecf0722130.jpg (134KB, 850x1027px) Image search: [Google]

134KB, 850x1027px

In the early days of nuclear weapon planning some madman created plans for a bomb big enough to destroy the entire continental united states something to the tune of an effective yield of 10,000mt.

Such a device would be stationary and the size of several large warehouses and would be detonated in the event of a soviet invasion of the continental US and used as a nuclear deterrent.

It wasn't seriously considered only because it would take up tremendous amounts of resources that could be used for smaller warheads, not because it didn't work. Spoopy.

>>34294184
Edward Teller was the madman.

http://blog.nuclearsecrecy.com/2012/09/12/in-search-of-a-bigger-boom/

>>34292872

If you are talkingkinetic force, probably not anytime soon, you would need to create something far more volatile to do that.

On a social level, cyber warfare can be a formidable weapon

>use open source tools to find country wide vulnerabilities
>use leaked NSA hax to target industries
>mix and match script kiddie viruses and malware
>send it out like a flock of pigeons
>collapse entire economies

>>34292914

also has a point, the key point is what or who is targeted, certain industries are more important, thats why WANACRY was considered bad - becasue it got into health care systems

Modern society:
- if you build it targets will come to it
- it supports those that cannot support themselves
- by stealing from those that can support themselves
- thus leading to its own slow destruction
So basically the only weapon that can kill everyone.

File: main_900.jpg (207KB, 900x662px) Image search: [Google]

207KB, 900x662px

>>34293714
the russia story is most likely bs but the metal cap thing is based on a real event. it was a nuclear test by the US during an extended operation where they tested multiple yields in varying locations (i forgot the name of the operation).

basically they put a nuke deep underground and covered the mine/hole with a giant metal plate. when reviewing the high-speed camera recording they could only see the plate for 2 frames. apparently that means it must have traveled faster than 13km/s at the point of detonation (that's more than 50x the speed of a jet fighter) which would technically make it the fastest man-made moving object ever (on earth at least).

they never found the plate, the scientists figured it probably evaporated due to friction heat or it was simply blown straight into space. the whole story is bizarre but kind of funny because the scientist simply stated that "we never found it"

>>34292926
Assualting crayola factories everywhere

>>34294283
casaba howitzer.

>>34292872
E X T E R M I N A T U S

Does communism count as a weapon?

File: jakub-grygier-004-nicoll-dyson-beam-ab (1).jpg (586KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

586KB, 1920x1080px

>>34292872

Nicoll Dyson Beams sterilising planets from the other side of the galaxy. Much more simple to make than you think.

>>34293282

A Dyson Sphere or a partial one like >>34294919

File: gallery-1477068967-physicz.gif (2MB, 640x320px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 640x320px

Vacuum Metastability Event bomb. Destroy the universe and turns all the laws of psychics upside-down.

>>34293316
Nuclear Pulse Propulsion look it up. We almost built a nuclear explosion riding capsule to go to the moon instead of the Apollo rockets. Also theoretical .1 lightspeed velocity acheived with the design taking us to Alpha Centauri in under 44 years, according to British space agency research.

>>34292872
yeah it's called Western Society. Very effective, place practically destroys itself

File: BEGONE.jpg (34KB, 640x432px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 640x432px

Just accelerate a reasonably sized mass to a significant percentage of the speed of light.

Old freighter you have lying around? Fill it with some rocks and sand, smash it into a planet at .95c. The resultant energy increase will probably liquefy the crust on that side and might even make a new moon depending on the comparison, size, etc.

>>34294961
Gunbuster yessss

File: IMG_20160921_143932.jpg (3MB, 4208x2368px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4208x2368px

>>34294971
very interesting

File: IMG_20160921_143911.jpg (2MB, 4208x2368px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 4208x2368px

>>34295310
however, note that all those plans are to get people into deep space, we dont care about slow accelaration to avoid g forces, we care about speed of an inert projectile, all those plans are very wastefull with their energy in order to take fregile humans.

File: Ave Dildarius.gif (2MB, 300x224px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 300x224px

>>34292872
>>34292873
>No.
Ah, that is where you are wrong, my friend.

>>34292988
antimatter is absolutely not nuclear

>>34292968
millions of years from now the human race would've evolved a lot further than what we are right now.
>mankind evolves into the alien species we refer to as the the greys

>>34294761
>Crayola

Marines don't make that "gimme more pay for doing the same job" e-4 specialist Army pay.

We munch on them dollar store brand crayons.

>>34294919
is this seriously just a giant parabolic mirror?

Usury.

File: 1496364638259.jpg (66KB, 553x567px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 553x567px

>>34294276
>kinetic

You just re-route an asteroid to hit where you want. Get a big enough one and you can do the end of the dinosaurs 2.0. You give me enough money and I could make an entire continent vanish in a few minutes using a sufficiently-sized asteroid. Top that you stupid meat bag.

>>34292872
We already did
It's called anime

>>34293539
>ok but there is no known way to contain and relese electricity in such a fast burst like an explotion

It's called a capacitor, you dip. You'd know this if you'd gone to high school.

File: 1495945050480.jpg (42KB, 344x344px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 344x344px

We're at the point now where it is difficult to create a more dangerous weapon without putting yourself at risk, no matter where you are on the Earth. Until we expand civilization to take up more space (for instance, colonize the solar system), it is self-destructive for us to create more powerful weapons.

If anything, bioweapons will see more development in the near future, because they can at least be contained and quarantined.

>>34292872
Bioweapons already exist, so we've already surpassed the destructiveness of nukes.

File: Rocks are not free 2.jpg (251KB, 949x1180px) Image search: [Google]

251KB, 949x1180px

>>34298071
>You just re-route an asteroid to hit where you want.
Rocks aren't free.

>>34292872
Virtue signaling

>>34298145
>a capacitor
>stores more energy than a nuclear device

why arent we arming the b52s with capacitors then?

>>34292872
very likely, but i doubt we will create more destructive non nuclear weapons. things like better fusion fuels in mixed bombs are a possibility.

>>34293316
ok give me specs and i'l do the math

File: Plumbob_Whitney.jpg (198KB, 655x800px) Image search: [Google]

198KB, 655x800px

>>34293316
Look up thunder well, its basically what you are describing except a stationary device.

From wiki :
"During the Pascal-B nuclear test, a 900-kilogram (2,000 lb) steel plate cap (a piece of armor plate) was blasted off the top of a test shaft at a speed of more than 66 km/s (41 mi/s; 240,000 km/h; 150,000 mph)."

so yeah, it works pretty damn well

File: 1473624128003.jpg (121KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

121KB, 800x600px

>>34293316
Ok i did it.

W80 Nuclear Warhead.
200Kt max yield.
1kt = 4.184E+12 joules.
200kt = 8.368e+14 joules or 836800000000000 joules or 836 Terrajoules
Projectile will be 1kg
KE = 1/2MV^2
At 100% efficiency KE = 8.368e+14 joules
8.368e+14 joules = 1/2(1kg)*V^2
8.368e+14 joules = (0.5kg)V^2
8.368e+14 joules/0.5kg = V^2
sqrt(1.6736 × 10^15 joules) = sqrt(V^2)
V = 40,901,000 m/s
HOLY FUCKING SHIT BALLS
Say we use an Osmium rod, Osmium has a density of 22590 kg/m^3
You wanted to see if it would penetrate a mountain
So from this shit https://www.osti.gov/scitech/servlets/purl/562498/ we get a rock penetration formula of:
D = 0.00178 S N (W/A)^0.7 (V-100) *this is all in imperial units
0.00178 S (nose coefficient of 1) (2.2lbs/1in *just a random average area of the rod)^0.7 * (134189632.55fps - 100)
So we just need S, which is obtained by:
S = 12(fsubc'*Q)^-0.3
Q for fair rock qualit is 0.5
fsubc' is 43511.3 psi
S = 0.04997218982 (unit less)
Finally our depth is: 20728.2597768
21,000 feet of penetration
keep in mind i fucked up this equation by including inches instead of feet for area but im too lazy to change it and its 5:15 in the morning here, but this should be a good idea
also this equation was tested below 4000 m/s, so upper velocity limit is not known

So given that a lower thinner width yields better penetration, its safe to say, this projectile would fire from the top of mount everest to sea level

TL;DR
>21,000 feet of rock penetration so basically straight through the top of mount everest to sea level
muzzle velocity is 40,901,000 m/s

Jesus christ im going to selep now

>>34299559
Thank you, couldn't sleep until I could be sure it would be possible to kill a mintain with a nuclear projectile

>>34296725

Yep. Super-simple to make. Just lots of thin mirrors orbiting a star, reflecting and focusing the light to a single point in phased array laser. It would have a killing range of 1 million light-years. It doesn't even require that much material. Just a large asteroid or a moon would be enough.

>>34299609
>super simple
Yeah, no. You try corralling several miles of foil against everything from solar wind to micro asteroids to actual asteroids. The idea is simple, so is the idea of cold fusion

>>34293182
Antimatter is NOT nuclear.
>>34294161
Antimatter annihilation effectively converts twice the antimatter amount into pure energy. There's currently no better energy to material ratio we know of for exploding devices.

>>34299609
First off, the idea of focusing light to a target millions of light years away is incredibly completed, especially considering that it's pretty damn hard to aim at something it's moved since the million years the light took to reach you. For all you know the planet your hitting is already dead.

>>34299559
>using imperial for a nuclear gun
USA
S
A

>>34299662
Good, fuck that planet twice then.

>>34299642

It's not a singular foil. It's a swarm os satellites focusing a beam. Every satellite only gets a small amount.
>>34299662

Unless the planet has rockets or change their orbit, I don't think it would be that hard. It's pretty easy target anything in orbit of an object.

>>34299671
Shit changes over time, orbits aren't 100% consistent. Just in the time since the zodiac system was created, our view of the sky has shifted so your zodiac symbol is a month off compared to when it's was then.

>>34292872
Anitmatter, relativistic impactors, asteroidal bombardment

>>34294919
>>34299662

Note that this also has civilian uses. It can be used to propel ships at speeds close to C without exotic materials. It could also be used for preparing planets for planet-cracking minery.

>>34292872
antimatter

>>34299707
>>34299695
the best/worst part is that its apparently not theoretical anymore, antimatter has been proven to exist and now there are things looking into finding out how to use it

>>34299696
Assuming you could hit shit was it, it still seems impractical to shoot something that isn't within a few light years. Your not gonna wait thousands of years for it to hit your target, then wait thousands more before you can visually confirm.

>>34293316
i doubt that any particle could survive that without breaking up

>>34293316
I recognize that gun
It's the long tom at batei haosef in Jaffa.

>>34299714
Trouble is also producing enough antimatter to be used for anything. A documentary claimed it'd take the entire US GDP to make a tablespoon of the stuff

>>34299729
just a tablespoon can wipe out a fucking continent

>>34293476
>>34293390
>>34295310
>>34295365
Fun place, did you climb around the tanks?

>>34299731
One gram of anti matter equates to about 43 kilotons of TNT , though not sure about density, so who knows how much a tablespoon would be

File: 1242890_50921571 (1).jpg (4MB, 3548x2048px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 3548x2048px

A Kugelblitz. An artificial black hole made of concentrated light. The process take advantage of the E=MC^2, matter and energy are one and the same. We would need the energy of a partial dyson swarm, but in exchange you get an extremely compact source of energy.

An industrial class would have the size of a proton. It would weight about 2 empire state buildings. It would produce energy in the form of hawking radiation generating about 160 petawatts, far more than entire's Earth production. It's a 100% efficient matter-energy conversion, infinitely escalable.

>>34299755
although one fuck up and you could have billions dead

>>34292872
Von Newman replicators combined with ftl could very well be galaxy/universe ending

>>34292926
OOH RAH

File: 1458361224748.png (91KB, 1733x507px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 1733x507px

>>34293316
Russians beat ya to it.

>>34292872

Weather control will not only render nukes obsolete (lol try launching an ICBM through a thousand storms) but allow whatever nation has it to literally wipe another nation off the map by spamming tornadoes on their territory, or simply fucking them up by causing droughts in their farmlands.

>>34293714
>>34299794

>>34293301
cant tell if glock that fires grenades, or grenade that explodes into glocks...

>>34292872
in what regard?
sheer fuck-shit-up power? oh fuck no
kill count? bioweapons are a thing
societal destruction? we have the CIA for that.

>>34293194
god rods are hilariously weak compared to any kind of nuclear weapon. you would need a rod weighing about a half a million kilograms dropped from low earth orbit to equal the power of a minuteman III

File: the end.jpg (111KB, 736x552px) Image search: [Google]

111KB, 736x552px

>>34292872
>Step one: you must into space
>Step two: find a big ass rock
>Step three: fit big ass rock with a guidance system and some basic thrusters
>Step four: put big ass rock on collision course with spot on earf you don't like
>Step five: pic very related

>>34299840
A certain deceased Canadian engineer and Mossad would disagree entirely with that assesment.

>>34293476
fellow high school level physics nerd here.

If you did that kind of math with the pure calorimetry of gunpowder you get numbers way faster than any gun shoots.

Almost all of the energy from shooting anything goes into heat and sound

>>34294161
The next step is a quark bomb.

Nobody has any idea how to pull it off, but they are sure that the splitting of protons into quarks will be insanely more powerful than just splitting atoms.

>>34294191
I am both terrified a man of such ambition existed during the nuclear age and in awe of his genius. A real life mad scientist.

>>34299851
maybe. But this is a question of are they more destructive, and the answer is no. Not even close

>>34293316
>Nuclear Saltwater Rockets
aka God's Own Flamethrower.

>>34299805
It's a glock that fires grenades that explode into glocks that fire more grenades that explode into more glocks repeating ad infinitum.

>>34299869
The issue is that protons are stable (according to current knowledge) and at the lowest energy level of known quark combinations, so trying to gain energy from their reactions would be much like trying to gain energy from fission of lead. Less stable higher energy level baryons do not exist in nature outside extremely high energy reactions in stars and such. Neutrons are not stable but I have great doubt whether you could stimulate their decay

>>34294283
Lookup project thunderwell

Control-F Life Eater

Disappointing, gentlemen.

File: strangelets.jpg (44KB, 233x240px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 233x240px

>>34299952
>Less stable higher energy level baryons do not exist in nature.

There's one terrifying possibility: Strangelet.

File: image.gif (2MB, 835x435px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 835x435px

>“I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones.”

Gentlemen, may I present the stone!

A bigger nuke

File: IMG_20160921_132925.jpg (3MB, 4208x2368px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4208x2368px

>>34299735
yes, also climbed into this panzer through the open drivers hatch and met a russian guy who claimed he was a su100 commander in 1956

>>34299559
impressive work

>>34299794
link does not work

>>34301225
That's because that bitch Zelda is always getting kidnapped. Give the guy a break.

>>34293182
>but we have yet to utilize it's full potential

kinda, but not really.

when the Russians tested tsar bomba, they had a big realization about huge nukes.

after you get past a certain size, most of the blast dissipates into the sky/space, not effecting the target.

basically, it becomes more useful to use many small nukes than one giant one.

>>34292872
.45 existed before nukes OP

>>34299847
>Kikerael still exists
Americucks everyone.

>>34293526
>put iron asteroid in front of it.

>>34303689
>DA JOOOOOOOOOOOOOS
Hi /pol/. Plz go and stay go.

Anyways, you do realize being even on that side of the planet during an impact that powerful would kill you right? Would probably wipe out all life on Earth in short order and especially people who lived in what is now part of the crater rim.

>>34299654
>currently
E=MC^2 says we won't

Of course, there are more efficient ways to use said energy than an explosion

>>34293476
Im gonna assume you forgot to take relativity into account

Also i LOL at ur 100% efficiency.

>>34303771
Ever played billiards? Billiard ball 1 (KKV) impacts ball 2 (asteroid). Asteroid is now shattered into a million plus pieces, but about half of those shards are now flying in Earth's direction at comparable speed. Instead of getting hit by a relativistic slug, we are hit with relativistic buckshot.

>>34303869
An impact at even fractional c will NOT produce shrapnel, the Ke will turn into plasma and Xray radiation.

>>34292872
Probably, if we can still "survive" a nuclear weapons, then there is still improvements that could be made I guess.

>>34292872
relativistic kill vehicle

The Death Star

*Blocks your path*
*Resets your evolutionary system*

The next big thing could very well be dropping asteroids on things, its an extremely simple concept, the main ingredient is available in the billions in our solar system and they are extremely easy to weaponize

>Born too late to watch Japan fry
>Born too early to drop rocks on martian separatists

>>34303902
So we get plasma shotgunned with a side of lethal radiation.

File: Dropping rocks.jpg (23KB, 534x401px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 534x401px

>>34304764
Fucking forgot my image

>>34293034
...in a speculative super-superweapon thread...

In the end throwing rocks really really hard will pretty much always be a viable weapon.

File: IMG_20160921_132629.jpg (4MB, 4208x2368px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 4208x2368px

>>34303849
its 1 minute of highschool physics, got any better answers?

>>34294283

Operation Plumbbob, Pascal-B test

>>34292872
Already done.

USAF 1967: One aircraft loaded with tactical nuclear weapons can achieve the same effect as seven aircraft with conventional weapons.
USAF 1991: One use of a PGM has the same effect as nine unguided munitions.

>>34292938
An antimatter bomb would actually not be that devastating. Antimatter-matter annihilation releases most of its energy in neutrinos and gamma rays, neither of which heat air very much, and hot air is what generates blast waves. Neutrinos are almost entirely wasted; trillions pass through every cubic centimeter of space every second, and detectors a hundred meters across only detect a few an hour.

File: Nemesis_(first_edition).jpg (20KB, 220x324px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 220x324px

>>34292968

I'm halfway through pic related. Spoiler alert?

>>34293512

Shame the next book sucked dick.

>>34306604
Wiki says proton-antiproton reactions would eventually wind up releasing electrons, positrons, gamma rays, and neutrinos. Got any source for the percentage of energy you'd expect to be neutrinos? I'd expect all the others to still be destructive.

>>34293714
>>34293431
It was conceptual. No one ever wanted to actually build it (probably). But there's no reason to think that some scientists and engineers didn't get a thought experiment handed to them and come up with something rad.

>>34293316
The kinetic energy is going to be less than the energy released by the nuclear explosion. Guaranteed to be less powerful.

Building a nuke that has a yield of absurdly high levels is quite possible and could be achieved right now if most of the "advanced" nuclear powers (US, Russia, France, UK, China, Israel) wanted to.

However it'd be very expensive, of little effectiveness (you can already destroy whatever you want with nukes), and create a lot of tension on them

Yields reached their peak in the 60s and stayed that way for a reason

>>34303787
>Assuming that /pol/ thinks.

You know better anon!

>>34300280

Why would this be terrifying?

>>34309559
Yeilds reached their literaly peak in the 60's, the guy who made Tsar Bomba originally designed for exactly 100 megatons (before scaling it back out of sheer horror at the very idea) because that's essentially the largest yield you can get before it becomes too hard/inefficient to push our atmosphere anymore with the blast wave, because at that point it already ripped our atmosphere open and is losing blast pressure to the vacuum of space. We either need cobalt based neutron bombs, or relativistic weapons to step is from here, onichaan~

>>34292872
Well, vacuum decay would end the universe if false vacuum theory is correct. Any device that could induce that is pretty much a reality killer. Failing that, relativistic kill vehicles are pretty much the most dangerous thing possible based on out current understanding of physics.