Page 1 of 1
Are planet-destroying weapons practical?
Posted: Mon Oct 04, 2021 11:41 pm
by Revolutionary Moderate
A weapon that is capable of destroying entire planets might seem to be an amazing weapon, but there are some drawbacks to them. They would cost a lot of money to build and would probably need a lot of power to operate, and if they are as big enough, they would need to be defended. So, it makes more sense to just use some asteriods than use a planet-destroying weapon. Even if your enemy is hiding deep underground, there are several choices you could make. You could poison the atmosphere of the planet, and kill all life on the surface of the planet. You could try to change the climate of the planet by either making it so hot that its surface becomes lava, or you could freeze the planet. You could try to disassemble the planet using nanobots, or you could try something else. Maybe planet-destroying weapons might be like the nuclear weapons that we have, in which I mean, they would be used once or twice, and then never used again (hopefully). However, for civilizations that are colonized many planets, the destruction of a single planet would be annoying, but it would likely only be an annoyance. Even a weapon that can destroy multiple planets with a single shot suffers from the same problems. So, it seems like planet-destroying weapons are impractical, and also if you have to techonology to destroy planets, why destroy a planet when you could exploit it.
Re: Are planet-destroying weapons practical?
Posted: Tue Oct 05, 2021 12:39 am
by Jakob
A civilization powerful enough to destroy planets wouldn't care about wasting a few if it was politically expedient. But razing the crust off a planet is a lot easier than destroying it outright and should in most cases accomplish the same goals.
Re: Are planet-destroying weapons practical?
Posted: Tue Oct 05, 2021 8:37 am
by JackWhite1
Revolutionary Moderate wrote: ↑Mon Oct 04, 2021 11:41 pm
A weapon that is capable of destroying entire planets might seem to be an amazing weapon, but there are some drawbacks to them. They would cost a lot of money to build and would probably need a lot of power to operate, and if they are as big enough, they would need to be defended. So, it makes more sense to just use some asteriods than use a planet-destroying weapon. Even if your enemy is hiding deep underground, there are several choices you could make. You could poison the atmosphere of the planet, and kill all life on the surface of the planet. You could try to change the climate of the planet by either making it so hot that its surface becomes lava, or you could freeze the planet. You could try to disassemble the planet using nanobots, or you could try something else. Maybe planet-destroying weapons might be like the nuclear weapons that we have, in which I mean, they would be used once or twice, and then never used again (hopefully). However, for civilizations that are colonized many planets, the destruction of a single planet would be annoying, but it would likely only be an annoyance. Even a weapon that can destroy multiple planets with a single shot suffers from the same problems. So, it seems like planet-destroying weapons are impractical, and also if you have to techonology to destroy planets, why destroy a planet when you could exploit it.
Haha, let us see, maybe the richest country in the future will host Warhammer like eternal crusade on some not very valuable planets
Re: Are planet-destroying weapons practical?
Posted: Tue Oct 12, 2021 2:09 pm
by Lariliss
1. If we are talking about some other planets, it is not practical because it will change the planetary system balance.
2. If we are talking about some other planets again, it is a matter of time, when we get there we are able to destroy the planetary ecosystem without even aiming it. Any research is intrusive to the planet ecosystem.
3. Unfortunately, we are already mature on destructing our own planet's ecosystem.
I am on a constructive side
Re: Are planet-destroying weapons practical?
Posted: Wed Oct 13, 2021 6:44 pm
by Cyber_Rebel
Monumental waste of resources. If we're capable of this scale of destruction, then terraforming on an equally large scale would have to be the more logical option. The only scenario I could even see this being an option, (yes that includes weaponizing asteroids) is if there happened to be an incredibly dangerous artificial intelligence who happened to seize control of the planet and risks escaping it.
Re: Are planet-destroying weapons practical?
Posted: Fri Oct 22, 2021 8:19 am
by JackWhite1
It's hard to say is practical to destroy the planet or not, but did you hear what Musk said about a nuclear nuke? Elon Musk, on the air of the evening television program Late Show in 2019, proposed making Mars fit for life and subsequent colonization with the help of thermonuclear weapons. That's an interesting but controversial idea. He talked also about another way to make the planet warmer is by constantly increasing the concentration of greenhouse gases, but this method is slower. On the air of the program, Musk reflected on space travel and ways to colonize Mars. According to the CEO of SpaceX, colonists on the red planet will have to live in transparent houses until their atmosphere becomes suitable for human habitation. Raising the temperature in the atmosphere of Mars is possible by the nuclear bombardment of the poles, and increasing the concentration of greenhouse gases is a slow way.
So, the partial planet-destroying, in theory, is practical but that's just a theory.
