The Naked Scientists
  • Login
  • Register
  • Podcasts
      • The Naked Scientists
      • eLife
      • Naked Genetics
      • Naked Astronomy
      • In short
      • Naked Neuroscience
      • Ask! The Naked Scientists
      • Question of the Week
      • Archive
      • Video
      • SUBSCRIBE to our Podcasts
  • Articles
      • Science News
      • Features
      • Interviews
      • Answers to Science Questions
  • Get Naked
      • Donate
      • Do an Experiment
      • Science Forum
      • Ask a Question
  • About
      • Meet the team
      • Our Sponsors
      • Site Map
      • Contact us

User menu

  • Login
  • Register
  • Home
  • Help
  • Search
  • Tags
  • Member Map
  • Recent Topics
  • Login
  • Register
  1. Naked Science Forum
  2. Non Life Sciences
  3. Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology
  4. If Tunguska was "2,000 times stronger" than the a-bombs, how did Earth survive?
« previous next »
  • Print
Pages: [1]   Go Down

If Tunguska was "2,000 times stronger" than the a-bombs, how did Earth survive?

  • 9 Replies
  • 5371 Views
  • 0 Tags

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Pseudoscience-is-malarkey (OP)

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 660
  • Activity:
    6.5%
  • Thanked: 19 times
    • View Profile
If Tunguska was "2,000 times stronger" than the a-bombs, how did Earth survive?
« on: 26/06/2021 04:17:38 »
Even if the Tunguska event was 200x, let alone 2,000x more powerful than the bombs my country dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, how did it not wipe out life on Earth, and how come only a few people noticed the event actually happen? I know it was in the desolate Siberian wilderness, populated by some farmers and Tsarists political prisoners, but still...
« Last Edit: 26/06/2021 04:20:34 by Pseudoscience-is-malarkey »
Logged
 



Offline alancalverd

  • Global Moderator
  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • ********
  • 14845
  • Activity:
    100%
  • Thanked: 1120 times
  • life is too short to drink instant coffee
    • View Profile
Re: If Tunguska was "2,000 times stronger" than the a-bombs, how did Earth survive?
« Reply #1 on: 26/06/2021 11:17:16 »
The atom bombs were in the 20 kiloton range. People have exploded 10-megaton bombs since then, with almost nobody else noticing.

Humanity at its worst is puny compared with a decent hurricane or tsunami.
Logged
helping to stem the tide of ignorance
 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • 27787
  • Activity:
    91%
  • Thanked: 933 times
    • View Profile
Re: If Tunguska was "2,000 times stronger" than the a-bombs, how did Earth survive?
« Reply #2 on: 26/06/2021 12:03:52 »
Also the Tunguska event didn't produce radioactive fallout.
Logged
Please disregard all previous signatures.
 

Offline evan_au

  • Global Moderator
  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • ********
  • 10428
  • Activity:
    26.5%
  • Thanked: 1254 times
    • View Profile
Re: If Tunguska was "2,000 times stronger" than the a-bombs, how did Earth survive?
« Reply #3 on: 26/06/2021 13:05:38 »
The blast radius increases as the cube root of the energy exploded (all other things being the same)...
- So if you had an explosion 1,000 times larger, the blast radius would only increase by a factor of 10
- This is because the blast energy expands outwards in 3 dimensions

This is also why research into very large nuclear bombs was not pursued - you can do a lot more damage with 10 "little" bombs than one big one with 10 times the explosive power.
See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiple_independently_targetable_reentry_vehicle
Logged
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • 46938
  • Activity:
    100%
  • Thanked: 99 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: If Tunguska was "2,000 times stronger" than the a-bombs, how did Earth survive?
« Reply #4 on: 27/06/2021 13:01:18 »
Quite interesting comment Evan, and one that I'm sure was considered when this new doctrine was introduced, of 'low yield' limited nuclear wars. The one we're gearing up to today.
Logged
"BOMB DISPOSAL EXPERT. If you see me running, try to keep up."
 



Offline Just thinking

  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ******
  • 1009
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 144 times
  • Naked Science Forum Newbie
    • View Profile
Re: If Tunguska was "2,000 times stronger" than the a-bombs, how did Earth survive?
« Reply #5 on: 20/07/2021 18:10:11 »
It is believed that the entire nuclear arsenal on the earth could destroy almost all human life many times over but that is the calculation taking into account direct hits on populated sites around the earth. But if all the nuclear weapons were detonated let's say in the middle of the south pole only penguins and other creatures would be bothered. The sound my travel quite some distance many thousands of kilometres and radiation would be a very big problem may be killing people some years down the track but the planet would barely feel it.
Logged
 

Offline Petrochemicals

  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ******
  • 2608
  • Activity:
    24%
  • Thanked: 97 times
  • forum overlord
    • View Profile
Re: If Tunguska was "2,000 times stronger" than the a-bombs, how did Earth survive?
« Reply #6 on: 20/07/2021 22:07:30 »
The kt didn't affect the earth catastrophically unless you where a boiligical life form.

Quote
The Chicxulub impactor had an estimated diameter of 11–81 kilometers (6.8–50.3 mi), and delivered an estimated energy of 21–921 billion Hiroshima A-bombs (between 1.3×1024 and 5.8×1025 joules, or 1.3–58 yottajoules).
Logged
For reasons of repetitive antagonism, this user is currently not responding to messages from;
BoredChemist
To ignore someone too, go to your profile settings>modifyprofie>ignore!
 

Offline Europa

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 208
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 2 times
  • Naked Science Forum Newbie
    • View Profile
Re: If Tunguska was "2,000 times stronger" than the a-bombs, how did Earth survive?
« Reply #7 on: 21/07/2021 16:19:27 »
Quote from: Pseudoscience-is-malarkey on 26/06/2021 04:17:38
Even if the Tunguska event was 200x, let alone 2,000x more powerful than the bombs my country dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, how did it not wipe out life on Earth, and how come only a few people noticed the event actually happen? I know it was in the desolate Siberian wilderness, populated by some farmers and Tsarists political prisoners, but still...
The Tunguska explosion is estimated to be 33 times the blast at Hiroshima or 500 kilotons.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tunguska_event#:~:text=The%20exploding%20meteoroid%20was%20determined,release%20of%20approximately%20500%20kilotons.

Logged
 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • 27787
  • Activity:
    91%
  • Thanked: 933 times
    • View Profile
Re: If Tunguska was "2,000 times stronger" than the a-bombs, how did Earth survive?
« Reply #8 on: 21/07/2021 17:39:08 »
Quote from: Petrochemicals on 20/07/2021 22:07:30
boiligical life form.
Life forms which are not biological are seldom troubled by anything...
Logged
Please disregard all previous signatures.
 



Offline Bored chemist

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • 27787
  • Activity:
    91%
  • Thanked: 933 times
    • View Profile
Re: If Tunguska was "2,000 times stronger" than the a-bombs, how did Earth survive?
« Reply #9 on: 21/07/2021 17:43:05 »
Quote from: Europa on 21/07/2021 16:19:27
Quote from: Pseudoscience-is-malarkey on 26/06/2021 04:17:38
Even if the Tunguska event was 200x, let alone 2,000x more powerful than the bombs my country dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, how did it not wipe out life on Earth, and how come only a few people noticed the event actually happen? I know it was in the desolate Siberian wilderness, populated by some farmers and Tsarists political prisoners, but still...
The Tunguska explosion is estimated to be 33 times the blast at Hiroshima or 500 kilotons.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tunguska_event#:~:text=The%20exploding%20meteoroid%20was%20determined,release%20of%20approximately%20500%20kilotons.


It's also estimated as up to 30 MTons
"The 30 Mt (130 PJ) estimated upper limit blast power of the Tunguska event could power the same average home for more than 3,100,000 years."
from
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TNT_equivalent

But the detail doesn't matter.
Most of Hiroshima survived the blast.
Almost all the damage was confined to sticky out bits that people had put there.
The flat bits were generally  fine.

That wiki page lists plenty of earthquakes etc that were much bigger than a thousand times the upper bound to the estimated energy from Tunguska.
A notable example is an hour's worth of sunshine: 104000 megatons.
« Last Edit: 21/07/2021 17:49:07 by Bored chemist »
Logged
Please disregard all previous signatures.
 



  • Print
Pages: [1]   Go Up
« previous next »
Tags:
 

Similar topics (5)

How would our weight differ on a revolving to that of a non-revolving earth.?

Started by Alan McDougallBoard General Science

Replies: 21
Views: 17251
Last post 26/07/2021 14:21:22
by Bored chemist
Can matter and anti-matter annhilation one day power the earth?

Started by spook1456Board Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology

Replies: 1
Views: 9843
Last post 11/04/2011 17:46:33
by JMLCarter
Is the Earth immersed in dark energy and dark matter?

Started by thedocBoard Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology

Replies: 2
Views: 9110
Last post 13/08/2012 13:18:25
by lightarrow
Would increase or a drop in Sun's temperature effect Earth's temperature?

Started by bobdihiBoard Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology

Replies: 13
Views: 8412
Last post 29/07/2019 10:55:01
by andrew7278
The molecules in a single drop of water diluted evenly throughout the Earth's oceans would result in a density of one molecule per litre of sea water!

Started by Erik Moeser Board General Science

Replies: 6
Views: 10372
Last post 06/02/2019 15:01:32
by Petrochemicals
There was an error while thanking
Thanking...
  • SMF 2.0.15 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines
    Privacy Policy
    SMFAds for Free Forums
  • Naked Science Forum ©

Page created in 0.401 seconds with 57 queries.

  • Podcasts
  • Articles
  • Get Naked
  • About
  • Contact us
  • Advertise
  • Privacy Policy
  • Subscribe to newsletter
  • We love feedback

Follow us

cambridge_logo_footer.png

©The Naked Scientists® 2000–2017 | The Naked Scientists® and Naked Science® are registered trademarks created by Dr Chris Smith. Information presented on this website is the opinion of the individual contributors and does not reflect the general views of the administrators, editors, moderators, sponsors, Cambridge University or the public at large.