The possibility of artificial fusion explosion of giant planets and other objects of

the Solar system

By A.V. Turchin, Russian Transhumanist Movement with Joseph
Friedlander aiding translation, rewriting to English.
avturchin@mail.ru
http://www.scribd.com/doc/8299748/Giant-planets-ignition
Translated from Russian
Working draft 2, with Joseph Friedlander
Disclaimer: This is not a formal scientific paper, and it should not be used as
proof that a thermonuclear explosion of giant planets is impossible. The topic deserves
formal scientific investigation, more than it has so far received. My goal is only to
draw attention to a topic upon which the fate of the human race may someday hinge.

Abstract

This article discusses various theories about how artificially caused

thermonuclear detonation of giant planets and other objects of Solar System could be
triggered, and what such an event’s impact on the Earth may be. In most cases this
would mean the extinction of terrestrial life. The published scientific evidence
suggests that thermonuclear detonation of layers with high content of deuterium in the
atmospheres of giant planets is theoretically possible. Some estimates of the content of
deuterium in the atmosphere of Jupiter show that it is only five times less than the
minimum required level for the thermonuclear detonation (1 atom in 1600 versus 1 in
300). This is too little safety margin in order to be sure that such reactions are not
realistic. Naturally enriched deuterium layers are hypothetically possible in terrestrial
planets, including Earth, the icy satellites, comets and giant planets. In the distant
future, perhaps in the second half of the XXIth century, will be available means of
detection of natural high concentration regions of deuterium in the solar system and
creation of technical means for initiating the explosion of planets, which would make
artificial explosion of a planet practically feasible. This means that in the future such
artificial detonation may become a means for space wars, a tool of world blackmail,
or occur as a result of technological accident. On a related subject, there is little
possibility of such an explosion after collisions following ‘end of mission’ of space
probes such as the Saturn spacecraft Cassini containing nuclear fuel elements, but not
because Cassini can not explode, and not because the planet can not explode, but
because the energy of a hypothetical explosion of Cassini is not enough to initiate a
successful detonation reaction of noticeable magnitude.

Contents
Contents...........................................................................................................................1
Introduction.................................................................................................................2
History of the question .............................................................................................10
About possibility of explosion of nuclear fuel cells. ................................................12
Possibility of explosion of a giant planet..................................................................14
Explosion consequences ...........................................................................................26
Other possible explosions of planets. .......................................................................29
The literature:............................................................................................................34
 Introduction
The main problem with considering the possibility of giant planet explosions
is that people think that it is a ridiculous concept and dismiss the idea before
considering the evidence. It reeks of bad science fiction. So they don't consider the
arguments and miss the chance to find that the arguments are much more convincing
than commonly thought a priori. The same problem colors any discussion of strong
AGI. (artificial general intelligence, an easily replicatable artificial mind that can
‘teach’ its successors rapidly through uploading). Still, the reason these ideas became
the subject of so many lurid fictions is because they are existential dangers, each in
their own way—and thus were compelling subjects for storytelling. The fact that bad
stories were written should not stop us from considering the scientific realities that the
fictions were based upon.

The most important issue to consider here is a possibility of runaway

thermonuclear detonation of planets. The possible causes—deliberate detonation,
accidents of exploration or cosmic collision or future industrial activity—we may
consider later. First let us survey the underlying facts.

1) According to the findings, published in the prestigious journal Physical

Review (by prominent US nuclear military scientists, including Dr. Edward Teller’s
apprentice), thermonuclear detonation (i.e. explosion), of a planet could happened at
normal pressure by the deuterium fusion reaction D + D, provided that the
concentration of deuterium is more than 1 to 300. (Relative to normal hydrogen).
((Necessary conditions for the initiation and propagation of nuclear detonation waves
in plane atmospheres. Thomas A. Weaver and Lowell Wood, Physical review 20 - 1
July 1979,
http://www.lhcdefense.org/pdf/LHC%20-%20Sancho%20v.%20Doe%20-
%20Atmosphere%20Ignition%20-%202%20-%20Wood_AtmIgnition-1.pdf)

A recently published refutation of possible explosion of Saturn is low

quality, because it does not even mention that the reaction of detonation of deuterium
is possible. (“Project Lucifer: Will Cassini Turn Saturn into a Second Sun?”
http://www.universetoday.com/2008/07/24/project-lucifer-will-cassini-turn-saturn-
into-a-second-sun-part-1/)

2) Investigations conducted in the late 1990's took measurements that

showed that the concentration of deuterium in the upper layers of Jupiter is 1 in 1600,
which is only five (5) times smaller than the minimum required level for detonation.
"Hubble measures deuterium on Jupiter". Science News – Find Articles. 5 October 1996. Retrieved 2007-09-
10.As mentioned in this article, this value also agrees with the Galileo entry probe measurement for Jupiter
Later studies suggested a lesser ratio as below:

Deuterium abundance on Jupiter is about 2.25×10−5 (roughly 22 atoms in a

million, or 15% of the terrestrial deuterium-to-hydrogen ratio); these ratios
presumably reflect the early solar nebula ratios, and those after the Big Bang.
However, other sources suggest a much higher abundance of e.g. 6×10−4 (6 atoms in
10,000 or 0.06% atom basis). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deuterium

Even if the lower value is correct, point 3) below can cancel that benefit, as
will become apparent:
3) It was found that deuterium isotope separation easily happens by natural processes,
and in particular that the concentration of heavy gases (such as helium) is increasing
as gravitational settling and rainout in the interior of giant planets. (The so-called
‘helium rain’) And such is most likely true for deuterium as well. Consequently, in the
bowels of the giant planets may be regions of sufficient concentration of deuterium to
support a detonation wave.

And to reach these depths is not difficult, because the planet is liquid. (It should be
noted that the temperature at depth in the giant planets is tens of thousands of degrees.
However, depending on the results of computer modeling, (specifically on the time
required for descent to target depths and the insulation efficiency of a many-layer
sinking body containing the warhead) there may be in principle ways to insulate a
bomb to a given pressure level if the concentration of thermonuclear fuel is known in
the target region before sinking the bomb there.)
Thus the technology of explosion of the giant planets, in principle, may be reachable
for our civilization now.

Finally, if somehow all the deuterium in the depths of Jupiter were to enter
into a runaway thermonuclear reaction, then it will emit the energy equivalent of about
3000 years of luminescence of the Sun during a few tens of seconds. That is enough
to disrupt the Earth's atmosphere and melt the upper few kilometers of soil, (and
deeper than that we cannot penetrate for shelter protection because of the hot interior
of the earth) and destroy all future human colonies in the Solar system. Thus, the
explosion of the giant planets can be a powerful Doomsday Machine suitable for
blackmailing --on any given fringe issue--the entirety of human civilization.

And if such weapons would be created, there is the risk of their use. The
more widespread the capability, the greater the probability of their use.

Now we should look on the various risks in more detail.

There are some events which are very improbable, but whose consequence
could be infinitely large (e.g. black holes on the Large Hadron Collider—if such a
thing could be done, it would end everything—at least for humanity.). The possibility
of nuclear ignition of self-sustaining and spreading fusion reactions in giant planets
like Jupiter and Saturn which could lead to the explosion of said planet, is one of
them.

Several considerations suggest that an artificial explosion of the giant planets

is possible. Inside the giant planets are vast amounts of thermonuclear fuel under high
pressure and at high density. This density for certain substances is higher (except
water, perhaps) than the density of these substances in any region of Earth.

At 10,000 kilometers below Jupiter's cloud top liquid hydrogen reaches a

pressure of 1,000,000 bar with a temperature of 6,000° K. At this state hydrogen
changes into a phase of liquid metallic hydrogen. In this state, the hydrogen atoms
break down yeilding ionized protons and electrons similar to the Sun's
interiorhttp://www.solarviews.com/eng/jupiter.htm
 Other sources hold that it takes 4 million bar to transition to the metallic
hydrogen phase. For comparison, the pressure at the core of the Earth is 3 million bar.
http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Nwfaq/Nfaq4-4.htm gives the radiation implosion
pressure in the 1952 Mike deuterium H-bomb as 73 megabars.)

Large quantities of the substance would be fighting that vast pressure and
containment in any attempt (during any detonation) to escape away from the reaction
zone, arguing for containment for sufficient time for any reaction, even a dampened
one, to result in large energy emissions.
Consider also that this thermonuclear fuel—unlike in the Sun-- has never
been involved in nuclear combustion reactions, and it retains easily combustible
components, namely, deuterium, helium-3 and lithium (and maybe boron), which have
burned preferentially in the stars. In addition, the deep interior of giant planets contain
fuel for reactions, which may prompt a runaway burning - namely, the tri-helium
reaction (3 4He = 12C) and for reactions to the accession of hydrogen to oxygen, which,
however, requires to start them a much higher temperature. The material in the deep
bowels of the giant planets is mildly degenerate (electron degeneracy) matter form
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metallic_hydrogen (in the form of a metal ocean), just as
the substance of white dwarfs is--and regularly in the Galaxy explosive thermonuclear
burning of this sort occurs in the form of helium flashes and the flashes of the Type I
supernovae. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helium_burning

It may simply be that there is no way to light such a reaction in a giant planet
in nature, but that it would burn perfectly well once lit (by human agency, perhaps.)
This is a serious worry.

The more opaque a given environment, the greater the chances for the reaction within
it to propagate, as energy loss is less (twice the diameter, eight times the interior, four
times the exterior surface). In this connection note that in the interior of the giant
planets there are many impurities and lower transparency (more opacity) can be
expected. Gravitational differentiation and chemical reactions can lead to the
allocation of areas within the planet which are more suitable to run the reaction in its
initial stages.

The stronger will the triggering explosion, the greater will be amount of the
initial field of burning, and the more likely that the response would be self-sustaining,
as the energy loss will be smaller and the number of reaction substances and reaction
times greater. It can be assumed that if lit with a sufficiently powerful fuse (a
thermonuclear bomb of suitable size) the reaction may become self-sustaining.

Recently Galileo spacecraft was impacted into Jupiter. Galileo had nuclear
pellets with plutonium-238 which under some assumptions could undergo chain
reaction and lead to a minor yield nuclear explosion. It is interesting to understand if
such an event could lead to the runaway explosion of a giant planet. Spacecraft Cassini
may similarly in the future be disposed of inside Saturn with unknown consequences.
In the future deliberate ignition of giant planet may become a means of space war.
Such an event could sterilize the entire Solar system.

This article’s purpose is to pose questions which would help ‘bracket the
evidence’ on either side of the question—that explosion of outer planets and smaller
bodies rich in deuterium and other thermonuclear fuels as a result of inadvertent
human activity is impossible.

By which we may pose an analogy: In one city an untested new model of

nuclear power station is under construction. Citizens of the city know this, and they
also know that nuclear stations sometimes can have dangerous accidents. They have
enough knowledge of the risks, that they demand proofs of safety of the given project.
The burden of the proof of safety of the project lies not on the simple citizens of the
city, but on the power station designers. At the same time citizens have the right to
pose questions despite their lack of technical competence: Whether the reactor is of
Chernobyl type is used at the station, how spent nuclear fuel will be stored, what will
be if the reactor will be attacked by terrorists, what will be if a plane crashes into it
etc. Possibly, some of these questions will be unexpected for designers, and through
this process of open inquiry may be found new answers and engineering solutions.

Definitely, I make no claim of sufficient technical qualification to prove the

possibility and, especially, impossibility of a giant planet explosion (thus the
disclaimer in the beginning of this article). I gently note that the proof of impossibility
is always the more difficult thing, as it should touch all possibilities, presumably
including the unknowable and the unthinkable!

Therefore I shall focus on a simpler problem: I will collect all those

arguments, which speak to us about an explosion possibility. The reader may then
consider whether the pile of evidence remains undisturbing.

The core scientific basis for our study could be found in the article
(Necessary conditions for the initiation and propagation of nuclear detonation waves
in plane atmospheres. Thomas A. Weaver and Lowell Wood, Physical review 20 - 1
July 1979,
http://www.lhcdefense.org/pdf/LHC%20-%20Sancho%20v.%20Doe%20-
%20Atmosphere%20Ignition%20-%202%20-%20Wood_AtmIgnition-1.pdf) This
article rejected the possibility of extending the thermonuclear detonation in the Earth's
atmosphere and in Earth's oceans because of balance of the loss of radiation (one that
does not exclude the possibility of reactions involving limited areas: say, a small
deposit of heavy (deuterium rich) ice or heavy methane clathrate upon the ocean floor,
compared with the amount of the entire mass of the earthly oceans - but enough to
lead to disastrous consequences—more fallout than any realistic human-launched
nuclear war (hundreds of thousands of tons of product isotopes) and thus human
extinction.)

There it is said: “We, therefore, conclude that thermonuclear-detonation

waves cannot propagate in the terrestrial ocean by any mechanism by an astronom-
ically large margin.

It is worth noting, in conclusion, that the susceptibility to thermonuclear

detonation of a large body of hydrogenous material is an exceedingly sensitive
function of its isotopic composition, and, specifically, to the deuterium atom fraction,
as is implicit in the discussion just preceding. If, for instance, the terrestrial oceans
contained deuterium at any atom fraction greater than 1:300 (instead of the actual
value of 1: 6000), the ocean could propagate an equilibrium thermonuclear
detonation wave at a temperature of 2 keV (although a fantastic 1030 ergs—2 x 107
MT, (20 TERATONS, OR 20,000 GIGATONS, OR 20 MILLION MEGATONS—J.F.) or the total
amount of solar energy incident on the Earth for a two-week period—would be
required to initiate such a detonation at a deuterium concentration of 1: 300). Now a
non-negligible fraction of the matter in our own galaxy exists at temperatures much
less than 300 °K, i.e., the gas-giant planets of our stellar system, nebulas, etc.
Furthermore, it is well known that thermodynamically-governed isotopic fractionation
ever more strongly favors higher relative concentration of deuterium as the
temperature decreases, e.g., the D:H concentration ratio in the ~102 К Great Nebula
in Orion is about 1:200.45 Finally, orbital velocities of matter about the galactic center
of mass are of the order of 3 x 107 cm /sec at our distance from the galactic core.

It is thus quite conceivable that hydrogenous matter (e.go, CH4, NH3, H2O, or
just H2) relatively rich in deuterium (1 at. %) could accumulate at its normal, zero-
pressure density in substantial thicknesses or planetary surfaces, and such layering
might even be a fairly common feature of the colder, gas-giant planets. If thereby
highly enriched in deuterium (10 at. %), thermonuclear detonation of such layers
could be initiated artificially with attainable nuclear explosives. Even with deuterium
atom fractions approaching 0.3 at. % (less than that observed over multiparsec scales
in Orion), however, such layers might be initiated into propagating thermonuclear
detonation by the impact of large (diam 102 m), ultra-high velocity (^Зх 107 cm/sec)
meteors or comets originating from nearer the galactic center. Such events, though
exceedingly rare, would be spectacularly visible on distance scales of many parsecs.”

(Note that these computations are made for flat atmospheres, (plane
detonations) under the assumption that a balance will be established between radiated
energy in space and energy created during the reaction, while we are talking about
initiating of the explosion inside a giant planet, where the emitted energy will remain
within it, until the planet will be—in worst case—consumed as a source of fresh fuel.
So to merely start the reaction much lower concentrations of deuterium will be
sufficient.)

The first main objection to the possible explosion of giant planets is the
fact that the so-called “Simple Super” by Edward Teller does not work. The “Simple
Super” is the first theoretical model of the hydrogen bomb, which consisted in joining
the tube with liquid deuterium to the atomic bomb, so that the explosion of the atomic
bomb would detonate deuterium. But it turned out that the detonation wave does not
extend down the tube because of the large losses of radiation, which are growing even
while increasing the size of the device (through Compton scattering). After several
years of experiments in the Soviet Union and the United States in the late 1940's this
design abandoned in favor of the scheme with the implosion compression of the tube
casing by radiation.

The “Simple Super” as a weapon makes sense only if detonator is a fission

bomb, whose output is limited by hundreds of kilotons. However, in our case, a
hypothetical space-based weapon would beused as a detonator-- a hydrogen bomb
with a capacity of many megatons. Inability to create a “Simple Super” bomb with a
1940s fission device does not mean inability to start a self-sustaining reaction with
the help of a much more powerful hydrogen bomb.

So stands the situation based on declassified sources. But we cannot be sure

that all information on this sensitive issue is declassified. On the other hand, let’s see
who has written articles on the detonation of the atmosphere, from which is drawn the
quotation above. They are Thomas Weaver and Lowell Wood. About Wood
Wikipedia says the following: “The initial focus of the strategic defense initiative was
a nuclear explosion-powered X-ray laser designed at Lawrence Livermore National
Laboratory by a scientist named Peter L. Hagelstein who worked with a team called
'O Group', doing much of the work in the late 1970s and early 1980s. O Group was
headed by physicist Lowell Wood, a protégé and friend of Edward Teller, the "father
of the hydrogen bomb". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_Defense_Initiative

Another author of the article is Thomas A. Weaver (1985) who got the
following prize: “National Security: For his exceptional contributions to national
security in the physics, design and leadership of x-ray laser experiments, which
include work in atomic physics, radiate transfer and hydrodynamics, material science,
and the development of complex diagnostics. These major accomplishments follow
from earlier research in astrophysics with emphasis on stellar evolution.”
https://www.llnl.gov/llnl/sciencetech/awards/lawrence.jsp (this page doesn’’t
exist now, but see https://www.llnl.gov/str/Pat497.html and
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernest_Orlando_Lawrence_Award )

Lowell also got this prize: “The Ernest Orlando Lawrence Award was
established in 1959 in honor of a scientist who helped elevate American physics to
world leadership.
Lowell L. Wood (1981)
National Security: For his outstanding contributions to national security in
the areas of directed energy, inertial confinement fusion, underwater communications,
nuclear weapon design concepts, and computer technology.”

So what we get by this logic (merely at the level of ‘conspiracy theories’, an

argument meant only as circumstantial, not an irrefutable argument): We can certainly
say that Teller was the best-experienced person in the world regarding the question of
the possibility to create Teller’s “Simple Super”. And his friend and protégé Wood,
was probably aware of the knowledge base of Teller. In doing so, in his article on
the detonation atmospheres Wood actually argues that the “Simple Super”is
possible! (When Wood writes: « If thereby highly enriched in deuterium (10 at. %),
thermonuclear detonation of such layers could be initiated artificially with attainable
nuclear explosives»). And while he makes no precise calculations (because it is
classified information), the fact that he spoke with such certainty about it, suggests
that such computations were made and that the minimum conditions to start the
reaction had been found. And the only way to publish it in the open press was to speak
about this concerning atmospheres of distant planets.

Thus, one can presume with some certainty that the claim that the “Simple
Super” of Teller is impossible - is disinformation designed to hinder the establishment
of the hydrogen bomb in a third country - and in any case –at minimum--- we cannot
use data on the impossibility of the “Simple Super” as 100 percent reliable because
people who know from firsthand about the design - argue that the detonation of layers
rich in deuterium is possible.

The second main objection to the thermonuclear detonation of giant planets

is low concentrations of deuterium in the interstellar medium and low observable
concentrations of deuterium in the atmospheres of giant planets. In Wikipedia is said:
 “Deuterium abundance on Jupiter is about 2.25 • 10-5 (about 22 atoms in
1000000 or 15% of the terrestrial deuterium-to-hydrogen ratio) [1]; these ratios
presumably reflect the early solar nebula ratios, and those after the Big Bang .
However, other sources suggest a much higher abundance of eg 6 • 10-4 (6 atoms in
10,000 or 0.06% atom basis)” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deuterium

Estimation of one atom to 1600 was obtained from here: “Hubble

observations and lowering probe to Jupiter: Hubble measures deuterium on Jupiter -
Hubble Space “Telescope
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1200/is_n14_v150/ai_18757250

This figure is four times greater than the concentration of deuterium in the
Earth and only five times less than the required minimum value for the wave of
nuclear detonation. Given the uncertainty in the measurement of the actual
concentration, as well as the uncertainty of what is the real minimum threshold for
launching thermonuclear detonation reaction of deuterium and finally, the availability
of other easy-burning elements (helium-3 and lithium-6) this cannot exclude the
possibility that this concentration—in places at least-- is sufficient to –upon artificial
triggering-- initiate an explosion of Jupiter, or that other giant planets contain high
concentrations.

Moreover, if as some suggest, that deuterium preferentially ‘rains down’, i.e.

collects somewhere at the bottom layers, the concentration of the upper atmosphere is
by definition understated compared to the whole planet concentration. A shortage of
helium in the upper atmosphere of Jupiter and Saturn compared to the solar
concentration, is explained by deposition of heavy helium downwards. (This is given
the name ‘helium rain’) The same can happen with deuterium, also heavier than
hydrogen.

Even if we can’t ignite Jupiter, it could be possible with Uranus or Neptune,

as show the following citations:

“In contrast, Uranus and Neptune may have been enriched in

deuterium, during their formation, by the mixing of their
atmospheres with comparatively larger cores containing D-rich icy
grains”.( http://herschel.esac.esa.int/Publ/2001/lellouche.pdf
Emmanuel Lellouch. Observations of planetary and satellite
atmospheres and surfaces.)

“Using observations of the CH3D/CH4 ratio in the outer planets, we

developed two simple but limiting models which constrain the
amount of dilution that deuterated volatiles which were contributed
to the planetary atmospheres by evaporated primordial ices may
have undergone by mixing with the original hydrogen envelopes.
The models suggest that the D/H ratio in these ices was probably
somewhere between a few times 10−4 and 10−3.”
(Barry L. Lutz*, 1, Tobias Owen† and Catherine De Bergh‡ Deuterium
enrichment in the primitive ices of the protosolar nebula.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?
_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6WGF-4731GTM-
1FV&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&view=c&_a
cct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=8f
27b0935685da8e228b51dcc64f721b )

“On the basis of this data set all Oort cloud comets seem to exhibit a
similar ratio in H2O, enriched by about a factor of two relative to
terrestrial water and approximately one order of magnitude relative
to the protosolar value.”
Roland Meier and Tobias C. Owen. Cometary Deuterium. Space
Science Reviews Volume 90, Numbers 1-2 / Октябрь 1999 г.
http://www.springerlink.com/content/j884385710582805/

Uranus : The deuterium abundance ratio relative to light hydrogen

5.5+3.5−1.5×10−5
http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Atmosphere-of-Uranus

Deuterium enrichment in giant planets:

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6V6T-
3VWKKR4-
11&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&view=c&_ac
ct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=741
591de1c15795f3d2f5a82e96ac6ff

Also, a higher concentration of D can’t be ruled out inside the giant

planets:

“Here, we analyze the consequences of deuterium (D) sedimentation

on Jupiter's excess heat and discuss its effects on the sound profiles.
Such sedimentation is assumed to have occurred in the early stages
of planet formation (here the core-instability model) through
planetesimal vaporization in the deeper parts of the envelope… We
find that with a modest degree of interior stratification of D (5%–15%
of the total D of the planet), D-D burning naturally explains the
excess heat given off by the planet.”
Ouyed, R., Fundamenski, W. R., Cripps, G.R. and Sutherland, P.G. D-
D Fusion in the Interior of Jupiter?
http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/305797

Note that small concentrations of deuterium in Jupiter don’t

mean small quantity. For example, if the upper estimate of the
number is correct, its weight is about 1 / 5 the mass of Earth, and if
lower - the order of half the mass of the Moon. Each pair of atoms
D, joined in the reaction, provided approximately 10 MeV energy
(Given that the formed tritium immediately react), or 0.8 * 10 **- 12
J. Or 0.5 * 10 ** 12 J at the mole. Or 2.5 * 10 ** 14 J per kg. Or 2.5 *
10 ** 38 J in the maximum case for combustion of all the deuterium
in the whole of Jupiter. This is about the same energy, which
the Sun radiates in 20,000 years. And all of this energy will be
realized in a few seconds. This is a billion (at least) times more than
a minimum level of energy that would lead to the death of all
intelligent life on Earth.
 That is the brief outline of the situation with the problem of
detonation giant planets. We will now consider the related issues in
more details. We will discuss the history of the issue, then Galileo
and Cassini, in terms of whether they or another space probe could
serve as a detonator for an outer system object, then turn to the
question about the possibility of thermonuclear detonation of
planets, and then discuss the possible implications for Earth of such
a blast, and finally discuss other existing theories about the
possibility of explosions of planets by non-thermonuclear detonation.

History of the question

The first time we are aware of the possibility of explosion of Jupiter being
considered in a public article was Jacco van der Worp «Could NASA Use Galileo to
Create a Jovian Nagasaki?» http://yowusa.com/space/2003/space-2003-09a/1.shtml In
it is said, that in 2003 of NASA made a decision on splashing down space vehicle
Galileo which was engaged in research of system of Jupiter, into Jupiter, on purpose to
avoid contamination of the (possibly life bearing) satellite of Jupiter Europe with
earthly bacteria (from an uncontrolled future collision). However Worp noted that on
board of Galileo there are radio-isotope heat generators on plutonium-238 which
weight is 12 kg., divided into tablets of 150 gr. These tablets are placed in a strong
heat-resisting casing made from heavy metals – so to endure any accident of the space
vehicle at start from the Earth. Worp pays attention that though there is popular belief
that plutonium-238 is not weapons plutonium, but actually it has a critical mass. The
minimum estimation of its critical mass makes 200 grams and for this reason tablets
was made weighing no more than 150 grams (on pure substance). Modern researches
show, that the critical mass of plutonium-238 in case of a sphere of pure substance
makes about 10 kg. (Updated Critical Mass Estimates for Plutonium-238
http://sti.srs.gov/fulltext/ms9900313/ms9900313.html).

Further Worp assumes, that the nuclear fuel capsules are resistant to impact,
that they will not collapse at the descent of Galileo into upper layers of atmosphere of
Jupiter, and will start to plunge slowly into the ocean of metal liquid hydrogen which
is present, according to modern representations, at certain depths. Heat resistance and
high density will allow them to plunge to significant depth where they will be
compressed by pressure of millions of atmospheres. During some moment pressure
will destroy these tablets. If this final compression occurs extremely quickly – that is if
the tablet external case suddenly breaks, sharp compression of plutonium can result it
in a supercritical condition and lead to nuclear reaction, possibly of explosive
quickness. As ambient pressure will be already millions atmospheres, compression
will be long and the significant part of plutonium will have time to react, that will
result in growth of temperature to 100 million degrees at the worst case. This
temperature will be enough to initiate thermonuclear reactions in ambient hydrogen,
which can lead to self-supporting reaction of combustion of the hydrogen ocean of
Jupiter and then to explosion of the planet with fatal consequences to the human
civilisation. That is quite a chain of circumstances, but it only has to happen once to
get our (brief) attention!

Worp has said his thoughts in the popular radio show “From Coast to Coast”,
however they have not been heard by us, and Galileo has already impacted Jupiter,
and we are still here! In the Universe observed by us the explosion has not occurred
(to this question we will still return). However after several months appeared article of
Richard C. Hoagland. Did NASA Accidentally “Nuke” Jupiter?
http://www.enterprisemission.com/NukingJupiter.html In it was retold thought of
Worp, and then was paid attention that a month later after splashing down, on the
surface of Jupiter there was a strange stain in equatorial area.
(http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/jupiter_dark_spot_031023.html)
There are different opinions on the nature of this stain – a shade from the
satellite, the usual whirlwind, an error of supervision, however Hoagland has put
forward the assumption, that this stain has resulted from the nuclear explosion of
Galileo as it too has been impacted in the equatorial area. However the size of the stain
was approximately equal to the size of the Earth, and it has held for several days (and
reminded one of stains from the impact of comet Schumacher-Levi in July 1994) –
and it was far more extensive in area, than the stain from nuclear explosion in several
tens kilotons maximum could achieve. Such a stain could be formed, we note, if some
quantity of hydrogen too would enter the reaction, but then the process damp out (after
achieving a gigaton level triggered explosion). The time delay of one month from the
splashing down of Galileo before occurrence of stain Hoagland explains by slow
immersion of plutonium tablets into the hydrogen ocean, and then a slow raising of a
sphere of the heated gas after explosion. This does not appear consistent with the
behavior of matter under such circumstances, and may be neglected as an explanation.

In 2006 appeared, an apparently anonymous article The Lucifer Project

http://www.rinf.com/news/nov05/lucifer-project.html in which the same risks are
considered with reference to Project Cassini – to the probe rotating at the moment
around Saturn. This probe, possibly, too will be splashed sooner or later into Saturn
and also carries plutonium batteries. The article is written in the classical spirit of the
conspiracy theory and contains an uncreditable thesis: That Saturn should be ignited
like a star as a second Sun. Again, the behavior of matter does not justify these
claims. The stable combustion of giant planets is not possible, only explosive. (The
stable thermonuclear sequence the Sun is on requires slow burning isotopes and
reactions, ‘forced’ by an extreme level of gravitational pressure which the cores of
giant planets lack)

In the report of NASA on safety of Cassini the risk of igniton of Saturn is not
discussed at all, but it is told that under no circumstances nuclear tablets cannot lead to
nuclear explosion. There it is not mentioned that on board Cassini is contained at least
three critical weights of plutonium. (Spacecraft Power for Cassini
http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/spacecraft/safety/power.pdf) From the report you could get
an impression, that this is a safe isotope of plutonium (mostly Pu-238, a non-weapons-
grade isotope) is contained on Cassini, on the site we see that this isotope is not military-
oriented. Really, plutonium-238 – was never used for creation of nuclear weapons, and
for practical engineering reasons—it is strongly self-heating, to the point of red-hotness,
and for cost and other reasons as well. However all this does not mean, that it cannot blow
up, and, according to the government of the United States, (Updated Critical Mass
Estimates for Plutonium-238 http://www.osti.gov/bridge/purl.cover.jsp? purl =/6009-
YSy5TG/native/) it possesses a critical mass. (Moreover, it is a high-power source of
neutrons according to some information, and does not demand a neutron fuse, unlike
plutonium-239. http://www.ricin.com/nuke/bg/bomb.html) Here we see a certain non-
candor, which is not obvious if one has not undertaken a special search of sources. No
conspiracy theory is needed to understand that NASA, enduring antinuclear protests
before launch of every atom-powered space probe, might not wish to volunteer facts
which its’ political enemies would jump on without hesitation. Or perhaps worse,
NASA simply does not know everything the Department of Energy knows, being
reliant upon them for obtaining both the plutonium 238 and the battery design. NASA
or some subcomponents thereof at times are known to take scornful approach to safety
problems that the history with the Shuttle demonstrates. Their failures were not casual
– each time there were people who cautioned about them – but they were ignored.

Special reflectors around plutonium-238 are capable of reducing its critical

mass considerably. These reflectors can consist of specific metals, and from hydrogen.
(I will remind, that Cassini will plunge into hydrogen ocean which is under high
pressure and very dense). Even plutonium oxide has a critical weight, which is simply
twice more. (Updated Critical Mass Estimates for Plutonium-238
http://www.osti.gov/bridge/purl.cover.jsp?purl=/6009-YSy5TG/native/) The stronger
compression, the less is the critical mass; on this elementary fact is based action of
implosion in a plutonium fission bomb.

In 2008 of NASA has refused splashing down Cassini and has prolonged its
mission for two years. The further destiny of mission depends on financing and a
technical condition of the vehicle.

Such is the problem’s history. From here we see, that it consists of four
independent questions:

1) Whether splashing down Cassini in Saturn could lead to a nuclear

explosion.
2) Whether it is possible by means of this nuclear explosion (or otherwise)
to ignite self-containing thermonuclear reactions in bowels of giant planets.
3) And if yes, whether this doubly hypothetical chain of events could
begin, and whether the nuclear explosion of Cassini can start it.
4) What will be consequences for the Earth of such a hypothetical
thermonuclear explosion of a giant planet-- that is, what chances of human extinction
would result as a result of such a (literal!) disaster. (The original meaning of disaster
brings a connotation of ‘unlucky star!’)

Having multiplied probabilities of all four events, we can estimate the risk of
global catastrophe connected with Cassini.

In this article we will collect arguments only in favor of the worst succession
of events, acting in a role, so to say, as devil’s advocate and we will extend an
invitation and plea to more competent researchers to refute this worst case!

About possibility of explosion of nuclear fuel cells.

As researchers recognize, the critical weight of plutonium-238 and its

nuclear properties are badly studied experimentally. Supposing for a paranoid instant,
that research of plutonium-238 under huge pressure was one of the secret and latent
objectives of the flights of Galileo and Cassini. If it so it was one of the most senseless
and mad experiments in human history.
 Let's notice also, that plutonium-238 in batteries is not pure. In it can be
plutonium-239 impurity (up to 1/3 of weight), and also at the given tablets there is
uranium-234 which is a source of neutrons and can lead to creating of other elements
during long operation.

One of the objections of the theory about explosion of fuel cells is that for
plutonium explosion is required implosion of very exact spherical compression of a
sphere of plutonium. I will notice, that sphericity of compression is guaranteed by
uniformity of a high pressure in the bowels of Saturn. (in a bomb, the outside
environment is unpressurized, and all is dependent on the transient explosive
configuration. If the pressure comes from an steady state (on that level) isotropic
environment, it is not the same case!) Besides spherical implosion, there are also to
consider cylindrical compression (that is uniform compression of the cylinder on each
side) and even plane implosion (as a hammer on an anvil) – they are not suitable for
military nuclear bombs as being ineffective, but something more simple can be
interesting to nuclear terrorists as technically more achievable). They too lead to
nuclear explosion, but of smaller force. Non-uniformity of implosion at compression
of fuel tablets can be compensated for by duration of force of external pressure. In
addition, we do not know what yield should be an explosion sufficient to initiate
thermonuclear reaction. (In the fuel tablets collects helium because of the alpha decay
of plutonium so there might be something to light up.) I will notice, that fast
compression of nuclear tablets is probable when external pressure will exceed
structural limit and will suddenly crumple their external shell. Nuclear fuel capsules
should be very heavy, very refractory and very strong to achieve any penetration of the
ocean of the metallic hydrogen that is in Saturn.
And they are made such– so that they would not break in event of possible
combustion of Cassini in atmosphere of the Earth. And for the same reason they
should survive entry into the atmosphere of Saturn. To achieve penetration, even at the
local terminal velocity, to the deep interior, however, may be something else. The
most likely scenario is simple melting (at near solar temperatures) and safe dispersal.

From resulted above logic chain it is clear that certain basic elements to start
a nuclear reaction were present on Galileo and are present on Cassini in the theoretical
case of survival to depths of interest. Moreover, Cassini has twice the fuel cells than
Galileo did. However there are many factors which can prevent the beginning of a
rough chain nuclear reaction, for example, slow melting of elements in process of their
immersion, retraction of nuclear tablets one from another on significant distances etc.
Besides, tablets are surrounded by layers of graphite and iridium, which should
interfere with chain reaction (however these can melt down in the process of
immersion into the hot depths of the planet). On the other hand, we do not know yet
what is actually is in the bowels of giant planets and which conditions are necessary
for initialization to self-supporting thermonuclear reaction in them.

My opinion consists that slow melting and dissolving away of tablets most
likely took place. And I would give 1 chance on 10 000, that a nuclear explosion took
place. Probably this is generous.

On the other hand, if we are to apply Bayesian logic to the fact of an

occurrence of a strange stain on Jupiter soon after splashing down Galileo, it raises
probability of a hypothesis that such an explosion nevertheless took place.
 Besides, we cannot use the fact that explosion has not happened, as the proof
of its impossibility as we could survive only in that world where Jupiter has not blown
up. That is, no matter how small the probability to survive was, we discuss this only in
a world where we have survived, so, we cannot use the fact of the survival for an
estimation of the probability of event. (See my article Natural accidents and antropic
principle http://www.proza.ru/texts/2007/04/12-13.html for more detailed explanation
of this concept.) On the contrary, the fact that the stain of 2003 had huge sizes, says
not only that there was a chance that such an explosion took place but also that a
significant amount of surrounding heavy hydrogen has participated in it, for some time
was self-sustaining until it petered out at the gigaton level, some meters away from the
trigger point in the fuel mass.

As we see, even at a present insignificant level of development of space

technologies, (in this rather paranoid worse-case view) mankind has made the second
attempt in a decade to blow up a giant planet, albeit inadvertently. In the future when
there will be robots, capable of even limited self-reproduction, development of Solar
system will go at much bigger rates. Thousands of spaceships belonging to different
people and corporations will plough space. Manufacture of radioactive isotopes will
considerably be reduced in price and become widespread. A set of expeditions will be
sent to giant worlds, or the outer moons, immersions into their bowels will be
commonplace, at least in terms of one-way probes. Perhaps nuclear depth charges will
be sent for gas giant seismology. As a result sooner or later (by Bayesian argument
perhaps much later), as an accident, or as an experiment only meant to go so far, or in
an malicious, intentional fashion, a suitable thermonuclear device will be blown up in
an area capable by design, accident or circumstance of supporting runaway
thermonuclear combustion. Therefore of much bigger interest is the response of giant
to a detonation, regardless of the motives of those causing it—if indeed they have any,
in the case of an accident? If the reaction is absolutely impossible, it won’t happen in
the worst case, and our motives do not matter. If it can happen…we would truly prefer
to know in advance, for only then can we take precautions.

Possibility of explosion of a giant planet.

Briefly, the possible reasons enabling the explosion of giant planets are:

Inside the giant planets is thermonuclear fuel under high pressure and at high density.
This density for certain substances is above the density of these substances on Earth.

At 10,000 kilometers below Jupiter's cloud top liquid hydrogen reaches a

pressure of 1,000,000 bar with a temperature of 6,000° K. At this state hydrogen
changes into a phase of liquid metallic hydrogen. In this state, the hydrogen atoms
break down yeilding ionized protons and electrons similar to the Sun's
interiorhttp://www.solarviews.com/eng/jupiter.htm
Other sources hold that it takes 4 million bar to transition to the metallic
hydrogen phase. For comparison, the pressure at the core of the Earth is 3 million bar.
http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Nwfaq/Nfaq4-4.htm gives the radiation implosion
pressure in the 1952 Mike deuterium H-bomb as 73 megabars.)
 Large quantities of combustable substances would not be able to escape from a
triggered reaction zone fast enough to avoid consumption. This fuel has never been
involved in combustion reactions, so it remains rich in easily combustible components,
namely, deuterium, helium-3 and lithium, which have all burned preferentially in the
stars. In addition, the depths of giant planets contain fuel for reactions, which may
prompt an explosive fire - namely, the tri-helium reaction (3 4He = 12C) and for
reactions to the accession of hydrogen to oxygen, which, however, require much
higher temperatures for ignition. Substance in the bowels of the giant planets is a
degenerate form of a metal sea, just as the substance of white dwarfs, in which
regularly takes place explosive thermonuclear burning in the form of helium flashes
and the flashes of the first type of supernova.

The more opaque is the burning environment, the greater are the chances for the
reaction to spread in it, as well as less resultant dispersion of the fuel; in the bowels of
the giant planets there are many impurities and can be expected to lower transparency.
Gravitational differentiation and chemical reactions can lead to the self-segregation of
areas within the planet that are more suitable to run the reaction in its delicate initial
stages. These may be compared to the primer charge on a larger charge of cheaper,
less sensitive chemical explosive.

The stronger will be the explosion of such a thermonuclear ‘blasting cap’ warhead the
greater will be amount of the initial field of burning, and the more likely that the
response would be self-sustaining, as the energy loss will be smaller and the number
of reaction substances and reaction times would be greater. It can be assumed that if a
sufficiently powerful fuse the reaction will became self-sustaining in the primer charge
and then spread to the limits of the slightly enriched area in the planet.

Let me elaborate these ideas more in detail.

A. A. Bolonkin once has appeared in print (Artificial explosion of the Sun:

real threat to mankind? http://www.pravda.ru/science/planet/space/05-01-
2007/208894-sun_detonation-0 ) with cautions of risks of explosion of the Sun. See
his new article with answers-- Artificial Explosion of Sun. AB-Criterion for Solar
Detonation
http://www.scribd.com/doc/24541542/Artificial-Explosion-of-Sun-AB-
Criterion-for-Solar-Detonation

(discussing in analogy a terrorist throwing a match into a tank (barrel) of

gasoline to kill a house full of enemies and himself)
He has said: “On the Sun reaction of synthesis of hydrogenous nuclei goes
slowly at the expense of the so-called "tunnel effect" because temperature of the Sun is
below the temperature of ignition of an explosive thermonuclear reaction. The sun
"decays", supplying life on the Earth. But if you in one point of the Sun exceed this
temperature of ignition this huge ‘main fuel tank’ with hydrogen will blow up, sweep
and will burn all the solar system, everything, even the most remote, planets. …"a
match " can be such specially designed nuclear bomb. And the instigator - the dying
dictator of the totalitarian state having the nuclear warhead-rocket weapon. People
were already convinced, that of the world is full suicide-terrorists which sincerely
believe that the more they will kill "incorrect people", the more they will get in
paradise”. This idea of Bolonkin has met fair criticism at scientific forums.
Question--
1) It is very difficult to deliver a warhead to the Sun. The Earth moves relative to the
Sun with a orbital velocity of 30 km/s, and this speed should be cancelled to fall to the
Sun. Current rockets do not suffice, and it is necessary to use gravitational maneuvers
around planets. For this reason (high delta-V (velocity changes required) for close
solar encounters, the planet Mercury is so badly investigated (probes there are
expensive to send).
In the updated version http://www.scribd.com/doc/24541542/Artificial-Explosion-of-
Sun-AB-Criterion-for-Solar-Detonation, Bolonkin replies-- Answer: The Earth has a
speed of 29 km/s around the Sun and an escape velocity of only 11 km/s. But Jupiter
has an orbital velocity of only 13 km/sec and an escape velocity of 59.2 km/s. Thus,
the gravity assist Jupiter can provide is more than the Earth can provide, and the
required delta-v at that distance from the Sun far less—enough to entirely cancel the
sun-orbiting velocity around the Sun, and let it begin the long plunge to the Solar orb
at terminal velocity achieving Sun escape speed 617.6 km/s. Notice that for many
space exploration maneuvers, we require a flyby of Jupiter, exactly to achieve such a
gravity assist, so simply guarding against direct launches to the Sun from Earth would
be futile!
Question--
2) Solar radiation will destroy any a probe on approach to the Sun or in the upper
layers of its photosphere.
In the updated version, Bolonkin replies-- Answer: It is easily shown; the high
efficiency AB-reflector can fully protect the apparatus. See [7] Chapters 12, 3A, [8]
Ch.5, [9]-[12].
7. Bolonkin A.A., "Non-Rocket Space Launch and Flight", Elsevier, 2006, 488 pgs.
http://Bolonkin.narod.ru/p65.htm , or http://www.scribd.com/doc/24056182 . The book contains
theories of the more then 20 new revolutionary author ideas in space and technology.
8. Bolonkin A.A., New concepts, ideas and innovations in aerospace and technology,
Nova, 2007.
The book contains theories of the more then 20 new revolutionary author ideas in space and
technology. http://Bolonkin.narod.ru/p65.htm , or http://www.scribd.com/doc/24057071 .

3) The hydrogen density in the upper layers of the photosphere of the Sun is
insignificant, and it would be much easier to ignite hydrogen at Earth oceans if it in
general is possible.
In the updated version, Bolonkin replies-- Answer: The hydrogen density
is enough known. The Sun has gigantic advantage – that is PLASMA. Plasma of
sufficient density reflects or blocks radiation—it has opacity. That means: no
radiation losses in detonation. It is very important for heating. The AB Criterion in
this paper is received for PLASMA. Other planets of Solar system have MOLECULAR
atmospheres which passes radiation. No sufficient heating – no detonation! The water
has higher density, but water passes the high radiation (for example γ-radiation) and
contains a lot of oxygen (89%), which may be bad for the thermonuclear reaction.
This problem needs more research.

However it is not difficult to see, that in case of giant planets these

conditions are removed or facilitated. That is to ignite a giant planet is immeasurably
easier, than the Sun if it in general is possible. To fly to them is much easier, as it
demands smaller change of speeds (delta-v), and such flights regularly are
implemented. There is no great thermal radiation. (But powerful radiation belts.) It is
not difficult to get into areas with very high pressure and density. Hydrogen density in
bowels of Jupiter is considerably above, the deep oceans of the Earth (because it is not
water, also there is no oxygen).

Let's notice, that analogies to falling of comet Schumacher-Levi (1994

collision with Jupiter) or huge lightning events in the atmosphere of Jupiter – do not
work, that is do not prove safety of nuclear explosions in thickness of ocean of
metallic hydrogen. Though the energy allocated at falling of a comet is enormous, at
no point does the extensive heat pulse distributed on great volume reach the intensive
ignition temperature necessary: 100 million degrees at least a one point. The most
important thing is that this energy is most intensively distributed during the explosion
in the upper atmosphere of Jupiter, instead of in the metallic H ocean, therefore the
given situation is similar in no sense.

Let's add that energy release of Jupiter exceeds its consumption of energy
from the Sun that is connected or with its proceeding compression, or with presence of
very weak nuclear reactions in it as assume some theories. In the latter case (if true,
which we realize it may not be) it means the presence in Jupiter of areas in which
these reactions are capable to proceed, at least slowly.

Let's notice further, that ways to initialize thermonuclear reaction relates to

nuclear weapon technology and consequently they are classified. Accessible data can
contain casual and intended errors and cannot serve as a reliable guarantee of
impossibility of any physical processes.

Now we will address to a question on a way of combustion of thermonuclear

fuel. Here is what I. Shklovsky (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iosif_Shklovsky ) writes
about power sources of explosion of the supernovas in his book I.S. Shklovsky: Stars:
Their Birth, Life, Death, San Francisco, 1978, ISBN 0-7167-0024-7
«It is the most natural to consider, that the large quantity of energy released
at flashes of supernova has a nuclear origin. However not any nuclear fuel can be, at
least theoretically, is responsible for star explosion. First of all it concerns to hydrogen
- to the basic nuclear fuel supporting by corresponding thermonuclear reactions quiet
radiation of stars on the main sequence. The matter is that though energy allocation at
full transformation of hydrogen into helium is very great (6 · 10 ** 18 erg/g), it occurs
slowly enough. Therefore an explosion (i.e. very fast release of the considerable
quantity of energy) in this case cannot occur.
The slowness of thermonuclear reactions with hydrogen nuclei has its’
reason in that the necessary chain reaction involving them contains b-decay process.
The last proceed rather slowly and they cannot be accelerated in no way, and it is
spontaneous processes. For example, even at the heat reaction of transformation of
hydrogen in deuterium:

p+p=D+b++n

Occurs because of b-decay very slowly. However at high temperatures

thanks to already considered in § 8 reactions 3He4 = 12С and the subsequent reactions
of nuclei of carbon with nuclei of helium (alpha-particles):

C 12+ He4 =O16 + g, O16 + He4 =20Ne + g

In these reactions considerable quantity of light nuclei of carbon, oxygen and

neon could arise. Nuclei of these light elements can at temperature about hundred
millions K already enter reactions with the protons, accompanied by significant, and
the main thing, fast allocation of energy as such reactions are not accompanied by b-
decay.
"However this way each nuclei of an LIGHT element can consistently attach to itself
(absorbing or associating with?) NO MORE THAN three OR four protons that will supply an
energy upon exit nearby of 10-20 Mev (Russian: МэВ ) on one nuclei."
For heavier nuclei formed by consecutive joining of protons, b-
disintegration presence strongly slows down reactions; it will lose the explosive
character. Nevertheless even 3-4 consecutive joinings of protons give a quite good
explosive. The main question, however, consists in, whether it suffices at a star the
necessary quantity of nuclei of light elements that at their explosion (how it can
happen, we yet do not discuss) the necessary quantity of energy would be allocated.
If a chemical compound of a star which should blow up, if same as at the Sun
in each gramme of its substance it is contained approximately 5 · 10 ** 20 light nuclei.
If somehow explosive reaction with light nuclei described above occurs, the specific
exit of energy will be = 10 ** 16 Mev. It is little by comparison! After all in case of
supernova of II type specific exit of energy at least is 10 times more. If we for a
minute imagine to ourselves, that our Sun would blow up owing to such reaction
energy 10 ** 49 erg would be allocated, and it all the same is less ten times, than is
allocated energy at flashes of supernova of I type. If to assume, that for any unknown
reason Sun bowels would heat up to temperature in hundred millions K explosion
most likely would follow. However speed of retraction of gases would not exceed,
say, 500 km/s, and it at least ten times is less, than observable speed of retraction at
flash supernova (see § 15).
If we wish to explain catastrophic allocation of energy at flash of supernova
by nuclear reactions (and such explosive reactions can occur only to nuclei of easy
elements) it is necessary to assume, that the chemical compound of bowels of the
blown up star should be sharply distinct from the solar. This distinction should be
expressed in incomparably bigger abundance of light elements (nitrogen, oxygen,
carbon, neon) in relation to hydrogen, than on the Sun. For example, if on the Sun on
each one thousand atoms of hydrogen it is necessary only one atom any of these
elements at a star which should blow up, quantity of light atoms should make already
2-3 % from quantity of atoms of hydrogen».

What for us it is important from the above citation? First, that though
hydrogen also is not suitable for fast reactions, but carbon, oxygen and neon which
are present at Jupiter (though and in insignificant quantities) – but in not less, than
nuclei of light elements are in the Sun. Moreover, for the account of presence of a firm
core, clouds etc., these light elements can be present at Jupiter even in more
considerable quantities, than in the Sun because on it comets and other bodies hit and
then rained down in the interior during its formation. And, besides, for the account of
gravitational differentiation and other processes there should be layers where
concentration of these elements is higher. (Besides, Neptune and Uranus have even
more light elements, especially oxygen, and too can be object of purposeful
explosions.)

Structure of atmosphere of Jupiter: (wikipedia)

89.8±2.0 % Hydrogen (H2)
10.2±2.0 % Helium
~0.3 % Methane
~0.026 % Ammonia
~0.003 % Hydrogen deuteride (HD)
0.0006 % Ethane
 0.0004 % water
The mass fraction in atmosphere of other elements makes 1 %: and on all the
whole mass of the planet but 5 per cent. Thus even it is less than neon and helium,
than on the Sun that connect that they have settled on depth. Liquid hydrogen becomes
metal at temperature near 10 000 K.

Secondly, from Shklovsky's citation follows, that the Sun nevertheless can
blow up, if it to heat up to 100 million degrees. It is interesting to us, whether it is
possible to initiate such an staged chain reaction explosion, having heated a certain
volume of a planet or a star and then with this preheating from the first explosion, to
trigger a larger explosion to heat up the next volumes so that chain reaction goes
runaway.

In the Sun fusion occurs slowly, and processes are in equilibrium. If in any
place nuclear reactions were accelerated, the temperature and pressure in it will grow,
and for the account of hydrostatic equilibrium this area has extended, thus, having led
to a temperature and speed of reaction decrease. (see Shklovsky. Stars: Their Birth,
Life & Death.) However it is true, only if the speed of distribution of reaction is less
than the speed of sound in that environment. In bowels of stars this speed of a sound is
rather high for the account of huge pressure and temperatures (up to 10,000 km/s) that
does make difficult occurrence of explosive reactions. In bowels of planets speed of a
sound has an order 10 km/s. (It is easier).

So the bowels of giant planet will not change dynamically in order to prevent
chain fusion reaction as it happens in stars.

Slow combustion of nuclear fuel in bowels of stars is the most known

process of thermonuclear synthesis in the observable Universe, however explosive
combustion in it also takes place. It occurs at flashes of new stars and at helium flashes
on white dwarfs and in nuclei of red giants. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helium_flash

Its basis is threefold helium reaction 3He4 = С12. the formula describing it
energy relise, is that:

E = p 2 X 3T 30

That is energy release is proportional to the square of density, to the cube of

concentration, and to 30th power of temperature. Density in bowels of Jupiter is ~6
orders of magnitude below density in white dwarfs, and concentration of helium – ~1
order. Thus, at the same temperature energy realized would be, according to the
formula, ~15 orders lower. However, to compensate this loss in energy release, it
would be enough to increase temperature approximately three times. That is to, let us
assume, 300 million degrees. Obviously, in natural conditions such temperature cannot
arise, if the temperature mounted slowly, for the time of the reaction the reaction area
would have time to disperse and dissipate (and possibly since it has not occurred,
special conditions are required, namely degenerated gas in white dwarfs which leads
to an invariance of density with temperature growth). However if the temperature
would appear suddenly, above threshold level reaction, the reaction could become
self-supporting. A nuclear bomb of sufficient power can create such conditions of
explosion.
 I will remind, that the detonation is «the supersonic fixed complex consisting
of a shock wave and exothermal chemical reaction behind it. It should not be confused
with deflagration — the wave of slow combustion accompanied by subsonic flows».
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Detonation

Note that the substance inside the giant planets is also degenerate, as the
substance of white dwarfs, namely, a degenerate electron gas in the metallic hydrogen.
It is not known to what extent this similarity increases the likelihood of a self-
sustaining fusion reaction, as is likely, with a sharp heat the state of hydrogen is
destroyed.

The Hariton (Harrison?) theorem that any exothermal substance is capable to

a detonation if its characteristic size surpasses some critical minimum is widely
known. (L.P.Feoktistov. A thermonuclear detonation. УФН 168 1247 (1998)
http://www.ufn.ru/ru/articles/1998/11/f/)

On the one hand, speed of the progress of the threefold helium reaction
depends on the 30th power of temperatures (Shklovsky). On the other hand, the more
the volume of fuel mix that has initially entered reaction, the more reaction time will
be sustained. Thus volume growth will affect the balance between radiating area and
area on which its energy dissipates which will result in much bigger heating of
ambient areas, and which creates a possibility for self-supporting reactions.

For example, at explosion of a nuclear bomb in the air, the size of a bomb is
several meters, and the transparency distance on which goes its radiation is kilometers,
and owing to it energy of explosion is very dispersed evenly over distance. At
explosion of a bomb of the sizes of ten meters to the environment, whose transparency
conditions areonly a few meters may be sufficient for starting chain reactions (for
example, hydrates of methane on the Earth with high deuterium concentration). All the
energy of the bomb passes on a volume of substance, much smaller than it. In such a
circumstance, successful ignition is far more likely

Otherwise it is possible to say: Energy realized is determined by bomb

volume, and radiation losses by the surface area of that volume, therefore, the more
the size of an initial bomb, the less problems with losses of energy and guaranteeing
ignition of additional reactions.

Thus, hypothetical start of a self-supporting reaction needs a certain

combination of conditions:
1) Temperature of the mix
2) Volume of the mix
3) Mix of chemical compounds and correct isotopes
4) Initial pressure and mix temperature.

On people directly depend only the two first parameters – namely: it is

possible to create a bomb of such force to reach demanded values. The alternative
version consists in an arrangement of set of bombs on a surface of an imagined sphere
so that they at first ignite reactions in this sphere, and then already reaction from
sphere can extend to its limits. (If this experiment implements on the Earth an exit of
the reaction out of the target ‘to burn’ the target fuel sphere is not necessary for the
guaranteed destruction of all life on the surface of the Earth, as radiation fallout even
from a small patch of material may lead to millions of tons of radioactive by products
and be global in sweep.)

Second two parameters are set mediated – namely, through selection of a

place of application of such device.

Before test of the first nuclear bomb in the USA was made the report LA-602
http://www.sciencemadness.org/lanl1_a/lib-www/la-pubs/00329010.pdf in which
were considered risks that A-bomb explosion would create chain reaction of synthesis
of nitrogen in earth atmosphere. (Besides, the bomb has been raised highly above
ground as there were concerns about risk of that earth crust will be involved in decay
or synthesis reaction). Conclusions that risks of starting chain reaction in the earth
atmosphere are insignificant have been drawn as a result

Besides, in the article «Unfulfilled Armageddon»

http://www.zn.ua/3000/3150/41866/ it is asserted, that before explosion of first
hydrogen bomb Mike, Gamow had conducted similar calculations which have proved
impossibility of ignition of deuterium at world ocean for the account of explosion
which was conducted on a marine atoll. Unfortunately, to find these proofs in the open
press was not possible, that in particular can mean, that the situation is not so good, as
was sought to present in public. Namely, from the Wood paper mentioned above
setting minimum conditions which are necessary for ignition of 1:300 D-enriched
marine water (force of explosion not less than 10 teratons (million megatons)
(Russian: гигатонн) could follow) – and there may be even more dangerous
revelations, still remaining classified.

Later Compton declared, that chances of accident of ignition of atmosphere

were less than 3 on one million, but A. Kent's investigation has shown, that he has
took these figures from air. See Adrian Kent. “The critical review of estimations of
risks of global catastrophes”. http://www.proza.ru/texts/2008/05/23/67.html

The basic proof of safety of the first nuclear explosion in report LA-602 was
that at synthesis of nuclei of nitrogen huge power losses will occur by radiation of all
kinds, and consequently how the explosion reference temperature was great, reaction
will inevitably fade out.

Besides, if the sphere in which there is a reaction, exceeds the size in 50

metres in radius, in it the Compton effect will start to play a role consisting that at
dispersion of photons on hot electrons there is a cooling of electrons and growth of
energy of photons that leads still bigger ablation of energy by radiation and easing of
thermonuclear reaction. The idea to make a hydrogen bomb (“Simple Super” idea of
Teller), simply having attached a pipe with deuterium to a nuclear bomb did not work,
in particular, because of the Compton dissipation, which cooled it too fast. On the
other hand, in someone's memoirs it is noticed, that if the pipe would be very wide,
then between temperatures of electrons and photons nevertheless would be established
equilibrium. But technically it was unrealistic.

Let's notice, that to the beginning thermonuclear reaction in deuterium

corresponds to energy in 0.1 Mev (Russian: Мэв), and energy allocation makes
approximately 10 Мev. It means, that reaction of one pair of atoms can give energy
that bring in 100 atoms to the reaction, that is a gain – 1 to 50. But in the oceans 1
deuteron exists only on ~6500 atoms of hydrogen (154 ppm) that makes such a
reaction on deuterium impossible at in the open ocean. But it was said that in the
Arctic concentration of deuterium is higher because of some natural reasons and
because of that the Tsar-bomb explosion was feared of starting chain reaction in its
water and so was conducted on air.
But on the Sun is even less deuterium. (The analysis has shown, that on the
Sun it is not enough deuterium, in thousand times it is less, than on the Earth. It is a
qualitative argument in favor of thermonuclear reactions: deuterium is formed in the
central zone of the Sun extremely slowly, and disappears in10 seconds after it is
formed. For so small time it, of course, cannot leave on a surface, and primary
deuterium from gaseous clouds which was saved on the Earth, on the Sun for a long
time has already burnt away.» http://window.edu.ru/window_catalog/pdf2txt?
p_id=4392 the NATURE And POWER SOURCES of STARS. I.Luchkov.)

Let's pay attention to the following logic paradox arising in discussions about
explosion of planets of giants – it is asserted, that self-supporting reaction in them is
impossible, as the hot area will immediately extend and will dissipate. If this area
extends in a planet the average density of substance will be equal in this area to
average density of substance in a planet, and in this case it is impossible to tell, that
the area has dissipated (unlike a case of explosion of a nuclear bomb in atmosphere
where the density of a material of a bomb is much more than atmospheric density and
there is a possibility to dissipate). Thus, if to tell, that the border of extending area will
be denser, and interiors – emptier-- it will be similar to a shock wave front.

If so, then the heated area will dissipate only at the limits of Jupiter –and it
will be the explosion of Jupiter!

Think of an analogy to combustion: If on a tip of a sheet of paper the small

spark can go out itself and if the huge heap of rotten rags it can ignite spontaneously
we see the volume of the burning weight even is more important than its temperature.

Thus, absence of explosive thermonuclear reactions to the Sun with

deuterium cannot serve as the proof of impossibility of these reactions on the Earth
and in giant planets as on the Sun deuterium (as we have seen—at least in the interior)
already is not present.

However the given Compton argument does not work in relation to less
transparent environments, moreover, it prompts, that the most dense and opaque
substances as firm materials of a mantle of planets of earth type are should be the most
dangerous prey to a potential explosion! These materials should contain enough of
hydrogen, helium, oxygen and carbon that in them fast thermonuclear reactions could
proceed. To these requirements, apparently, well suited is the sea-bottom of the
Earth-- rich with fossils, in particular with hydrates of methane which contain H, O, C,
and it is a lot of the impurities making them opaque to light radiation and for neutrons.
(And also the deposits of natural gas rich with an impurity of helium.) The sea-bottom
is under sufficient pressure to exclude the fast retraction (dispersion) of atoms
undergoing fusion «as would occur in vacuum».

Opacity of the metallic hydrogen ocean of Jupiter and other planets of giants
depends on concentration of impurities, and it is impossible to exclude, that on any
depth this concentration is great enough.
 Besides, the important feature of Jupiter is that, unlike the Sun, on it was
saved large quantities of highly combustable isotopes, first of all deuterium (and also
lithium 6 and 7). Besides, there at significant amounts (unlike the Earth) of helium-3
which is considered as perspective nuclear fuel for the future earthen thermonuclear
power stations, and there is a project proposed for its extraction on a giant planet,
namely, on Uranus where the gravity is minimum. In the Uranian atmosphere the
probe which will float and filter helium, purifying helium-3, and then from it a rocket
to the Earth will launch with its’ rich prize. Bryan Palaszewski. "Atmospheric Mining
in the Outer Solar System. http://gltrs.grc.nasa.gov/reports/2006/TM-2006-214122.pdf
this project creates risks of nuclear explosion as such ship will demand for itself
nuclear power installation, and, by definition, will be filled by nuclear fuel in the form
of helium-3.

I will remind, that lithium6 deuteride is the basic fuel of modern hydrogen
bombs. It is possible to assume, that in some areas, thanks to the mass differentiation
of hydrogen, the quantity of deuterium in Jupiter will be raised (though this would
contradict data about a strong convection in its atmosphere). But on an ocean of
metallic hydrogen if there is no strong convection, it is possible. It is possible to
assume also, as itself natural lithium deuteride (in the form of areas of the raised
concentration) is formed on Jupiter in certain unique conditions – also as on the Earth
sometimes there are gold nuggets.

In the future when development of planets becomes massive, there will be a

set of the independent stations working in atmospheres of giant planets, and wars for
the right of use of planets with application of the nuclear weapon that is besides
fraught with its falling in bowels of these very planets and scientific nuclear depth
explosions (for investigations akin to helioseismology but for giant planets) are
possible also.

Conclusion: the possibility of starting of the thermonuclear detonation of one

of the giant planets looks possible though a fuse of huge force for this purpose can be
demanded. (Or may not: In megabar conditions even a small thermonuclear warhead
may suffice) In other words, at presence of an ultimately strong fuse, we, possibly,
can ignite a giant planet. Without exact calculations it is impossible to estimate force
of a fuse.

Also as well as on the Earth not just any small nuclear explosion can lead to
the kind of uncontrollable nuclear reaction we fear. Similarly, the future explosion of
Cassini will not necessarily result in explosion of Saturn even if explosion of Saturn
basically is possible with a sufficient detonator. All depends on the igniter and the
place to be ignited.

It is possible to give from following «expert estimations»: probability of

explosion Cassini – less than 1 to 10 000, probability of that giant planets basically
can blow up – 1 to 10, the probability of that explosion Cassini becomes a cause of the
explosion of Saturn – too 1 to 10 000, probability of extinction as a result of explosion
– 1. Then total probability of extinction as a result of mission Cassini – 1 to billion.
But even this estimation is unacceptably great, according to A.Kent.

Besides, an error in an estimation of this estimation could be more than the

estimation, which is hardly less often, than 1 time in a billion.
 The probability of accident with Cassini is approximately same, as well as
chances of accident with LHC. It is sad that the mankind creates very many dangerous
experiments simultaneously.

Let's notice, that the problem of explosion of celestial bodies will arise and at
a hypothetical future dicersion of comets menacing to the Earth and asteroids by
means of nuclear explosions. As for such deviation some large bodies will be required
explosions of gigaton scales, chances of fusion detonations of debris of comets will
inevitably increase. (The assumption here, is that rare patches of enriched burnable
isotopes may exist in some comets)

And as such explosions, probably, will be near to the Earth (if to intercept
comets at the last minute) consequences may be rather pitiable. Besides, radiation
from the explosion of a nuclear interceptor rocket too will drop out to the Earth.

Gravitational separation may also be at work, collecting deposits of heavy

water inside cooled water bodies - such as satellites of giant planets.

To destroy all intelligent life on the Earth it would be sufficient to blow up a

cube of heavy water (on the Earth) an edge of 100 meters, which would roughly 1000
gigatons (equivalent to a strike of the asteroid with diameter of several kilometers),
but more important then the blast is the killing mechanism of millions of tons of
radioactive waste, dispersed world wide. Enough heavy water may be possible to get
using genetically modified organisms, sensitive to the isotopic composition. «But at
the same time know that physical and chemical properties D2O quite different than the
H2O – its’ isomer. Thus, the boiling point of heavy water is +101,4 ° C and freezes it
at +3,81 ° C. Its density is 10 per cent more than the usual. » (Be careful, heavy water!
M. ADZHIEV http://nt.ru/tp/mr/otv.htm) The article alleged that the bottom ice in
the northern rivers consists heavy water, as well as exist deposits of ice that is at
the bottom of the Arctic.

«Largest solar neutrino detector SNO (Canada) contains 1 kiloton of heavy

water». (Wikipedia) http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Тяжелая_вода
It could lead to 10-16 gigaton (10,000-16,000 megaton) explosion in case of
detonation.
Also many fission nuclear reactors contain heavy water. (A lesser quantity,
though)

Famous opponent of LHC Sancho wrote:

“I have had several lengthy, hours-long discussions with Dr. Richard
Webb concerning the thermonuclear detonation potential of the
various fusible materials in high concentration at the LHC, which
consist primarily of fusible C-12 in the one-ton graphite collimators
and multi-ton graphite, the fusible N-14 in cylinders of compressed
air at 100 atmosphere concentration, and the fusible liquid He-4
utilized as the coolant of the superconducting magnets that ring the
full 27 kilometer circumference of the beam pipes of the LHC. He is
likewise agreed that the potential for an accidental thermonuclear
detonation of those fusible materials from an errant beam might be
present, and needs to be examined in detail.»
http://www.lhcdefense.org/pdf/SANCHO%20v.%20DOE%20-
%20%20September,%202008%20-%20Affidavit%20of%20WLW
%20in%20Support%20of%20Reply%20Memorandum%20%20-
%201.pdf
Furthermore, if the helium from cooling system gets into the ring of
accelerator, you get something like TOKOMAK fusion reactor mechanism!
The same applies to the future ITER project, which, among other things,
would be extremely dangerous to accumulate cobalt-60 in the walls of the chamber
(blanket), and in case of an explosion of it will be a huge radioactive contamination.

Sediments of deuterium are possible on Mars (check!!! deuterium develop

from cosmic rays - neutron capture of hydrogen - hence, smaller space body will have
greater concentration of deuterium, as their relation of surface to volume is more), and
even in the nuclei of comets and icy dwarf planets. In this sense, it is dangerous to
repel an in-falling comet by nuclear explosion because it could lead to its detonation -
and the fallout of formed radioactive elements on the Earth. (Remember the recent
outbreak of the Holmes comet. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holmes_comet However,
the default mechanism for cometary explosions is chemical, involving free radicals.
This however does not affect our argument since we are focusing on the worst case
only!)

Moreover, if true, that deuterium develop from hydrogen under the influence
of cosmic rays, the ancient surface of ice moon would be extremely rich with
deuterium - because there is no mixing. For example, the surface of Enceladus, which
Cassini regularly flies by and could smash into it. However, if the explosion will cover
only the surface of Enceladus, rather than its volume, the number of the resulting
radioactive elements may not be enough to harm the Earth, although the total
destruction of the satellite and its residual spraying throughout the solar system (with
subsequent «nuclear» winter on Earth) is very likely. As well as dispersion of high-
speed shrapnel as a result of dissymmetrical explosion that could also fall to Earth.

There is reason to believe that deuterium can be a separate layer of the

innermost regions of Jupiter.
«In the Livermore lab received evidence that deuterium D2 (heavy
hydrogen) into a metallic phase at a pressure of 50 GPa and temperature of 8000 K.
Some conditions are believed to exist in the bowels of the planet Jupiter. »
http://nature.web.ru/db/msg.html?mid=1156483&s =

«In today's thin Martian atmosphere attitude of deuterium to hydrogen in

water vapor is five times higher than in the water on Earth. Past studies attributed this
way hydrogen from Martian atmosphere over time. Because hydrogen is lighter
deuterium, it evaporate more quickly, leading to relatively high levels of deuterium in
the atmosphere of Mars in our time. »
http://martiantime.narod.ru/Papers/01014.htm

«In the meteorite containing hydrogen, the content of deuterium observed by

dozens of times higher, compared with the earth.» «Such clashes of meteorites or
asteroids in the solar system may be caused by some of the gamma-ray bursts (with
the range and time), attributed to a remote extragalactic objects. » Mikhail Karpov.
Cold nuclear fusion and education issues light elements in the Earth's crust and
meteorites. http://www.sciteclibrary.ru/rus/catalog/pages/9070.html

Hypothetically, you can imagine the two-stage (or even three) thermonuclear
detonation of celestial body. Initially, explode very small (a few hundred meters in
size) area with very high concentrations of deuterium - say, a glacier. Then it ignites
surrounding area with less deuterium, which requires for its combustion the starter of
greater force. (the original area of high concentration serves as this primer charge).
Then, the reaction becomes the triple helium reaction, which covers a considerable
amount of the planet.

However it was found that cosmic rays couldn’t produce lithium

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_ray_spallation

Ultra-dense deuterium may be the nuclear fuel of the future

http://www.science.gu.se/english/News/News_detail?contentId=879280
“The material is produced from heavy hydrogen, also known as deuterium, and is
therefore known as “ultra-dense deuterium”. It is believed that ultra-dense deuterium
plays a role in the formation of stars, and that it is probably present in giant planets
such as Jupiter.”

Explosion consequences

Let's assume that explosion of Jupiter (or Saturn – but for simplicity we will
consider Jupiter alone) has occurred. What will be negative consequences of this event
for the Earth?

Here there are two versions of events – 1 – explosion occurs at the moment
in time (now) when people live only on the Earth. 2. Explosion occurs in 100 or more
years when the mankind has extended over all the solar system. In the second case
explosion is much more probable, but its’ consequences could be not as deadly to
mankind as a species.

Energy of explosion will be equal in the maximum case to energy of flash of

a nova – if the most part of the thermonuclear fuel in Jupiter burns through. If
explosion is of smaller force than this, we have a question--whether will be its forces
enough to force the mass of Jupiter to escape velocity (59.2 km/sec) Jupiter to dump
the atmosphere. I believe if this will occur, consequences for the modern Earth will be
pitiable.

As I already spoke, Jupiter cannot become a second steady-state star in Solar

system, (owing to its’ small mass) and consequently only its explosive combustion is
possible. Maximum time of this process is determined by speed of a sound in the core
of Jupiter which is not less 10 km/sec. Second, by the size of burning area – no more
than 100,000 km. Thus, maximum time of combustion no more than 10, 000 seconds--
that is three hours. However the interior, more dense and smaller on a volume basis
most likely will burn faster, and the burning rate will make up to 1000 km/sec, that
corresponds to speed of gases in plasma, heated to hundreds of millions degrees. Thus,
minimum time of combustion will be approximately 10 seconds.

If only one thousand part of substance of Jupiter takes part in reaction, and
the energy equal of one thousandth part weight of that substance which has entered the
reaction it will be equivalent to a mass converted to energy of 10 ** 18 tons. Thus
every second in bowels of the Sun 4*10 ** 6 tons of substance pass in energy. From
here follows, that luminosity of Jupiter approximately over an hour (rough time of
dispersion and atmosphere—now plasma ball-- cooling) becomes ~100 million times
more than the present luminosity of the Sun. On account of the 5 AU (average)
distance from the Earth, this energy will decrease approximately by 25 times, but in
any case, within an hour the radiation flux will exceed solar by a million times. There
is no need to press in exact calculations, to tell, that it will result in failure of the
atmosphere of the Earth and destruction of all its’ biosphere.

Possibly, significant layer of rocky rocks will be broken (from tens of metres
to kilometres by thickness). On the other hand, as flash will be short-term the
underside of the Earth and other planets will suffer considerably smaller damage, and
theoretically underground bases, deep in several kilometres in depth on Earth’s moon,
could go through this flash. (It also means, in case of the future space conflict, that the
party which will dispose such bases, can be interested in explosion of Jupiter on
purpose to clear Solar system of the opponent.)

The blast wave from the heated hydrogen will reach the Earth in some days
or weeks, but nothing will be there left to destroy, and force of its effect will be less,
than from the flash.

If explosion will be less energetic (or as it was offered in one place, the Earth
will be obscured from it by the Sun during this moment i.e. at the anti-jovian point)
radioactive fall-out from explosion will be the factor that threatens the Earth.

At supernovae, and at nuclear explosions, are created many radioactive

elements (On account of acquisition of neutrons with heavy nuclei. This is how heavy
elements are created, and initial debris products will contain a large percentage of
unstable short half-life highly radioactive, elements As before, arrival of the remnants
of Jupiter to the Earth will take from several days till several years; the worst isotopes
will decay but the remnant will be quite enough. A significant amount of (‘hot’)
isotopes with the decay periods greater than some years will remain and will drop out
by meteoric action onto the Earth. For example, for full radioactive contamination of
the Earth only a few hundreds thousand tons of cobalt-60 is required. It will mean long
and painful death for all life.

The viewable size of the Earth from Jupiter is approximately 1 to 100 000,
and the share of the Earth in its firmament– (subtended angle of arc) 1 to 10 billionth
of sky area. It is possible to assume, that the Earth will receive not a smaller share of
the substances dumped by Jupiter (actually, more, for the account of gravitational
acquisition, which sweeps out a far greater area than the planet’s physical sphere
does). If it dumps 1/10 the proportional weight to the Earth there will drop out 10 **
13 tons of jovian fallout (that is 10 000 cubic km at water densities).

In case of explosion of the supernova the isotope nickel-56 with the decay
period of 6 is transformed into an isotope cobalt-56 with the decay period of 77 days.
At speed of explosion of a shell of Jupiter about 1000 km/s (about corresponding to
speed of atoms of substance at temperatures of thermonuclear combustion) decay
products will reach the Earth within 8 days. Even if only one ten-thousand part will
consist of radioactive elements, it all the same will be 10 ** 9 tons, or 2 tons per
square kilometre of an earth surface, that is 50 000 mol substances of nickel or 10 **
29 atoms which will give 10 ** 17 decays (bequerels) on each square meter per
second, that, is roughly speaking, there will correspond to one million roentgens in a
second, that is one thousand lethal doses a second. Even if radiation will be a billion
times less then one lethal dose will take 10 days.

Further, in case of destruction of Jupiter the Solar system will be filled with
its remnants and the remnants of its satellites, many of which will get into the inner
solar system and will result in intensive meteoritic bombardment of the Earth.
Gravitational stability of the solar system also may suffer—The Sun is 99.86 percent
of the mass of the Solar System, and Jupiter is .1 percent. Close flybys of large masses
may change orbital geometries to some small extent.

At last, the remnants of Jupiter can generate the new "protoplanetary" disk
which part (also it will be temporary) in internal areas of Solar system and will
disseminate the Sunlight that will result in «nuclear winter» on the Earth. The optical
thickness of the disk will be especially great in an ecliptic plane so the Earth can
plunge into full darkness. I will remind the reader, that insignificant weight tails of
comets are very brightly visible in the sky, that a lot of mass is not required (given the
large area) for darkening the Sun over a square meter. And if this exercise is repeated
over the entire perceived disk area of the Sun as seen from Earth—we are in trouble in
any case.

These conclusions do not strongly differ for explosions of Saturn, Uranus

and Neptune as uncertainty of these conclusions makes several orders of magnitude
variation, however the reserve of "striking ability” makes many orders of magnitude
of overkill. Hence, a nuclear explosion of any planet should be considered as threat to
human existence.

Only when the mankind will be settled far beyond inner Solar system, for
example, in Kuiper belt, or Oort Cloud, only then will an explosion of Jupiter not
represent for it danger of full extinction.

You can also argue that high concentrations of deuterium would be only deep
inside the giant planets, which is difficult to penetrate for the probe due to high
pressure and temperature. But here are possible options. For example, Earth has a
solid core of iron at a temperature of about 6000 degrees - that is possible to retain a
firm shell probe by the fact that at high-pressure (3 million bars at the Earth’s core)
substance remains solid at high temperatures.

In addition, high temperatures should not penetrate into the probe, which
imposes restrictions on the speed of immersion / size of the probe. Finally, the
envelope must withstand pressure and not pass it on to the center.

There is a presumption that in the liquid iron in Earth's is dissolved hydrogen

in large quantities (and that even at the expense of it the earth is increasing) - if so, the
bowels of the Earth can also be enriched with layers of deuterium.

However, the probe should be dropped out in this environment quickly to

survive the ambient heat.

And to reach these depths is not difficult, because the planet is liquid. (It
should be noted that the temperature at depth in the giant planets is tens of thousands
of degrees. But the pressure aids nuclear reactions.
 At 10,000 kilometers below Jupiter's cloud top liquid hydrogen reaches a
pressure of 1,000,000 bar with a temperature of 6,000° K. At this state hydrogen
changes into a phase of liquid metallic hydrogen. In this state, the hydrogen atoms
break down yeilding ionized protons and electrons similar to the Sun's
interiorhttp://www.solarviews.com/eng/jupiter.htm
Other sources hold that it takes 4 million bar to transition to the metallic
hydrogen phase. For comparison, the pressure at the core of the Earth is 3 million bar.
http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Nwfaq/Nfaq4-4.htm gives the radiation implosion
pressure in the 1952 Mike deuterium H-bomb as 73 megabars.)

However, depending on the results of computer modeling, (specifically on the

time required for descent to target depths and the insulation efficiency of a many-layer
sinking body containing the warhead) there may be in principle ways to insulate a
bomb to a given pressure level if the concentration of thermonuclear fuel is known in
the target region before sinking the bomb there.) The key issue is penetration time.
What will be terminal descent velocity? If less than a day, might a 100-layer thermal
defense be sufficient to allow a bomb to survive until a pressure switch goes off? If
slower, but more efficient insulation (or simply more layers with same efficiency) the
result could be the same.
If so, the technology of explosion of the giant planets, in principle, may be
reachable for our civilization now.

In the future, when the development of nanotechnology will allow quick and
cheap way to master space, the question of finding the layers with high concentrations
of deuterium and the creation of huge explosive devices to initiate the explosion will
greatly simplified. In fact, hostile organizations may launch an invisible nanorobots
into depths of a giant planet that will create a fuel source for a cosmic explosion in
several years or even less.

Moreover, nanotechnology will enable separation of isotopes, and this means

that it will be possible to artificially create an inside layer in the planet with
sufficiently high concentration of deuterium and other elements necessary for the
explosion (lithium-6, for example, to create lithium deuteride, as in modern hydrogen
bombs) and then be able to blackmail the entire solar system. In addition, the
transformation of the planet can be made imperceptible to the outside observer, if he
does not have monitoring devices placed in the bowels of the planet.

Other possible explosions of planets.

Some time back E.M.Drobyshevsky has made waves over all the Internet
with the article «About prority of space missions» (Danger of explosion Callisto and
priority of space missions www.ioffe.ru/journals/jtf/1999/09/p10-14.pdf) where he
asserts, that the satellite of Jupiter Callisto can blow up because of chemical
combustion reaction in ionised ice (caused by cosmic radiation and chemical
radiolysis over time). We will admit, for this argument, that it so. Then spontaneous
explosion of Callisto in the next 100 years has chances less, than 1 to 10 million,
recognising that Callisto has existed whole not less than one billion years. On the other
hand, an expedition to the satellite going about its’ business with deep drilling and
other (explosive?) seismic sounding, can go awry and lead to explosion of Callisto
even such a minor vehicle falling on a surface explosion through a navigational
mishap or implosion of plutonium batteries through collision at cosmic velocities
without atmospheric slowdown). I think, that it will be fair to assume, that expedition
on Callisto has not less than 1 chance from 1000 that it will result in accident (if such
an accident is at all possible). In other words, the very probing expedition increases
the chances of an accident by ten thousand times. Thus, priority of space missions
should consist in: Not to direct any missions to Callisto! A prospective investigator
might say, "It is necessary to investigate, whether can Callisto blow up. Its ices are
how much strongly saturated by electrolysis products, we do not know, and no one can
tell us. It is necessary to voyage to Callisto, to land there there, to drill, search," - the
scientist might say. http://www.uralweb.ru/news/n325810.html

Any number of self-booting jokes are possible, in which the precautions

themselves become the trigger that causes doom to humanity. (One such joke here is
pertinent: The autopsy has shown, that the patient has died of autopsy.)

Besides, continuing in the worst-case vein, suppose we do find dramatic

results: Callisto can blow up? We should deliver round it space patrols to protect it
from collision with meteorites and from space terrorists? (Because, if knowledge of
risks of explosion of Callisto will be promulgated, future versions of today’s terrorists
may make it their prime target.) We should build bombproof shelters strenuously? Or
we should start to evacuate from it surpluses of bomb isotopes, which itself is fraught
with danger (since that will by definition concentrate them for export?)

Besides, it is possible to consider a hypothetical possibility of collision of

Cassini with the satellite of Saturn—Enceladus-- by which it regularly flies by at small
altitude. Hypothetically, such collision can lead to impact implosion of nuclear tablets
of Cassini, to nuclear explosion and then to the thermonuclear explosion of Enceladus
consisting of water ice with impurity. Weight of Enceladus is 10 million times less
than weight of Jupiter, therefore, proceeding from the resulted estimations, its
luminosity at explosion too should be in ten millions times less. On the other hand,
time of combustion Enceladus will be mere fractions of a second. In this case its
luminosity for one second will exceed solar influx to the Earth by three thousand
times at ground level. It is enough of it to boil a sheet of water of the thickness of
several centimetres. Thus, all life on a surface of one hemisphere will be lost from
burns as from explosion of a nuclear bomb, and also intensive fires will flash. Global
consequences will be comparable with global nuclear war, but some number of people
will survive. At the same time, at explosion Enceladus the significant amount of
radioactive substances also would form, too in ten millions times less than in the case
of an explosion of Jupiter. However we saw, that explosion of Jupiter gives a reserve
of a billion times on more radioactivity than the minimum (well-distributed) needed
for human extinction, it is quite possible that a mere explosion of Enceladus can
suffice.
Similar sort of a reasoning are applicable and for thermonuclear explosion of
other satellites of planets, large asteroids and terrestrial planets if there will be ways of
effecting their detonation. It is possible to imagine also, that intragalactic meteorites
having speeds in hundreds of kilometres per second, (expelled, let us guess, from
binary objects where inadvertent gravity assists make possible such speeds) might
create fusion reactions in case of their collision with ice satellites. However unlikely,
it only takes one…
 Finally we mention the theory that explosions of planets are connected with
natural uranium reactors in their centre. (Anisichkin. Voronin, Calculation of the
fragmentation of planets at explosion
http://www.vniitf.ru/rig/konfer/5zst/Section2/2-4r.pdf and their other
activities.) Explosions occur after impact events when the natural uranium reactors in
the planet centre contracts. Such reactor in the active form could be on the Earth and at
planets of giants, and in sleeping (dormant) form – on other terrestrial planets and on
some (iron) asteroids. This is comparable to the georeactor theory of Professor
Herndon in the USA.

Now there were projects of deeply drilling of the mantle by means of refractory probes
with a radiation heat source or reactor (Aranovich). (A ‘hot drop’) Besides risks of
creation of a supervolcano, such probes create also risk of nuclear explosions at
sudden implosion under massive pressure of a shell of a probe and sharp compression
of radioactive substance if it supports fission. Such explosion could become the
initiator for awakening or strengthening of the activity of a hypothetical natural
uranium reactor. Consider
a paper that is not comforting in this context

http://arxiv.org/pdf/physics/0308058:

Geo-engineering Gone Awry: A New Partial Solution of Fermi’s Paradox

By

Milan M. Cirkovic & Richard B. Cathcart

http://arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/0308/0308058.pdf

(Fermi’s Paradox is the calculation that intelligent extraterrestrials should be

visible everywhere yet are to be found nowhere. One common offered solution is that
we are the first. Another common solution is that the Cosmos is far deadlier than we
imagine, and we are just not a victim yet.

We know for certain of natural uranium reactors whose traces are found in
the uranium mine in Gabon where reaction went hundred thousand years in deposits of
the uranium ore washed by flows of underground waters (as natural moderator in early
times when U-235 was more abundant).
http://www.rol.ru/news/misc/news/02/10/16_078.htm But there they write, that at the
moment such reactors cannot work, as uranium-235 has broken up to level of
concentration below 3 percent. (Currently 0.7 percent) Nevertheless, there is a thought
about starting of nuclear explosion of the Earth for the account of explosion of a
thermonuclear bomb in uranium mines. Though such explosion cannot capture all
planet, the effect can be catastrophic for the account of huge allocation of radiation
rich fallout. This is however probably impossible, barring a deliberate attempt to use
huge amounts of fusion isotopes to trigger such uranium concentrations.

When I studied physics in school, my friend has told me that if to collect all
nuclear charges in the Marianas trench and to detonate them, an uncontrollable chain
reaction will begin, the Earth will burn three days and destroy everything. The
statement that it will burn three days, obviously, is false as there are no conditions for
a stable combustion, (a runaway explosion is rapid or nonexistent) and we may
dismiss this case as just another ignorant rumor. This does not however mean that a
sufficiently massive thermonuclear charge on the ocean floor near, say, a spreading
ridge might not open a volcanic vent to a mantle plume that Mankind might well wish
had stayed closed. This might cause a new Iceland sized island, but probably would
not cause mass extinctions.

Possibly an (also hypothetical!) planetary explosion might (with unlikely

compressional geometries and efficiencies) result also in creation (or release!) of a
small black hole and its immersion into a planet. At accretion onto the black hole 30-
50% of infalling matter’s mass is released into radiation. Too, concerns about
strangelets, magnetic monopoles and other hypothetical objects whose risks of
occurrence were discussed in connection with the LHC might be released. This is
stacking improbable cases on top of each other until they teeter, but this paper
cheerfully examines all worst cases!

At the core of the Sun has already begun to shape the future white
dwarf, into which the Sun will turn: the density of matter in the core is 150 tons per
cubic meter and the concentration of helium 4 is sufficiently high, and temperature is
15 million degrees. Hypothetically it can be assumed that such conditions is sufficient
for detonation of helium (but not for its slow burning) in the triple helium reaction.
However, to deliver at the center of the Sun a «blasting cap» is at least problematic.
But again there are possibilities to a malevolent future
scientist/dictator/terrorist/ignorant probing fool—Advanced matter substances could
penetrate deeply inside the sun --objects inaccessible now for Earth technologies:
neutrinos, dark matter, microscopic black holes. An example is A.A. Bolonkin’s ‘AB-
Matter’.

Every risk is worth considering, because we don’t know how small it is until
we calculate it.
I estimate that probability of theoretical possibility of ignition of giant planet
is around 1 per cent. (Hopefully the 99% chance is correct—that such a thing is
impossibility.)
And I estimate that chances of intended or occasional detonation of any
planet is also 1 per cent for next several hundreds years.
So, the chances of human extinction from given risk is around ~ 1 to 10 000
—if these calculations are correct. But facts are facts. If it is possible, it can happen. If
impossible it cannot. Yet only a fool does not investigate if he might be in danger.
There was a famous cartoon around the time of the fall of the USA’s Skylab space
station in 1979: A computer tells a scientist, “Look, either it hits you or it doesn’t.
The odds are 50-50.” Until we investigate, the joke is on us!

You may try to dream about the opportunity to influence the flare on
the sun, which are magnetic in nature. (However, they have the upper limit of energy
equal to the total energy of magnetic field of the Sun - see A. Dar.)

Finally, in a collision of two planets also provides enormous energy. For

example, if two terrestrial planets crashed, the realized energy would be equal to about
100 days of luminosity of the Sun. Much of that energy would be released as heat. For
example, if all this energy release occurred during a 24 hour interval-- it would have
led to the luminosity of 100 times greater than that of the sun. (The actual time scale
would be on the order of under an hour) This would lead to burn up of the biosphere
on the side of the Earth where the collision is visible. Even if the colliding planets are
obscured by (say) fragment clouds after the first hour, that first one hour of incredible
heat would cause burning of a hemisphere on Earth. The consequences of meteoritic
rain and sun shadow dust (like nuclear winter) also will follow.

As the resulting breakup dust will be in the form of a disk around the sun, it
will change the orientation of solar luminosity - more light will scatter to the side of
the disc, and less along the edge of the disk. Therefore, the planet in the ecliptic plane
will receive much less radiation, even taking into account the balance between
absorbed and radiated dust emission. This might lead to an ice age punctuated by
meteoric fireballs day and night for ages to come.

Natural H-bomb

In 1989, Serge J.D. D'Alessio and Archie A. Harms suggested that some of the
deuterium in a comet entering the Earth's atmosphere may have undergone a nuclear
fusion reaction,[33] leaving a distinctive signature in the form of carbon-14. They
concluded that any release of nuclear energy must have been almost negligible.
Independently, in 1990, César Sirvent proposed that a deuterium comet, i.e., a comet
with an anomalous high concentration of deuterium in its composition, could have
exploded as a natural hydrogen bomb, generating most of the energy released. The
sequence would be first a mechanical or kinetic explosion, triggering a thermonuclear
reaction. These proposals are inconsistent with knowledge both of the composition of
comets and of the temperature and pressure conditions necessary for initiating a
nuclear fusion reaction.[34] Studies have found the concentration of radioactive
isotopes in the blast region to be inconsistent with those expected following a nuclear
explosion, fusion or otherwise.[18]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tunguska_event

The nuclear and aerial dynamics of the Tunguska event,

Planetary and Space Science, Vol. 37, No. 3, pp. 329-340, 1989.
http://www.math.uwaterloo.ca/~sdalessi/Tunguska.pdf

However, this paper (as is known) is written in the spirit of the worst case, so let us
consider—suppose there was such a comet and it was (also!) on a collision course for
Earth—and intercepted (say) at the distance of Earth’s Moon. The warhead we send
to deflect it hits the enriched deuterium patch (a third improbability!) Now—

To calculate nuclear fallout of comet explosion (if it is thermonuclear) we should devide

surfase of Earth on surfase of imaginable sphere with the centre in the point of explosion.
This will be part за fallout which reach the Earth.

Earth is 4 sq. grads from Moon http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grad_(angle)

and sky is 42. 252 sq grad. So, Only 1 of 10 000 fallout atoms would reach the Earth in case
of such a comet explosion. So, (assuming 1,000 gigatons=1 teraton=1 million megatons)
thermonuclear yield is enough to destroy most significant life on earth through nuclear fallout
and isotopes (during the peak of the Cold War total megatonnage was never as much as
40,000 megatons, and most times less than 20,000 megatons) we need a 10 000 times more
powerfull explosion to contaminate the earth from the distance of the moon’s orbit, ie
10,000,000 gigatons of TNT.
Given a yield of 82.4
kT/kg of deuterium, 12.14 kilograms are needed for 1 megaton.
Given a heavy water deuterium concentration of 20% by weight (16 +4 rather than 16
+2) 60.68 kilograms of heavy comet ice are needed for 1 megaton. Therefore we need
1 million times 10,000 times say 61 kilograms of heavy ice, or say 610000 million
kilograms or 610 million tons of heavy ice. This is under a cubic kilometer; many medium size
comets would have sufficient deuterium, some of which may be sufficiently enriched to light up
under a thermonuclear warhead stimulus and ignite the rest. For example, see this article on
the Wild 2 comet on Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/81P/Wild mass approximately
230 billion tons. Supposing that this was a fragment of a larger comet with such an enriched
deuterium deposit, and the enriched fragment was (in the spirit of this paper!) the one to fly by
us closely, it might pay to test for deuterium before firing! (An unenriched comet with sufficient
deuterium would be many times larger). But we need not be so paranoid to imagine frying the
earth with radiation alone—a small pocket of enriched deuterium would convert a ‘routine’
comet deflection warhead mission to a disastrous fragmentation event that could have
radioactive (!) cometary pieces impacting Earth both this orbit and for many years to come.

The literature:

Artificial Explosion of Sun. AB-Criterion for Solar Detonation

http://www.scribd.com/doc/24541542/Artificial-Explosion-of-Sun-AB-
Criterion-for-Solar-Detonation

Jacco van der Worp. Could NASA Use Galileo to Create a Jovian Nagasaki?
YOWUSA.COM, 07-September-03 http://yowusa.com/space/2003/space-
2003-09a/1.shtml

About a stain on a floodlight.

http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/jupiter_dark_spot_031023.html

Forum:
Nuclear ignition of gas giant atmospheres
http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php? t=3156

The Lucifer Project

This is a documentation and study of the feasibility of creating a
sustainable fusion reaction from an initial fission reaction on Saturn caused by a
significant quantity of Plutonium-238 being inserted deep into the atmosphere.
http://www.rinf.com/news/nov05/lucifer-project.html

Richard C. Hoagland. Did NASA Accidentally “Nuke” Jupiter?

http://www.enterprisemission.com/NukingJupiter.html

Spacecraft Power for Cassini

http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/spacecraft/safety/power.pdf

Updated Critical Mass Estimates for Plutonium-238

http://www.osti.gov/bridge/purl.cover.jsp? purl =/6009-YSy5TG/native/
 Artificial explosion of the Sun: real threat to mankind?
http://www.pravda.ru/science/planet/space/05-01-2007/208894-sun_detonation-0

The superbomb of Teller – does not work.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/bomb/peopleevents/pandeAMEX71.html

The "George" Test

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/bomb/peopleevents/pandeAMEX55.html

L.P.Feoktistov. A thermonuclear detonation. УФН 168 1247 (1998)

http://www.ufn.ru/ru/articles/1998/11/f/

Nuclear Reaction When Galileo Spacecraft Impacts Into Jupiter In

September 2003 Unlikely But Possible.
http://www.cyberspaceorbit.com/JUPFULLx.htm

Artificial firing of a star

http://www.astronomy.ru/forum/index.php/topic, 36939.0.html

Discussion about Cassini

http://www.astronomy.ru/forum/index.php/topic, 4673.1580.html

Anisichkin. CALCULATION OF THE FRAGMENTATION OF PLANETS

AT EXPLOSION http://www.vniitf.ru/rig/konfer/5zst/Section2/2-4r.pdf

Drobyshevsky E.M. Danger of explosion of Callisto and priority of space

missions www.ioffe.ru/journals/jtf/1999/09/p10-14.pdf

A.V. Turchin. «Natural accidents and antropic principle»

http://www.proza.ru/texts/2007/04/12-13.html

L.P.Feoktistov. A thermonuclear detonation. УФН 168 1247 (1998)

http://www.ufn.ru/ru/articles/1998/11/f/

Interesting discussion about a possibility of ignition of deuterium at oceans

And in general about consequences of nuclear war.
http://forum.inosmi.ru/forum//themes/printpost? post=474170
http://forum.inosmi.ru/forum//themes/viewthread? thread=17531&offset=60

Discussion at a scientific forum about project Болонкина.

http://elementy.ru/blogs/users/chronicler/10780/

In Saturn and Jupiter liquid metal helium is found

http://www.lenta.ru/news/2008/08/07/giants/

In the novel « colder than ice» floodlight explosion for the account of a
collapse of hydrogen in the metal form is discussed. http://fantlab.ru/work40400
**
 With first such prevention in the Nobel lecture in 1922 F.Aston – the
inventor mass спектрографа, experimentally opened the first isotopes and relativistic
defect of weight in an atomic nucleus has acted. Then he has stated for the first time
idea of thermonuclear reaction of transformation of hydrogen in helium, and also fears
concerning that this artificial reaction can be globalized in earth hydrosphere and to
become "bickford fuse" of space accident of a birth on a place of the former Earth of a
short-lived new star. Since then a possibility of transformation of physical laboratory
in epicentre of space accident that more it is less briskly discussed to this day …
http://www.radonezh.ru/analytic/articles/? ID=2763

(Necessary conditions for the initiation and propagation of nuclear

detonation waves in plane atmospheres. Thomas A. Weaver and Lowell Wood,
Physical review 20 - 1 July 1979,
http://www.lhcdefense.org/pdf/LHC%20-%20Sancho%20v.%20Doe%20-
%20Atmosphere%20Ignition%20-%202%20-%20Wood_AtmIgnition-1.pdf)

Debunk:
Project Lucifer: Will Cassini Turn Saturn into a Second Sun? (Part 1)
http://www.universetoday.com/2008/07/24/project-lucifer-will-cassini-turn-
saturn-into-a-second-sun-part-1/

Bryan Palaszewski. "Atmospheric Mining in the Outer Solar System.

http://gltrs.grc.nasa.gov/reports/2006/TM-2006-214122.pdf

http://www.lhcdefense.org/pdf/SANCHO%20v.%20DOE%20-
%20%20September,%202008%20-%20Affidavit%20of%20WLW
%20in%20Support%20of%20Reply%20Memorandum%20%20-
%201.pdf

http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Nwfaq/Nfaq4-4.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deuterium