I believe that the nuclear option is on the table. I think it would be easier to divert the asteroids by digging in the warhead under a large mass of material that can be expelled by the blast. The momentum given to the expelled mass would be matched by that transferred to the remaining asteroid.
I visualize a large quantity of water located with the nuclear charge that can be vaporized at the time of the blast, giving a push to the mass that is expelled. I do not know if normal asteroid matter can be vaporized to the required degree, but If it can, leave the water home. Dave -----Original Message----- From: Vorl Bek <vorl....@antichef.com> To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com> Sent: Thu, Feb 7, 2013 6:52 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Near earth asteroid info If we have the ability to deflect large objects, we would probably have the ability simply to nuke them with a 20 megaton bomb and turn them into gravel (presumably). In fact, my vague impression is that we have that ability now or could have it within a decade. A 'spaceguard' of orbiting nukes, at varying distances from the earth, at the orbit of the moon and much farther, would give us the ability to meet the objects at a safe distance from earth. If they are intercepted at a distance far enough from the earth that the earth is, say, 1/1000th of the sphere of space around the object that it 'sees', then the gravel that hits earth would burn up in the atmosphere. Some satellites might be destroyed, but that would be a trade worth making. The scare-movies I have seen about large nukes portray them as having a fireball larger than Manhattan, so I assume they could make mincemeat out of a 1km-wide asteroid; but even if they left several large chunks, the chances of one of the chunks hitting that 1/1000th bit of of the asteroid's sphere would be miniscule. And why not have followup nukes to make smaller chunks out of the larger chunks? As Swift said: a Flea Hath smaller Fleas that on him prey, And these have smaller Fleas to bite 'em, And so proceed ad infinitum
