Could a 'Death Star' really destroy a planet?
January 19, 2012 By Ray Sanders, Universe Today
The Death Star. Image Credit: Wookieepedia / Lucasfilm
Countless Sci-Fi fans vividly remember the famous scene in Star Wars in which the Death Star obliterates the planet Alderaan.
Mirroring many late night caffeine-fueled arguments among Sci-Fi fans, a University of Leicester researcher asks the question:
Could a small moon-sized battle station generate enough energy to destroy an Earth-sized planet?
A paper by David Boulderston (University of Leicester) sets out to answer that very question. First, for the uninitiated, just what the heck is a Death Star?
According to Star Wars lore, the DS-1 Orbital Battle Station, or Death Star, is a moon-sized battle station designed to spread fear throughout the galaxy. The image above shows the Death Star as it appeared in Star Wars Episode IV: A New Hope (1977). The Death Star’s main weapon is depicted as a superlaser capable of destroying planets with a single blast.
Boulderston claims that it is possible to estimate how much energy the Death Star would need in order to destroy a planet with its superlaser. There are a number of assumptions made, however, in order to come up with the energy requirement.
For starters, Boulderston assumed that Alderaan did not have any sort of planetary “deflector” shield. A second assumption is that the planet is a solid body of uniform density – essentially ignoring the complex interior of planets, due to lack of information on Alderaan itself. Using the idealized sphere model based on Earth’s mass and diameter, it was possible to determine the gravitational binding energy of Alderaan, using a simple equation of:
U= 3GMp2
——
5Rp
Where G is the Gravitational Constant (6.673×10-11), Mp is planet mass, and Rp is the planet’s radius. Using Earth’s mass and radius, the required energy comes out to 2.25 x 1032 Joules. Using Jupiter’s data, the energy required goes up to 2 x 1036 Joules.
Boulderston asserts that (according to Star Wars lore) the Death Star is powered by a ‘hypermatter’ reactor, possessing the energy output of several main-sequence stars. Given that the power output of our Sun is about 3 x 1026 Joules per second, it’s a reasonable assumption the Death Star’s reactor could power the superlaser.
Despite using a simplified model of a planet, Boulderstone states the simplified model is reasonable to use since the Death Star’s main power reactor has the energy output equal to several main-sequence stars. Even if Earth’s exact composition were used in the equation above, the required energy to destroy a planet would only be affected by a few orders of magnitude – well within the Death Star’s power budget.
Boulderstone reiterated that the energy required to destroy a Jupiter-sized planet would put considerable strain on the Death Star. To destroy a planet like Jupiter, all power from essential systems and life support (no re-routing from the auxiliary EPS conduits – that’s a Star Trek hack!) would be required, which is not necessarily possible.
Boulderstone’s conclusion is that the Death Star could indeed destroy Earth-like planets, given its main power source. While the Death Star could destroy an Earth-sized planet, a Jupiter-sized planet would be a tough challenge, and the Galactic Empire would need to resort to using a Suncrusher to destroy stars.
If you’d like to read Boulderstone’s paper, you can access it at: https://physics.le … view/328/195
Source: Universe Today
-
Planetary professor shows what alien sunset really looks like
Jan 11, 2012 |
not rated yet |
0
-
Scientists searching for Earth-type planets should consider two-star system, researchers say
Jan 09, 2012 |
not rated yet |
0
-
New calculations suggest Jupiter's core may be liquefying
Dec 21, 2011 |
not rated yet |
0
-
Binary star system found by following gamma-ray signal
Jan 13, 2012 |
not rated yet |
0
-
New planet discovered in Trinary star system
Jul 14, 2011 |
not rated yet |
0
-
Stars containing dark matter should look different from other stars
Feb 20, 2012 |
4.5 / 5 (17) |
11
-
Physicists discover evidence of rare hypernucleus, a component of strange matter
Feb 17, 2012 |
4.7 / 5 (38) |
22
-
Fast photon control brings quantum photonic technologies closer
Feb 13, 2012 |
5 / 5 (8) |
1
-
Engineers build first sub-10-nm carbon nanotube transistor
Feb 01, 2012 |
4.9 / 5 (36) |
32
-
Something old, something new: Evolution and the structural divergence of duplicate genes
Jan 31, 2012 |
4.6 / 5 (7) |
1
-
which college offer Light and modern physics in summer?
59 minutes ago
-
linear wave equation vs. linear system
2 hours ago
-
adhesive force and surface tension
2 hours ago
-
Newbie here.
4 hours ago
-
Rainbows in space?
4 hours ago
-
taking mechanical physics next fall
5 hours ago
- More from Physics Forums - General Physics
More news stories
Researchers build first physical 'metatronic' circuit
(PhysOrg.com) -- The technological world of the 21st century owes a tremendous amount to advances in electrical engineering, specifically, the ability to finely control the flow of electrical charges using ...
10 hours ago |
4.7 / 5 (17) |
5
|
Faster than light neutrinos? More like faulty wiring
You can shelf your designs for a warp drive engine (for now) and put the DeLorean back in the garage; it turns out neutrinos may not have broken any cosmic speed limits after all.
10 hours ago |
4.2 / 5 (22) |
23
|
Physicists surprised by disappearing and reappearing superconductivity in iron selenium chalcogenides
Superconductivity is a rare physical state in which matter is able to conduct electricity -- maintain a flow of electrons -- without any resistance. This phenomenon can only be found in certain materials at low temperatures, ...
14 hours ago |
5 / 5 (5) |
2
|
Less is more: Study of tiny droplets could have big impact on industrial applications
(PhysOrg.com) -- Under a microscope, a tiny droplet slides between two fine hairs like a roller coaster on a set of rails until poof it suddenly spreads along them, a droplet no more.
11 hours ago |
3.7 / 5 (3) |
0
|
Study reveals switching mechanism in promising computer memory device
(PhysOrg.com) -- Sometimes knowing that a new technology works is not enough. You also must know why it works to get marketplace acceptance. New information from the National Institute of Standards and Technology ...
18 hours ago |
4 / 5 (4) |
0
|
Spitzer finds solid buckyballs in space
(PhysOrg.com) -- Astronomers using data from NASA's Spitzer Space Telescope have, for the first time, discovered buckyballs in a solid form in space. Prior to this discovery, the microscopic carbon spheres ...
Stanford research team cracks animated NuCaptcha
(PhysOrg.com) -- The research team from Stanford University, led by Elie Bursztein, that previously had cracked regular CAPTCHAs and then audio CAPTCHAs, now has also successfully cracked the animated version called NuCapt ...
Going up: Japan builder eyes space elevator
A Japanese construction firm claimed Wednesday it could execute an out-of-this-world plan to put tourists in space within 40 years by building an elevator that stretches a quarter of the way to the moon.
Flesh-eating bacteria inspire superglue
(PhysOrg.com) -- A bio-inspired superglue has been developed by Oxford University researchers that cant be matched for sticking molecules together and not letting go.
ENASA satellite finds Earth's clouds are getting lower
(PhysOrg.com) -- Earth's clouds got a little lower -- about one percent on average -- during the first decade of this century, finds a new NASA-funded university study based on NASA satellite data. The results ...
Scientists create potent molecules aimed at treating muscular dystrophy
While RNA is an appealing drug target, small molecules that can actually affect its function have rarely been found. But now scientists from the Florida campus of The Scripps Research Institute have for the first time designed ...
Jan 19, 2012
Rank: 4.3 / 5 (4)
Nice of him to bring up the idea and publish this article though - I assume he wrote this in his free time, and we could benefit from more people doing things like this with their free time.
Jan 19, 2012
Rank: 3.3 / 5 (3)
its good work though. lol.
Jan 19, 2012
Rank: 5 / 5 (4)
Jan 19, 2012
Rank: not rated yet
Jan 19, 2012
Rank: 3.4 / 5 (7)
Idiot.
The article states that the math is idealized due to unknowns.
You may be right that some factors may have been missed, but this is just an exercise.
You say that if it "were so easy, then we'd already figured out how to make fusion reactors..."
No. We have figured out the approximate energy of the sun, how it generates energy, it's radius, etc. Some of these estimates are very easy to make. That doesn't mean that it gives us a method how to make energy.
All this guy does is show that the lore of the deathstar is consistent with physics in this one narrow area, that the entire output of several stars is enough energy to destroy a planet. DRRRRR!!@!!
1 star for you, 5 for everyone else.
Jan 19, 2012
Rank: 5 / 5 (2)
The Sun's energy output would require 750,000 seconds to generate enough energy to destroy the Earth. "Several stars" is rather vague, since the don't specify the stars. Assuming the Sun is average, and ten stars that size, it would require 75,000 seconds to generate the energy, or less than a day.
If we're talking A, B, or O stars, it could be an hour or less.
However, even at that rate, it would take months, if not years, to produce enough energy to destroy Jupiter, so the Death Star wouldn't be an effective weapon there.
Jan 19, 2012
Rank: 2.3 / 5 (3)
Take fanciful assumptions and you can extrapolate anything.
That said, there's still the problem that there's ten orders of magnitude difference between the power output of the sun, and the assumed energy it takes to destroy a planet. Doesn't make much difference if there's several of them.
10 to the 10th power seconds is still 300 years before the Death Star is fully charced and ready to fire.
Jan 19, 2012
Rank: 5 / 5 (1)
Jan 19, 2012
Rank: 4 / 5 (1)
Jan 19, 2012
Rank: 1 / 5 (2)
Jan 19, 2012
Rank: 5 / 5 (6)
On the other hand, rendering the planet uninhabitable would be even simpler than Javjav's idea. Given Star Wars technology, put one of their gravity drives on 10 km diameter asteroid, accelerate it to half the speed of light, and aim it at the planet. You'd splatter magma over the entire surface of the planet. The planet might still be in one piece, but there certainly wouldn't be any survivors!
In fact, any drive suitable for manned interstellar travel would be capable of destroying a civilization.
Jan 19, 2012
Rank: 5 / 5 (7)
Jan 19, 2012
Rank: not rated yet
idk, a marble going 90% the speed of light would have some bad effects on the habitability of earth.
Jan 20, 2012
Rank: 5 / 5 (4)
6.673 E-11 m^3/kg/s^2 * 5.9742 E24 kg * .018 kg/mol / 6,371,000 m = 1,126 kJ/mol. This may not seem much larger than the molecular dissociation energy, but consider that you don't need to atomize the planet. If you blow it up so that the average fragment size is a meter cubed, you leave the vast majority of the molecules alone whole but still destroy the planet.
Jan 20, 2012
Rank: 5 / 5 (2)
http://qntm.org/destroy
"Things Of Interest: Blog: Geocide:
How to destroy the Earth"
Barakn is right. The problem is that the mass of the Earth has to be not only broken up, but accelerated to escape velocity. Otherwise it will fall back together, and you'll still have a planet, although not a habitable one.
Jan 20, 2012
Rank: 1.8 / 5 (5)
Jan 20, 2012
Rank: not rated yet
Using his lower estimate of 2.25E32 J, and assuming perfect mass->energy conversion, 2.5E15 Kg of matter would be required.
The first death star was 160km in diameter. Assuming it was solid steel (density of 7.85E12 Kg/Km^3), it would weigh approximately 1.7E19 Kg.
The density of hypermatter is unknown, but if it had an equal density to steel, it would be quite possible to store 10000 shots worth of it within the Deathstar.
Jan 20, 2012
Rank: 2.2 / 5 (13)
My assumptions would be that it's a hyper efficient weapon and can be powered with a nine volt battery. The death star was in fact the size of a moon to house the thousands of people required to run the bureaucracy involved with an empire that has too many weapons and is all too willing to use them. Sound familiar?
Jan 20, 2012
Rank: 1.2 / 5 (5)
Jan 20, 2012
Rank: not rated yet
Jan 21, 2012
Rank: 5 / 5 (4)
Jan 21, 2012
Rank: 4 / 5 (6)
Jan 21, 2012
Rank: 1 / 5 (3)
Jan 22, 2012
Rank: 5 / 5 (4)
On the other hand, methane is a much stronger greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide, so things could get uncomfortably warm if too much is released.
Jan 22, 2012
Rank: 1 / 5 (1)
Jan 22, 2012
Rank: not rated yet
Jan 22, 2012
Rank: 1 / 5 (2)
A missile made from a one kilometer on a side cube of anti-iron should do the trick. This would annihilate with the equivalent amount of molten iron in the planet's core and release enough energy to move the bulk of the planet into orbit around itself.
Of course finding that much anti-iron it a problem.
Jan 22, 2012
Rank: not rated yet
It is one thing to make a laser 10% efficient, and perhaps extremely hard to make one 90% efficient, but making a laser convert power at 99.999999% efficiency I am sure has never happened. Only fiction however, so it can be as unrealistic as they want.
Jan 22, 2012
Rank: 5 / 5 (2)
I would think that the equation is out by several orders of magnitude but then my definition of "destroy" is probably different than theirs.
One needs to define ALL the terms before one can generate an equation.
Jan 24, 2012
Rank: not rated yet
Jan 24, 2012
Rank: not rated yet
They use the gravitational binding energy
http://en.wikiped...g_energy
Which is an upper limit to the energy you would need.
Gravitational binding energy assumes that particles are loose and that you pull them so far apart that they do not coalesce again.
A real planet does not consist of loose particles (and is therefore easier to pull apart because you don't need to pull all particles away from each other but just however many chunks you have blown it into. On the other hand you have to employ some energy to get those chunks to come loose from each other - but that is less than getting the stuff to fly off into space)
Additionally it would be OK to have the parts orbit each other afterwards through gravity. For all intents and purposes it would still be "destroyed". So the energy needed is less.
Jan 24, 2012
Rank: not rated yet
It wouldn't get that far because it would already annihilate with the first cubic kilometer it meets on the surface.
Antimatter reacts with any matter - not just matter that has the same chemical properties (it reacts on a proton-antiproton/electron-positron/neutron-antineutron level).
Jan 24, 2012
Rank: 1 / 5 (1)
Oh, and who's your daddy? I am.
Jan 24, 2012
Rank: 3.7 / 5 (10)
Jan 24, 2012
Rank: 1 / 5 (1)
http://www.youtub...d3QWsyk0
lolz
Jan 25, 2012
Rank: 1 / 5 (1)
Fortunately heat rises so the ocean floors are barely affected by atmospheric temperatures, and most of the hydrate deposits have 5-10 degrees of leeway. If a large quantity did melt somehow (e.g. by an ice age reducing the mass and pressure of the oceans), the first thing to worry about would be oxygen depletion in the ocean from methanotrophs consuming the dissolved methane, as was observed in some parts of the Gulf of Mexico after the oil spill. What little that escapes into the atmosphere will probably not be enough to pull us out of the ice age.
Jan 30, 2012
Rank: 2.3 / 5 (3)
I'd like his next article to be on the doomsday machine from Star Trek TOS.
edit: Oops here is a linky. http://en.wikiped...eries%29