From: dproudfo@jarthur.claremont.edu (Kekoa Proudfoot a.k.a. David)
Subject: Re: Destroy Sun -> Destroy Earth
Organization: Harvey Mudd College, Claremont, CA 91711
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1992 06:01:00 GMT

In article <8APR199221465319@utarlg.uta.edu> b790zcd@utarlg.uta.edu
(George M. Smiley) writes:
> All the talk around hear has centered on destroying the earth via many
> energy intensive applications, but, why not destroy the sun first ?
> Think of it, without the sun this planent becomes cold, lifeless, and
> barren - exactly what we want !! Why would destroying the sun be easier 
> than destroying the earth ? Because:
>  a) If we fucked up destroying the Earth, we might only destroy ourselves
>     thus ruling out any further attempt, however, if we botched destroying
>     the sun we would still be around to try again.
>  b) From a processes standpoint the sun is a much easier thing to understand
>     than the Earth, basically, it is just a really big fusion reactor with
>     alot of fuel.
>  c) Destroying the sun is a final solution, there would be no doubt as to
>     the outcome if the sun was destroyed i.e. the earth becomes a really
>     big charcoal briquet in the resulting explosion and/or the earth falls
>     out of orbit and becomes a really big comet orbiting around somebody 
>     elses sun.

You make some nice points... but let's consider some basic facts about the
sun:
               30
Mass    1.99x10  kg
               5
Radius  6.69x10  km

Now, for comparison, facts about Earth:

               24
Mass    5.98x10  kg (That's 332,776 times less massive than the sun)
                3
Radius  6.378x10 km (105 times smaller then the radius of sun)

Hmmm.  Volume is proportional to radius cubed...
   3
105 = 1,157,625.  That means the sun has 1,157,625 times more volume than the
Earth.

Now, how can you propose to destroy the sun when it has so much more mass
AND it is so much larger than the earth?  Tell me some chemical reaction
(or fission/fusion) reaction which can use, say, a planet as one reagent and
the sun as the other, which will cause a drastic change in the primary
reaction we're concerned with, the fusion of hydrogen, etc. at the sun.  Even
still, perhaps we might find a way to cause a disturbance at the sun.  Some
space-time thing-a-ma-bob... yeah, right.  I'm sure we'll find another,
closer-to-home method of destroying the earth before then.

Am I being too harsh on this whole destroy-the-sun thing?  Maybe I should
remind people that destroying the earth (as in breaking it up into several
chunks) is no easy task either.  Again, the earth is too massive to be
affected (significantly) by nuclear explosions, asteroids, meteors, comets...
Surely, we humans have access to only the crust of the planet--and the crust
is like a thick layer of dust on a large, relatively smooth (in comparison
to its radius) rock.  The crust holds all the material we can use to destroy
the earth.  Thus, there are very little resources available for people who
want to blow the whole planet to bits.  Sure, we can use the material in the
crust to go out into the solar system and get MORE material, but then again,
how much material will we be able to get?  Surely not enough to blow up
the planet.  By the time we can get enough material from the solar system
(and perhaps elsewhere) to _FINALLY_ destroy the earth, there will be colonies
of humans elsewhere.  Life will have spread, and we'll end up having to
destroy more and more.  When will it end?

Well, enough about the impossiblilty of blasting the earth to bits (and enough
about toasting it too).  I've got a couple of questions for all the destroy-
the-earther's out there:

    What will destroying the earth accomplish?

       (Yes, yes, I know the answer is life)

    So, what is the purpose of destroying life?  More specifically, what is
wrong with life as we know it?  Please outline points and please be as
specific as possible.  Perhaps knowing what is wrong will help to focus
people's effort on the problems with life.  This will in turn allow for
correction (whether that means destroying things remains to be determined).

    Please post your responses so other people can respond to responses, etc.
(A type of brainstorming?)  I hope this will help to bring out what it is
destroy-the-earther's are really after (seeing that what many have wanted--
namely blowing the planet to bits--is not likely).


Source of mass/radius data: Halliday and Resnick, _Physics_, 3rd, 1977--
a standard college Physics text.

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
         _
         |     _
        (|avid |)roudfoot              dproudfo@jarthur.claremont.edu
               |                        Harvey Mudd College, c/o '95
Newsgroups: alt.destroy.the.earth