Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Destroying Nuclear Weapons with High-Energy Neutrinos

Posted by michael on from the science-fiction dept.

TheMatt writes "As reported by PhysicsWeb, physicists are proposing a "futuristic but not necessarily impossible" method of destroying nuclear weapons via high-energy neutrinos sent through the earth. Based on current planned efforts, this 'vast extrapolation' of current technology would use 1000 TeV beams. This would require a 1000-km diameter storage ring using magnets orders-of-magnitude stronger than currently available. The cost would be around $100 million-plus and it'd use 50 GW of energy, the UK's current consumption. (And the slight problem that the process might set off the nukes, instead of just melting them...)"

10 of 100 comments (clear)

  1. Dear North Korea by jrivar59 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Dear North Korea,

    Please allow me to express our deepest regrets and sympathies for vaporizing your country. Unfortunatly, while attempting to help save the world from future nuclear calamities, we accidently detonated all your nuclear warheads. We hope that this will not cause you any inconvenience, and we look forward to a prosperous trade relationship with your country at the conclusion of your nuclear winter.

    Sincerly,

    -George W Bush

    1. Re:Dear North Korea by mythr · · Score: 5, Funny

      That's obviously a forgery. Our president could never write something that eloquent. ;)

    2. Re:Dear North Korea by NeoSkandranon · · Score: 4, Funny

      PS: All your base are belong to us.

      --
      If you can't see the value in jet powered ants you should turn in your nerd card. - Dunbal (464142)
    3. Re:Dear North Korea by MousePotato · · Score: 2, Funny

      ..that and he spells it nukular

      --
      Prospecting Stinks. Stop Wasting Time on Cold Calling.
  2. sweet! by sydlexic · · Score: 3, Funny

    that's only about 1.5x what it costs to knock over a middle eastern country. I think we can fit that in the budget somewhere between a $350-750 billion tax cut. Unless, of course, this wasn't a priority.

  3. All I could think of was Dr. Brown. by BoomerSooner · · Score: 4, Funny

    1.21 Gigawatts!!!!

  4. And hold the world ransom for... 1 Million dollars by Radical+Rad · · Score: 3, Funny
    From the paper :
    ...this kind of device can not only target the nuclear bombs but ... any kind of living object including human. ...we sincerely hope that our proposal will motivate and stimulate the revival of the old idea of World Government...

    I think Dr. Evil would like to make these guys an employment offer.

    And where to build the device?
    We first look for a mountain like in fig. 8 whose the surface does not touch many of the straight lines depicted as P1P2, P3P4, Q1Q2 or Q3Q4. We construct two synchrotron A and B which are both revolvable...

    Might I suggest a slightly used extinct volcano with a retractable roof?

  5. Natural Solution. by Martin+S. · · Score: 2, Funny

    Alternative you could take 'natures' own solution, grind and oxidise the core, mix with silicate (sand) and bury in deep holes (disused gold and diamond mines).

  6. Re:Why not just use a fast reactor? by Muad'Dave · · Score: 3, Funny

    Uh, I think the point of the article is to destroy your enemy's nukes while they're not looking, not to destroy nukes as in 'decommissioning' them. This is more of a disarming first-strike thing than anti-nuke, flowers-in-your-hair weapon destruction party thing.

    --
    Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.
  7. Gotta love /. by JUSTONEMORELATTE · · Score: 4, Funny

    After reading 36 of 46 comments, largely from folks saying "I have no clue about any of this, but what about ]blah[", I got the following tagline at the bottom:
    It is much easier to suggest solutions when you know nothing about the problem.

    Who knew /usr/games/fortune was so smart?

    --