No Bomb Powerful Enough To Destroy an On-Rushing Asteroid, Sorry Bruce Willis

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

No Bomb Powerful Enough To Destroy an On-Rushing Asteroid, Sorry Bruce Willis

Posted by samzenpus on Wednesday August 8, 2012 @07:09PM from the big-bomb dept.

coondoggie writes "Maybe it's the doom predictions about the end of the Mayan calendar this year, or maybe these guys are obsessed with old Bruce Willis movies. Either way a class of physics students from the University of Leicester decided to evaluate whether or not the premise of Willis' 1998 'Armageddon' movie — where a group of oil drillers is sent by NASA to detonate nuclear devices on an asteroid that threatens to destroy Earth — could actually happen. The students found it would take a bomb about a billion times stronger than the biggest bomb ever detonated on Earth."

10 of 352 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

What do you mean OLD Bruce Willis movies by Anonymous Coward · 2012-08-08 19:12 · Score: 5, Funny

Armagedon is not that old at all.. uhmm.. ohmm...
Fuck, get of my lawn
1. Re:What do you mean OLD Bruce Willis movies by mwvdlee · 2012-08-08 20:30 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  Fuck, get of my lawn
  You want them to do both at the same time?
  I'll assume the preferred order is in the order written.
  
  --
  Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
Quoth North Korea by Anonymous Coward · 2012-08-08 19:13 · Score: 5, Funny

We have a bomb that big! OoooOOOOOooh!
1. Re:Quoth North Korea by omnichad · 2012-08-09 01:18 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  Funny, I thought you were quoting Hollywood. Perhaps The Happening? One of the biggest bombs I've seen in a long time...
Obligatory Chuck Norris comment by Anonymous Coward · 2012-08-08 19:29 · Score: 4, Funny

Forget Bruce Willis, you just have to land Chuck Norris up there and have him stomp his foot once.
Re:Don't forget who directed the movie by robthebloke · 2012-08-08 21:09 · Score: 4, Funny

Plot points aren't exactly Michael Bay's MO...
FTFY
Re:not about destroying by Rei · 2012-08-08 21:57 · Score: 5, Funny

Exactly what I was thinking: Define "destroy". Do they mean completely vaporize or just something that will do the job?
Yes, if only there was a way to know what the students meant, like, oh I don't know, reading the article?

--
Sometimes I doubt your commitment to Sparkle Motion.
Re:not about destroying by foniksonik · 2012-08-09 00:29 · Score: 4, Funny

Don't you mean:
"Siri, we got an asteroid that will hit us!"
"I'm sorry, I didn't quite get that. Would you like me to search the web?"

--
A fool throws a stone into a well and a thousand sages can not remove it.
misplaced modifier by Hognoxious · 2012-08-09 00:36 · Score: 4, Funny

You've got the brackets in the wrong place.
It's not an old (Bruce Willis movie), it's an (old Bruce Willis) movie.

--
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Re:Nothing new by Grishnakh · 2012-08-09 04:39 · Score: 4, Funny

Or better yet, say that it's just too expensive to bother with, and do nothing. Engage in a public program of portraying any efforts to deflect the asteroid as "socialism". Call this project "Nero".