fossilesque@mander.xyzM to Science Memes@mander.xyzEnglish · 2 days agoAt this rate, why not.mander.xyzimagemessage-square88fedilinkarrow-up1344arrow-down12
arrow-up1342arrow-down1imageAt this rate, why not.mander.xyzfossilesque@mander.xyzM to Science Memes@mander.xyzEnglish · 2 days agomessage-square88fedilink
minus-squareJoeBigelow@lemmy.calinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up11·2 days agoActually, one of their feasibility assumptions is that the device is too large to be used militarily. https://arxiv.org/html/2501.06623v1#%3A~%3Atext=Confronting+the+escalating+threat+of%2CEnhanced+Rock+Weathering+(ERW).
minus-squareAdalast@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up3·12 hours agoI think they underestimate a military’s desire to use all of the things that go boom.
minus-squarepeoplebeproblems@midwest.sociallinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up8·1 day agoAh. I suppose building an 81 gigaton nuclear weapon wouldn’t be small. Let’s fire up the antimatter then!
Actually, one of their feasibility assumptions is that the device is too large to be used militarily.
https://arxiv.org/html/2501.06623v1#%3A~%3Atext=Confronting+the+escalating+threat+of%2CEnhanced+Rock+Weathering+(ERW).
I think they underestimate a military’s desire to use all of the things that go boom.
Ah. I suppose building an 81 gigaton nuclear weapon wouldn’t be small.
Let’s fire up the antimatter then!