h a l f b a k e r yIt might be better to just get another gerbil.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Nuclear race winner
A way to decide who won the nuclear war after we are all wiped off the face of earth | |
If the automatic nuclear war does wipe everybody off
the
face of earth, it would still be satisfying to know that
there
was some way of determining which side was the winner.
So I propose an underground bunker with a computing
machine using some sort of
algorithm agreed upon by all players
including the
latest newcomers. Following the destruction of all
humanity on
earth, the program will check how fast each side
responded, who started it, what measures were taken to
try to save the population, how many shelters were there
that proved insufficient for anything, and other benefits
of the detonated nuclear bombs, proving the
superiority of one side over the other.
Following this, a year after the world's destruction, the
winner will be declared, and the flag of the winning
organization or country will be raised automatically at
the
Nuclear Race Winner center.
The computer and all its part will be completely
mechanical, with no electric pars, and made from
components translucent to radioactivity, and protected
from high temperatures with heat proof materials.
not particularly relevant
Thermonuclear_20Roulette
but who's to say. [FlyingToaster, Sep 15 2014]
[link]
|
| |
I didn't think of the sound that should accompany the flag.
Probably the ding from a typewriter. But hey, this is
halfbakery, so I'm leaving it to you. |
|
| |
For full disclosure, I am obliged to say that this idea is about
the human culture and traditions of attempts at wiping the
human race off the face of earth, so you must agree that it
does have to do with both culture and race. |
|
| |
A computer inside a "Faraday cage" can withstand ElectroMagnetic
Pulses. Also, so can old-fashioned electronic circuits that used
vacuum tubes instead of transistors. Your Judgment Day computer
probably doesn't have to be 100% mechanical. |
|
| |
Shirley the simpler option is to have all of this done
on the ISS? |
|
| |
// the sound that should accompany the flag // |
|
| |
The only possible choice would be the Looney Tunes signout music ... |
|
| |
I'm happy to inform you that the use of every nuclear
bomb on the planet would be unlikely to kill all
humans, immediately or through environmental and
secondary effects. |
|
| |
But we can chip in to help, if it's important to you - a couple of tonnes
of antihydrogen, maybe ? |
|
| |
//Following the destruction of all humanity on earth// |
|
| |
Aren't we well past that mythology by now? Sure, all the major population centres of the warring tribes would be hit, but that leaves a lot of in-betweeners. I'd wager somone from an upper-amazonian tribe would have a hard time telling the difference between a nuclear winter and a volanic one. |
|
| |
Yes, but you'll pull better ratings if you have a proper "once and
for all finale" episode, and after all that's what the big
advertisers will pay for. |
|
| |
Always leave them wanting more … let it lie fallow a few years,
then start off again with a small group on another Class M
planet. OK, so you can't bring back any of the original cast, but a
few clones of popular characters should at least get a reasonable
share for the pilot. |
|
| |
I just always thought the whole "end of the human race" thing as a bit silly. Surely the loss of billions of lives is enough reason not to unleash the icbm's of war, without having to exaggerate? Do people realty think London, Paris and New York are the only seats of humanity? Are people deluded enough to think the existing stockpiles are big enough to physically damage the planet’s surface enough to do real harm? That’s an obscure type of hubris that is. |
|
| |
If there’s 5000 warheads ready to be launched*, and they are, that means if evenly distributed across the earth’s land surface** there’s one nuke per 30000 square kilometres. Or a square 173km a side. The overwhelming majority of the active warheads are in the 100-250kt range. So even if they were spread out, there would be many, many survivors. I would argue there would be even more survivors from a more likely exchange where military and civilian centres are targeted far more densely, because there are a lot of people living in places that wouldn’t get targeted at all. Like, the whole of New Zealand probably wouldn’t be afforded a single nuke, south America would pretty much be in the clear, same with western Africa, that kind of thing.
Anyhow, I’m belabouring the point, but even a worst case, full out exchange wouldn’t kill off mankind. It would fuck everything up, but not wipe us out. |
|
| |
*This is about right, give or take a few hundred. Not all of these are on icbm/slbm’s, but who’s being picky. Not counting inactive stockpiles.
**they wouldn’t be, you know. Also, that’s the second time today I’ve done a calculation based on the earth’s land surface area, both times for halfbakery comments. Hmm.. I’ve probably never used that number before, like ever. Weird. |
|
| |
The fallout from a volcanic winter doesn't tend to
give you radiation sickness. |
|
| |
And the simple loss of technology and
transportation infrastructure would kill of ~90% of
the population in the developed countries, and
probably ~50% in the less developed ones. Your
untouched New Zealand imports about 50% of it's
oil and gas, or about 25% of it's overall energy
supply. |
|
| |
I'm not saying that humanity would be completely
destroyed, but there won't be much left. |
|
| |
A search for the phrase " I propose " on the Halfbakery yielded 411 results. |
|
| |
I accept. **tee hee, giggle giggle blush** |
|
| |
I suspect it will be the last scientific claim to be disproved
by an experiment. |
|
| |
...but never quoted in any notable movie. |
|
| |
AusCansei, that was for normzone, right? |
|
| |
In the realm of nuclear mysteries, how can a country decimated twice by nuclear weapons have some of the earth's longest lived people? |
|
| |
Because it wasn't "decimated", that's why. |
|
| |
Decimation would involve the loss of 10% of the population. In 1945,
there were about 70 million Japanese. Their war deaths totalled about
2.5 million (roughly 4% of their 1939 population), a drop in the ocean
compared to the death and suffering they inflicted - often intentionally
- on tens of millions in the countries they occupied. |
|
| |
So Japan wasn't decimated. Unfortunately. They only lost about
200,000 in the two atomic attacks. |
|
| |
In the Roman army, when decimation was ordered, the unit was
divided into grouos of 10. These then drew lots within their group, and
the loser was
beaten or clubbed to death by the other nine. It sounds like the sort of
crude, vicious barbarity that would appeal to the Japanese,
possibly as a prime time game show. |
|
| |
//In the realm of nuclear mysteries, how can a country decimated twice by nuclear weapons have some of the earth's longest lived people?// |
|
| |
Genetic selective pressure? |
|
| |