The possibility of artificial fusion explosion of giant planets and other objects of the Solar system By A.V.

Turchin, Russian Transhumanist Movement with Joseph Friedlander aiding translation, rewriting to English. avturchin@mail.ru http://www.scribd.com/doc/8299748/Giant-planets-ignition Translated from Russian Working draft 2, with Joseph Friedlander Disclaimer: This is not a formal scientific paper, and it should not be used as proof that a thermonuclear explosion of giant planets is impossible. The topic deserves formal scientific investigation, more than it has so far received. My goal is only to draw attention to a topic upon which the fate of the human race may someday hinge. Abstract This article discusses various theories about how artificially caused thermonuclear detonation of giant planets and other objects of Solar System could be triggered, and what such an event’s impact on the Earth may be. In most cases this would mean the extinction of terrestrial life. The published scientific evidence suggests that thermonuclear detonation of layers with high content of deuterium in the atmospheres of giant planets is theoretically possible. Some estimates of the content of deuterium in the atmosphere of Jupiter show that it is only five times less than the minimum required level for the thermonuclear detonation (1 atom in 1600 versus 1 in 300). This is too little safety margin in order to be sure that such reactions are not realistic. Naturally enriched deuterium layers are hypothetically possible in terrestrial planets, including Earth, the icy satellites, comets and giant planets. In the distant future, perhaps in the second half of the XXIth century, will be available means of detection of natural high concentration regions of deuterium in the solar system and creation of technical means for initiating the explosion of planets, which would make artificial explosion of a planet practically feasible. This means that in the future such artificial detonation may become a means for space wars, a tool of world blackmail, or occur as a result of technological accident. On a related subject, there is little possibility of such an explosion after collisions following ‘end of mission’ of space probes such as the Saturn spacecraft Cassini containing nuclear fuel elements, but not because Cassini can not explode, and not because the planet can not explode, but because the energy of a hypothetical explosion of Cassini is not enough to initiate a successful detonation reaction of noticeable magnitude.

Contents
Contents...........................................................................................................................1 Introduction.................................................................................................................2 History of the question .............................................................................................10 About possibility of explosion of nuclear fuel cells. ................................................12 Possibility of explosion of a giant planet..................................................................14 Explosion consequences ...........................................................................................26 Other possible explosions of planets. .......................................................................29 The literature:............................................................................................................34

Introduction
The main problem with considering the possibility of giant planet explosions is that people think that it is a ridiculous concept and dismiss the idea before considering the evidence. It reeks of bad science fiction. So they don't consider the arguments and miss the chance to find that the arguments are much more convincing than commonly thought a priori. The same problem colors any discussion of strong AGI. (artificial general intelligence, an easily replicatable artificial mind that can ‘teach’ its successors rapidly through uploading). Still, the reason these ideas became the subject of so many lurid fictions is because they are existential dangers, each in their own way—and thus were compelling subjects for storytelling. The fact that bad stories were written should not stop us from considering the scientific realities that the fictions were based upon. The most important issue to consider here is a possibility of runaway thermonuclear detonation of planets. The possible causes—deliberate detonation, accidents of exploration or cosmic collision or future industrial activity—we may consider later. First let us survey the underlying facts. 1) According to the findings, published in the prestigious journal Physical Review (by prominent US nuclear military scientists, including Dr. Edward Teller’s apprentice), thermonuclear detonation (i.e. explosion), of a planet could happened at normal pressure by the deuterium fusion reaction D + D, provided that the concentration of deuterium is more than 1 to 300. (Relative to normal hydrogen). ((Necessary conditions for the initiation and propagation of nuclear detonation waves in plane atmospheres. Thomas A. Weaver and Lowell Wood, Physical review 20 - 1 July 1979, http://www.lhcdefense.org/pdf/LHC%20-%20Sancho%20v.%20Doe%20%20Atmosphere%20Ignition%20-%202%20-%20Wood_AtmIgnition-1.pdf) A recently published refutation of possible explosion of Saturn is low quality, because it does not even mention that the reaction of detonation of deuterium is possible. (“Project Lucifer: Will Cassini Turn Saturn into a Second Sun?” http://www.universetoday.com/2008/07/24/project-lucifer-will-cassini-turn-saturninto-a-second-sun-part-1/) 2) Investigations conducted in the late 1990's took measurements that showed that the concentration of deuterium in the upper layers of Jupiter is 1 in 1600, which is only five (5) times smaller than the minimum required level for detonation.
"Hubble measures deuterium on Jupiter". Science News – Find Articles. 5 October 1996. Retrieved 2007-0910.As mentioned in this article, this value also agrees with the Galileo entry probe measurement for Jupiter

Later studies suggested a lesser ratio as below: Deuterium abundance on Jupiter is about 2.25×10−5 (roughly 22 atoms in a million, or 15% of the terrestrial deuterium-to-hydrogen ratio); these ratios presumably reflect the early solar nebula ratios, and those after the Big Bang. However, other sources suggest a much higher abundance of e.g. 6×10−4 (6 atoms in 10,000 or 0.06% atom basis). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deuterium Even if the lower value is correct, point 3) below can cancel that benefit, as will become apparent:

3) It was found that deuterium isotope separation easily happens by natural processes, and in particular that the concentration of heavy gases (such as helium) is increasing as gravitational settling and rainout in the interior of giant planets. (The so-called ‘helium rain’) And such is most likely true for deuterium as well. Consequently, in the bowels of the giant planets may be regions of sufficient concentration of deuterium to support a detonation wave. And to reach these depths is not difficult, because the planet is liquid. (It should be noted that the temperature at depth in the giant planets is tens of thousands of degrees. However, depending on the results of computer modeling, (specifically on the time required for descent to target depths and the insulation efficiency of a many-layer sinking body containing the warhead) there may be in principle ways to insulate a bomb to a given pressure level if the concentration of thermonuclear fuel is known in the target region before sinking the bomb there.) Thus the technology of explosion of the giant planets, in principle, may be reachable for our civilization now. Finally, if somehow all the deuterium in the depths of Jupiter were to enter into a runaway thermonuclear reaction, then it will emit the energy equivalent of about 3000 years of luminescence of the Sun during a few tens of seconds. That is enough to disrupt the Earth's atmosphere and melt the upper few kilometers of soil, (and deeper than that we cannot penetrate for shelter protection because of the hot interior of the earth) and destroy all future human colonies in the Solar system. Thus, the explosion of the giant planets can be a powerful Doomsday Machine suitable for blackmailing --on any given fringe issue--the entirety of human civilization. And if such weapons would be created, there is the risk of their use. The more widespread the capability, the greater the probability of their use. Now we should look on the various risks in more detail. There are some events which are very improbable, but whose consequence could be infinitely large (e.g. black holes on the Large Hadron Collider—if such a thing could be done, it would end everything—at least for humanity.). The possibility of nuclear ignition of self-sustaining and spreading fusion reactions in giant planets like Jupiter and Saturn which could lead to the explosion of said planet, is one of them. Several considerations suggest that an artificial explosion of the giant planets is possible. Inside the giant planets are vast amounts of thermonuclear fuel under high pressure and at high density. This density for certain substances is higher (except water, perhaps) than the density of these substances in any region of Earth.

At 10,000 kilometers below Jupiter's cloud top liquid hydrogen reaches a pressure of 1,000,000 bar with a temperature of 6,000° K. At this state hydrogen changes into a phase of liquid metallic hydrogen. In this state, the hydrogen atoms break down yeilding ionized protons and electrons similar to the Sun's interiorhttp://www.solarviews.com/eng/jupiter.htm

Other sources hold that it takes 4 million bar to transition to the metallic hydrogen phase. For comparison, the pressure at the core of the Earth is 3 million bar. http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Nwfaq/Nfaq4-4.htm gives the radiation implosion pressure in the 1952 Mike deuterium H-bomb as 73 megabars.) Large quantities of the substance would be fighting that vast pressure and containment in any attempt (during any detonation) to escape away from the reaction zone, arguing for containment for sufficient time for any reaction, even a dampened one, to result in large energy emissions. Consider also that this thermonuclear fuel—unlike in the Sun-- has never been involved in nuclear combustion reactions, and it retains easily combustible components, namely, deuterium, helium-3 and lithium (and maybe boron), which have burned preferentially in the stars. In addition, the deep interior of giant planets contain fuel for reactions, which may prompt a runaway burning - namely, the tri-helium reaction (3 4He = 12C) and for reactions to the accession of hydrogen to oxygen, which, however, requires to start them a much higher temperature. The material in the deep bowels of the giant planets is mildly degenerate (electron degeneracy) matter form http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metallic_hydrogen (in the form of a metal ocean), just as the substance of white dwarfs is--and regularly in the Galaxy explosive thermonuclear burning of this sort occurs in the form of helium flashes and the flashes of the Type I supernovae. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helium_burning It may simply be that there is no way to light such a reaction in a giant planet in nature, but that it would burn perfectly well once lit (by human agency, perhaps.) This is a serious worry. The more opaque a given environment, the greater the chances for the reaction within it to propagate, as energy loss is less (twice the diameter, eight times the interior, four times the exterior surface). In this connection note that in the interior of the giant planets there are many impurities and lower transparency (more opacity) can be expected. Gravitational differentiation and chemical reactions can lead to the allocation of areas within the planet which are more suitable to run the reaction in its initial stages. The stronger will the triggering explosion, the greater will be amount of the initial field of burning, and the more likely that the response would be self-sustaining, as the energy loss will be smaller and the number of reaction substances and reaction times greater. It can be assumed that if lit with a sufficiently powerful fuse (a thermonuclear bomb of suitable size) the reaction may become self-sustaining. Recently Galileo spacecraft was impacted into Jupiter. Galileo had nuclear pellets with plutonium-238 which under some assumptions could undergo chain reaction and lead to a minor yield nuclear explosion. It is interesting to understand if such an event could lead to the runaway explosion of a giant planet. Spacecraft Cassini may similarly in the future be disposed of inside Saturn with unknown consequences. In the future deliberate ignition of giant planet may become a means of space war. Such an event could sterilize the entire Solar system. This article’s purpose is to pose questions which would help ‘bracket the evidence’ on either side of the question—that explosion of outer planets and smaller

bodies rich in deuterium and other thermonuclear fuels as a result of inadvertent human activity is impossible. By which we may pose an analogy: In one city an untested new model of nuclear power station is under construction. Citizens of the city know this, and they also know that nuclear stations sometimes can have dangerous accidents. They have enough knowledge of the risks, that they demand proofs of safety of the given project. The burden of the proof of safety of the project lies not on the simple citizens of the city, but on the power station designers. At the same time citizens have the right to pose questions despite their lack of technical competence: Whether the reactor is of Chernobyl type is used at the station, how spent nuclear fuel will be stored, what will be if the reactor will be attacked by terrorists, what will be if a plane crashes into it etc. Possibly, some of these questions will be unexpected for designers, and through this process of open inquiry may be found new answers and engineering solutions. Definitely, I make no claim of sufficient technical qualification to prove the possibility and, especially, impossibility of a giant planet explosion (thus the disclaimer in the beginning of this article). I gently note that the proof of impossibility is always the more difficult thing, as it should touch all possibilities, presumably including the unknowable and the unthinkable! Therefore I shall focus on a simpler problem: I will collect all those arguments, which speak to us about an explosion possibility. The reader may then consider whether the pile of evidence remains undisturbing. The core scientific basis for our study could be found in the article (Necessary conditions for the initiation and propagation of nuclear detonation waves in plane atmospheres. Thomas A. Weaver and Lowell Wood, Physical review 20 - 1 July 1979, http://www.lhcdefense.org/pdf/LHC%20-%20Sancho%20v.%20Doe%20%20Atmosphere%20Ignition%20-%202%20-%20Wood_AtmIgnition-1.pdf) This article rejected the possibility of extending the thermonuclear detonation in the Earth's atmosphere and in Earth's oceans because of balance of the loss of radiation (one that does not exclude the possibility of reactions involving limited areas: say, a small deposit of heavy (deuterium rich) ice or heavy methane clathrate upon the ocean floor, compared with the amount of the entire mass of the earthly oceans - but enough to lead to disastrous consequences—more fallout than any realistic human-launched nuclear war (hundreds of thousands of tons of product isotopes) and thus human extinction.) There it is said: “We, therefore, conclude that thermonuclear-detonation waves cannot propagate in the terrestrial ocean by any mechanism by an astronomically large margin. It is worth noting, in conclusion, that the susceptibility to thermonuclear detonation of a large body of hydrogenous material is an exceedingly sensitive function of its isotopic composition, and, specifically, to the deuterium atom fraction, as is implicit in the discussion just preceding. If, for instance, the terrestrial oceans contained deuterium at any atom fraction greater than 1:300 (instead of the actual value of 1: 6000), the ocean could propagate an equilibrium thermonuclear detonation wave at a temperature of 2 keV (although a fantastic 1030 ergs—2 x 107

MT, (20 TERATONS, OR 20,000 GIGATONS, OR 20 MILLION MEGATONS—J.F.) or the total amount of solar energy incident on the Earth for a two-week period—would be required to initiate such a detonation at a deuterium concentration of 1: 300). Now a non-negligible fraction of the matter in our own galaxy exists at temperatures much less than 300 °K, i.e., the gas-giant planets of our stellar system, nebulas, etc. Furthermore, it is well known that thermodynamically-governed isotopic fractionation ever more strongly favors higher relative concentration of deuterium as the temperature decreases, e.g., the D:H concentration ratio in the ~102 К Great Nebula in Orion is about 1:200.45 Finally, orbital velocities of matter about the galactic center of mass are of the order of 3 x 107 cm /sec at our distance from the galactic core. It is thus quite conceivable that hydrogenous matter (e.go, CH4, NH3, H2O, or just H2) relatively rich in deuterium (1 at. %) could accumulate at its normal, zeropressure density in substantial thicknesses or planetary surfaces, and such layering might even be a fairly common feature of the colder, gas-giant planets. If thereby highly enriched in deuterium (10 at. %), thermonuclear detonation of such layers could be initiated artificially with attainable nuclear explosives. Even with deuterium atom fractions approaching 0.3 at. % (less than that observed over multiparsec scales in Orion), however, such layers might be initiated into propagating thermonuclear detonation by the impact of large (diam 102 m), ultra-high velocity (^Зх 107 cm/sec) meteors or comets originating from nearer the galactic center. Such events, though exceedingly rare, would be spectacularly visible on distance scales of many parsecs.” (Note that these computations are made for flat atmospheres, (plane detonations) under the assumption that a balance will be established between radiated energy in space and energy created during the reaction, while we are talking about initiating of the explosion inside a giant planet, where the emitted energy will remain within it, until the planet will be—in worst case—consumed as a source of fresh fuel. So to merely start the reaction much lower concentrations of deuterium will be sufficient.) The first main objection to the possible explosion of giant planets is the fact that the so-called “Simple Super” by Edward Teller does not work. The “Simple Super” is the first theoretical model of the hydrogen bomb, which consisted in joining the tube with liquid deuterium to the atomic bomb, so that the explosion of the atomic bomb would detonate deuterium. But it turned out that the detonation wave does not extend down the tube because of the large losses of radiation, which are growing even while increasing the size of the device (through Compton scattering). After several years of experiments in the Soviet Union and the United States in the late 1940's this design abandoned in favor of the scheme with the implosion compression of the tube casing by radiation. The “Simple Super” as a weapon makes sense only if detonator is a fission bomb, whose output is limited by hundreds of kilotons. However, in our case, a hypothetical space-based weapon would beused as a detonator-- a hydrogen bomb with a capacity of many megatons. Inability to create a “Simple Super” bomb with a 1940s fission device does not mean inability to start a self-sustaining reaction with the help of a much more powerful hydrogen bomb. So stands the situation based on declassified sources. But we cannot be sure that all information on this sensitive issue is declassified. On the other hand, let’s see who has written articles on the detonation of the atmosphere, from which is drawn the

quotation above. They are Thomas Weaver and Lowell Wood. About Wood Wikipedia says the following: “The initial focus of the strategic defense initiative was a nuclear explosion-powered X-ray laser designed at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory by a scientist named Peter L. Hagelstein who worked with a team called 'O Group', doing much of the work in the late 1970s and early 1980s. O Group was headed by physicist Lowell Wood, a protégé and friend of Edward Teller, the "father of the hydrogen bomb". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_Defense_Initiative Another author of the article is Thomas A. Weaver (1985) who got the following prize: “National Security: For his exceptional contributions to national security in the physics, design and leadership of x-ray laser experiments, which include work in atomic physics, radiate transfer and hydrodynamics, material science, and the development of complex diagnostics. These major accomplishments follow from earlier research in astrophysics with emphasis on stellar evolution.” https://www.llnl.gov/llnl/sciencetech/awards/lawrence.jsp (this page doesn’’t exist now, but see https://www.llnl.gov/str/Pat497.html and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernest_Orlando_Lawrence_Award ) Lowell also got this prize: “The Ernest Orlando Lawrence Award was established in 1959 in honor of a scientist who helped elevate American physics to world leadership. Lowell L. Wood (1981) National Security: For his outstanding contributions to national security in the areas of directed energy, inertial confinement fusion, underwater communications, nuclear weapon design concepts, and computer technology.”

So what we get by this logic (merely at the level of ‘conspiracy theories’, an argument meant only as circumstantial, not an irrefutable argument): We can certainly say that Teller was the best-experienced person in the world regarding the question of the possibility to create Teller’s “Simple Super”. And his friend and protégé Wood, was probably aware of the knowledge base of Teller. In doing so, in his article on the detonation atmospheres Wood actually argues that the “Simple Super”is possible! (When Wood writes: « If thereby highly enriched in deuterium (10 at. %), thermonuclear detonation of such layers could be initiated artificially with attainable nuclear explosives»). And while he makes no precise calculations (because it is classified information), the fact that he spoke with such certainty about it, suggests that such computations were made and that the minimum conditions to start the reaction had been found. And the only way to publish it in the open press was to speak about this concerning atmospheres of distant planets. Thus, one can presume with some certainty that the claim that the “Simple Super” of Teller is impossible - is disinformation designed to hinder the establishment of the hydrogen bomb in a third country - and in any case –at minimum--- we cannot use data on the impossibility of the “Simple Super” as 100 percent reliable because people who know from firsthand about the design - argue that the detonation of layers rich in deuterium is possible. The second main objection to the thermonuclear detonation of giant planets is low concentrations of deuterium in the interstellar medium and low observable concentrations of deuterium in the atmospheres of giant planets. In Wikipedia is said:

“Deuterium abundance on Jupiter is about 2.25 • 10-5 (about 22 atoms in 1000000 or 15% of the terrestrial deuterium-to-hydrogen ratio) [1]; these ratios presumably reflect the early solar nebula ratios, and those after the Big Bang . However, other sources suggest a much higher abundance of eg 6 • 10-4 (6 atoms in 10,000 or 0.06% atom basis)” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deuterium Estimation of one atom to 1600 was obtained from here: “Hubble observations and lowering probe to Jupiter: Hubble measures deuterium on Jupiter Hubble Space “Telescope http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1200/is_n14_v150/ai_18757250 This figure is four times greater than the concentration of deuterium in the Earth and only five times less than the required minimum value for the wave of nuclear detonation. Given the uncertainty in the measurement of the actual concentration, as well as the uncertainty of what is the real minimum threshold for launching thermonuclear detonation reaction of deuterium and finally, the availability of other easy-burning elements (helium-3 and lithium-6) this cannot exclude the possibility that this concentration—in places at least-- is sufficient to –upon artificial triggering-- initiate an explosion of Jupiter, or that other giant planets contain high concentrations. Moreover, if as some suggest, that deuterium preferentially ‘rains down’, i.e. collects somewhere at the bottom layers, the concentration of the upper atmosphere is by definition understated compared to the whole planet concentration. A shortage of helium in the upper atmosphere of Jupiter and Saturn compared to the solar concentration, is explained by deposition of heavy helium downwards. (This is given the name ‘helium rain’) The same can happen with deuterium, also heavier than hydrogen. Even if we can’t ignite Jupiter, it could be possible with Uranus or Neptune, as show the following citations: “In contrast, Uranus and Neptune may have been enriched in deuterium, during their formation, by the mixing of their atmospheres with comparatively larger cores containing D-rich icy grains”.( http://herschel.esac.esa.int/Publ/2001/lellouche.pdf Emmanuel Lellouch. Observations of planetary and satellite atmospheres and surfaces.) “Using observations of the CH3D/CH4 ratio in the outer planets, we developed two simple but limiting models which constrain the amount of dilution that deuterated volatiles which were contributed to the planetary atmospheres by evaporated primordial ices may have undergone by mixing with the original hydrogen envelopes. The models suggest that the D/H ratio in these ices was probably somewhere between a few times 10−4 and 10−3.” (Barry L. Lutz*, 1, Tobias Owen† and Catherine De Bergh‡ Deuterium enrichment in the primitive ices of the protosolar nebula. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science? _ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6WGF-4731GTM1FV&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&view=c&_a

cct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=8f 27b0935685da8e228b51dcc64f721b ) “On the basis of this data set all Oort cloud comets seem to exhibit a similar ratio in H2O, enriched by about a factor of two relative to terrestrial water and approximately one order of magnitude relative to the protosolar value.” Roland Meier and Tobias C. Owen. Cometary Deuterium. Space Science Reviews Volume 90, Numbers 1-2 / Октябрь 1999 г. http://www.springerlink.com/content/j884385710582805/ Uranus : The deuterium abundance ratio relative to light hydrogen 5.5+3.5−1.5×10−5 http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Atmosphere-of-Uranus Deuterium enrichment in giant planets: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6V6T3VWKKR411&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&view=c&_ac ct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=741 591de1c15795f3d2f5a82e96ac6ff Also, a higher concentration of D can’t be ruled out inside the giant planets: “Here, we analyze the consequences of deuterium (D) sedimentation on Jupiter's excess heat and discuss its effects on the sound profiles. Such sedimentation is assumed to have occurred in the early stages of planet formation (here the core-instability model) through planetesimal vaporization in the deeper parts of the envelope… We find that with a modest degree of interior stratification of D (5%–15% of the total D of the planet), D-D burning naturally explains the excess heat given off by the planet.” Ouyed, R., Fundamenski, W. R., Cripps, G.R. and Sutherland, P.G. DD Fusion in the Interior of Jupiter? http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/305797 Note that small concentrations of deuterium in Jupiter don’t mean small quantity. For example, if the upper estimate of the number is correct, its weight is about 1 / 5 the mass of Earth, and if lower - the order of half the mass of the Moon. Each pair of atoms D, joined in the reaction, provided approximately 10 MeV energy (Given that the formed tritium immediately react), or 0.8 * 10 **- 12 J. Or 0.5 * 10 ** 12 J at the mole. Or 2.5 * 10 ** 14 J per kg. Or 2.5 * 10 ** 38 J in the maximum case for combustion of all the deuterium in the whole of Jupiter. This is about the same energy, which the Sun radiates in 20,000 years. And all of this energy will be realized in a few seconds. This is a billion (at least) times more than a minimum level of energy that would lead to the death of all intelligent life on Earth.

That is the brief outline of the situation with the problem of detonation giant planets. We will now consider the related issues in more details. We will discuss the history of the issue, then Galileo and Cassini, in terms of whether they or another space probe could serve as a detonator for an outer system object, then turn to the question about the possibility of thermonuclear detonation of planets, and then discuss the possible implications for Earth of such a blast, and finally discuss other existing theories about the possibility of explosions of planets by non-thermonuclear detonation.

History of the question
The first time we are aware of the possibility of explosion of Jupiter being considered in a public article was Jacco van der Worp «Could NASA Use Galileo to Create a Jovian Nagasaki?» http://yowusa.com/space/2003/space-2003-09a/1.shtml In it is said, that in 2003 of NASA made a decision on splashing down space vehicle Galileo which was engaged in research of system of Jupiter, into Jupiter, on purpose to avoid contamination of the (possibly life bearing) satellite of Jupiter Europe with earthly bacteria (from an uncontrolled future collision). However Worp noted that on board of Galileo there are radio-isotope heat generators on plutonium-238 which weight is 12 kg., divided into tablets of 150 gr. These tablets are placed in a strong heat-resisting casing made from heavy metals – so to endure any accident of the space vehicle at start from the Earth. Worp pays attention that though there is popular belief that plutonium-238 is not weapons plutonium, but actually it has a critical mass. The minimum estimation of its critical mass makes 200 grams and for this reason tablets was made weighing no more than 150 grams (on pure substance). Modern researches show, that the critical mass of plutonium-238 in case of a sphere of pure substance makes about 10 kg. (Updated Critical Mass Estimates for Plutonium-238 http://sti.srs.gov/fulltext/ms9900313/ms9900313.html). Further Worp assumes, that the nuclear fuel capsules are resistant to impact, that they will not collapse at the descent of Galileo into upper layers of atmosphere of Jupiter, and will start to plunge slowly into the ocean of metal liquid hydrogen which is present, according to modern representations, at certain depths. Heat resistance and high density will allow them to plunge to significant depth where they will be compressed by pressure of millions of atmospheres. During some moment pressure will destroy these tablets. If this final compression occurs extremely quickly – that is if the tablet external case suddenly breaks, sharp compression of plutonium can result it in a supercritical condition and lead to nuclear reaction, possibly of explosive quickness. As ambient pressure will be already millions atmospheres, compression will be long and the significant part of plutonium will have time to react, that will result in growth of temperature to 100 million degrees at the worst case. This temperature will be enough to initiate thermonuclear reactions in ambient hydrogen, which can lead to self-supporting reaction of combustion of the hydrogen ocean of Jupiter and then to explosion of the planet with fatal consequences to the human civilisation. That is quite a chain of circumstances, but it only has to happen once to get our (brief) attention! Worp has said his thoughts in the popular radio show “From Coast to Coast”, however they have not been heard by us, and Galileo has already impacted Jupiter,

and we are still here! In the Universe observed by us the explosion has not occurred (to this question we will still return). However after several months appeared article of Richard C. Hoagland. Did NASA Accidentally “Nuke” Jupiter? http://www.enterprisemission.com/NukingJupiter.html In it was retold thought of Worp, and then was paid attention that a month later after splashing down, on the surface of Jupiter there was a strange stain in equatorial area. (http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/jupiter_dark_spot_031023.html) There are different opinions on the nature of this stain – a shade from the satellite, the usual whirlwind, an error of supervision, however Hoagland has put forward the assumption, that this stain has resulted from the nuclear explosion of Galileo as it too has been impacted in the equatorial area. However the size of the stain was approximately equal to the size of the Earth, and it has held for several days (and reminded one of stains from the impact of comet Schumacher-Levi in July 1994) – and it was far more extensive in area, than the stain from nuclear explosion in several tens kilotons maximum could achieve. Such a stain could be formed, we note, if some quantity of hydrogen too would enter the reaction, but then the process damp out (after achieving a gigaton level triggered explosion). The time delay of one month from the splashing down of Galileo before occurrence of stain Hoagland explains by slow immersion of plutonium tablets into the hydrogen ocean, and then a slow raising of a sphere of the heated gas after explosion. This does not appear consistent with the behavior of matter under such circumstances, and may be neglected as an explanation. In 2006 appeared, an apparently anonymous article The Lucifer Project http://www.rinf.com/news/nov05/lucifer-project.html in which the same risks are considered with reference to Project Cassini – to the probe rotating at the moment around Saturn. This probe, possibly, too will be splashed sooner or later into Saturn and also carries plutonium batteries. The article is written in the classical spirit of the conspiracy theory and contains an uncreditable thesis: That Saturn should be ignited like a star as a second Sun. Again, the behavior of matter does not justify these claims. The stable combustion of giant planets is not possible, only explosive. (The stable thermonuclear sequence the Sun is on requires slow burning isotopes and reactions, ‘forced’ by an extreme level of gravitational pressure which the cores of giant planets lack) In the report of NASA on safety of Cassini the risk of igniton of Saturn is not discussed at all, but it is told that under no circumstances nuclear tablets cannot lead to nuclear explosion. There it is not mentioned that on board Cassini is contained at least three critical weights of plutonium. (Spacecraft Power for Cassini http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/spacecraft/safety/power.pdf) From the report you could get an impression, that this is a safe isotope of plutonium (mostly Pu-238, a non-weaponsgrade isotope) is contained on Cassini, on the site we see that this isotope is not militaryoriented. Really, plutonium-238 – was never used for creation of nuclear weapons, and for practical engineering reasons—it is strongly self-heating, to the point of red-hotness, and for cost and other reasons as well. However all this does not mean, that it cannot blow up, and, according to the government of the United States, (Updated Critical Mass Estimates for Plutonium-238 http://www.osti.gov/bridge/purl.cover.jsp? purl =/6009YSy5TG/native/) it possesses a critical mass. (Moreover, it is a high-power source of neutrons according to some information, and does not demand a neutron fuse, unlike plutonium-239. http://www.ricin.com/nuke/bg/bomb.html) Here we see a certain noncandor, which is not obvious if one has not undertaken a special search of sources. No conspiracy theory is needed to understand that NASA, enduring antinuclear protests before launch of every atom-powered space probe, might not wish to volunteer facts

which its’ political enemies would jump on without hesitation. Or perhaps worse, NASA simply does not know everything the Department of Energy knows, being reliant upon them for obtaining both the plutonium 238 and the battery design. NASA or some subcomponents thereof at times are known to take scornful approach to safety problems that the history with the Shuttle demonstrates. Their failures were not casual – each time there were people who cautioned about them – but they were ignored. Special reflectors around plutonium-238 are capable of reducing its critical mass considerably. These reflectors can consist of specific metals, and from hydrogen. (I will remind, that Cassini will plunge into hydrogen ocean which is under high pressure and very dense). Even plutonium oxide has a critical weight, which is simply twice more. (Updated Critical Mass Estimates for Plutonium-238 http://www.osti.gov/bridge/purl.cover.jsp?purl=/6009-YSy5TG/native/) The stronger compression, the less is the critical mass; on this elementary fact is based action of implosion in a plutonium fission bomb. In 2008 of NASA has refused splashing down Cassini and has prolonged its mission for two years. The further destiny of mission depends on financing and a technical condition of the vehicle. Such is the problem’s history. From here we see, that it consists of four independent questions: 1) Whether splashing down Cassini in Saturn could lead to a nuclear explosion. 2) Whether it is possible by means of this nuclear explosion (or otherwise) to ignite self-containing thermonuclear reactions in bowels of giant planets. 3) And if yes, whether this doubly hypothetical chain of events could begin, and whether the nuclear explosion of Cassini can start it. 4) What will be consequences for the Earth of such a hypothetical thermonuclear explosion of a giant planet-- that is, what chances of human extinction would result as a result of such a (literal!) disaster. (The original meaning of disaster brings a connotation of ‘unlucky star!’) Having multiplied probabilities of all four events, we can estimate the risk of global catastrophe connected with Cassini. In this article we will collect arguments only in favor of the worst succession of events, acting in a role, so to say, as devil’s advocate and we will extend an invitation and plea to more competent researchers to refute this worst case!

About possibility of explosion of nuclear fuel cells.
As researchers recognize, the critical weight of plutonium-238 and its nuclear properties are badly studied experimentally. Supposing for a paranoid instant, that research of plutonium-238 under huge pressure was one of the secret and latent objectives of the flights of Galileo and Cassini. If it so it was one of the most senseless and mad experiments in human history.

Let's notice also, that plutonium-238 in batteries is not pure. In it can be plutonium-239 impurity (up to 1/3 of weight), and also at the given tablets there is uranium-234 which is a source of neutrons and can lead to creating of other elements during long operation. One of the objections of the theory about explosion of fuel cells is that for plutonium explosion is required implosion of very exact spherical compression of a sphere of plutonium. I will notice, that sphericity of compression is guaranteed by uniformity of a high pressure in the bowels of Saturn. (in a bomb, the outside environment is unpressurized, and all is dependent on the transient explosive configuration. If the pressure comes from an steady state (on that level) isotropic environment, it is not the same case!) Besides spherical implosion, there are also to consider cylindrical compression (that is uniform compression of the cylinder on each side) and even plane implosion (as a hammer on an anvil) – they are not suitable for military nuclear bombs as being ineffective, but something more simple can be interesting to nuclear terrorists as technically more achievable). They too lead to nuclear explosion, but of smaller force. Non-uniformity of implosion at compression of fuel tablets can be compensated for by duration of force of external pressure. In addition, we do not know what yield should be an explosion sufficient to initiate thermonuclear reaction. (In the fuel tablets collects helium because of the alpha decay of plutonium so there might be something to light up.) I will notice, that fast compression of nuclear tablets is probable when external pressure will exceed structural limit and will suddenly crumple their external shell. Nuclear fuel capsules should be very heavy, very refractory and very strong to achieve any penetration of the ocean of the metallic hydrogen that is in Saturn. And they are made such– so that they would not break in event of possible combustion of Cassini in atmosphere of the Earth. And for the same reason they should survive entry into the atmosphere of Saturn. To achieve penetration, even at the local terminal velocity, to the deep interior, however, may be something else. The most likely scenario is simple melting (at near solar temperatures) and safe dispersal. From resulted above logic chain it is clear that certain basic elements to start a nuclear reaction were present on Galileo and are present on Cassini in the theoretical case of survival to depths of interest. Moreover, Cassini has twice the fuel cells than Galileo did. However there are many factors which can prevent the beginning of a rough chain nuclear reaction, for example, slow melting of elements in process of their immersion, retraction of nuclear tablets one from another on significant distances etc. Besides, tablets are surrounded by layers of graphite and iridium, which should interfere with chain reaction (however these can melt down in the process of immersion into the hot depths of the planet). On the other hand, we do not know yet what is actually is in the bowels of giant planets and which conditions are necessary for initialization to self-supporting thermonuclear reaction in them. My opinion consists that slow melting and dissolving away of tablets most likely took place. And I would give 1 chance on 10 000, that a nuclear explosion took place. Probably this is generous. On the other hand, if we are to apply Bayesian logic to the fact of an occurrence of a strange stain on Jupiter soon after splashing down Galileo, it raises probability of a hypothesis that such an explosion nevertheless took place.

Besides, we cannot use the fact that explosion has not happened, as the proof of its impossibility as we could survive only in that world where Jupiter has not blown up. That is, no matter how small the probability to survive was, we discuss this only in a world where we have survived, so, we cannot use the fact of the survival for an estimation of the probability of event. (See my article Natural accidents and antropic principle http://www.proza.ru/texts/2007/04/12-13.html for more detailed explanation of this concept.) On the contrary, the fact that the stain of 2003 had huge sizes, says not only that there was a chance that such an explosion took place but also that a significant amount of surrounding heavy hydrogen has participated in it, for some time was self-sustaining until it petered out at the gigaton level, some meters away from the trigger point in the fuel mass. As we see, even at a present insignificant level of development of space technologies, (in this rather paranoid worse-case view) mankind has made the second attempt in a decade to blow up a giant planet, albeit inadvertently. In the future when there will be robots, capable of even limited self-reproduction, development of Solar system will go at much bigger rates. Thousands of spaceships belonging to different people and corporations will plough space. Manufacture of radioactive isotopes will considerably be reduced in price and become widespread. A set of expeditions will be sent to giant worlds, or the outer moons, immersions into their bowels will be commonplace, at least in terms of one-way probes. Perhaps nuclear depth charges will be sent for gas giant seismology. As a result sooner or later (by Bayesian argument perhaps much later), as an accident, or as an experiment only meant to go so far, or in an malicious, intentional fashion, a suitable thermonuclear device will be blown up in an area capable by design, accident or circumstance of supporting runaway thermonuclear combustion. Therefore of much bigger interest is the response of giant to a detonation, regardless of the motives of those causing it—if indeed they have any, in the case of an accident? If the reaction is absolutely impossible, it won’t happen in the worst case, and our motives do not matter. If it can happen…we would truly prefer to know in advance, for only then can we take precautions.

Possibility of explosion of a giant planet.
Briefly, the possible reasons enabling the explosion of giant planets are: Inside the giant planets is thermonuclear fuel under high pressure and at high density. This density for certain substances is above the density of these substances on Earth. At 10,000 kilometers below Jupiter's cloud top liquid hydrogen reaches a pressure of 1,000,000 bar with a temperature of 6,000° K. At this state hydrogen changes into a phase of liquid metallic hydrogen. In this state, the hydrogen atoms break down yeilding ionized protons and electrons similar to the Sun's interiorhttp://www.solarviews.com/eng/jupiter.htm Other sources hold that it takes 4 million bar to transition to the metallic hydrogen phase. For comparison, the pressure at the core of the Earth is 3 million bar. http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Nwfaq/Nfaq4-4.htm gives the radiation implosion pressure in the 1952 Mike deuterium H-bomb as 73 megabars.)

Large quantities of combustable substances would not be able to escape from a triggered reaction zone fast enough to avoid consumption. This fuel has never been involved in combustion reactions, so it remains rich in easily combustible components, namely, deuterium, helium-3 and lithium, which have all burned preferentially in the stars. In addition, the depths of giant planets contain fuel for reactions, which may prompt an explosive fire - namely, the tri-helium reaction (3 4He = 12C) and for reactions to the accession of hydrogen to oxygen, which, however, require much higher temperatures for ignition. Substance in the bowels of the giant planets is a degenerate form of a metal sea, just as the substance of white dwarfs, in which regularly takes place explosive thermonuclear burning in the form of helium flashes and the flashes of the first type of supernova. The more opaque is the burning environment, the greater are the chances for the reaction to spread in it, as well as less resultant dispersion of the fuel; in the bowels of the giant planets there are many impurities and can be expected to lower transparency. Gravitational differentiation and chemical reactions can lead to the self-segregation of areas within the planet that are more suitable to run the reaction in its delicate initial stages. These may be compared to the primer charge on a larger charge of cheaper, less sensitive chemical explosive. The stronger will be the explosion of such a thermonuclear ‘blasting cap’ warhead the greater will be amount of the initial field of burning, and the more likely that the response would be self-sustaining, as the energy loss will be smaller and the number of reaction substances and reaction times would be greater. It can be assumed that if a sufficiently powerful fuse the reaction will became self-sustaining in the primer charge and then spread to the limits of the slightly enriched area in the planet. Let me elaborate these ideas more in detail. A. A. Bolonkin once has appeared in print (Artificial explosion of the Sun: real threat to mankind? http://www.pravda.ru/science/planet/space/05-012007/208894-sun_detonation-0 ) with cautions of risks of explosion of the Sun. See his new article with answers-- Artificial Explosion of Sun. AB-Criterion for Solar Detonation http://www.scribd.com/doc/24541542/Artificial-Explosion-of-Sun-ABCriterion-for-Solar-Detonation (discussing in analogy a terrorist throwing a match into a tank (barrel) of gasoline to kill a house full of enemies and himself) He has said: “On the Sun reaction of synthesis of hydrogenous nuclei goes slowly at the expense of the so-called "tunnel effect" because temperature of the Sun is below the temperature of ignition of an explosive thermonuclear reaction. The sun "decays", supplying life on the Earth. But if you in one point of the Sun exceed this temperature of ignition this huge ‘main fuel tank’ with hydrogen will blow up, sweep and will burn all the solar system, everything, even the most remote, planets. …"a match " can be such specially designed nuclear bomb. And the instigator - the dying dictator of the totalitarian state having the nuclear warhead-rocket weapon. People were already convinced, that of the world is full suicide-terrorists which sincerely believe that the more they will kill "incorrect people", the more they will get in paradise”. This idea of Bolonkin has met fair criticism at scientific forums.

Question-1) It is very difficult to deliver a warhead to the Sun. The Earth moves relative to the Sun with a orbital velocity of 30 km/s, and this speed should be cancelled to fall to the Sun. Current rockets do not suffice, and it is necessary to use gravitational maneuvers around planets. For this reason (high delta-V (velocity changes required) for close solar encounters, the planet Mercury is so badly investigated (probes there are expensive to send). In the updated version http://www.scribd.com/doc/24541542/Artificial-Explosion-ofSun-AB-Criterion-for-Solar-Detonation, Bolonkin replies-- Answer: The Earth has a speed of 29 km/s around the Sun and an escape velocity of only 11 km/s. But Jupiter has an orbital velocity of only 13 km/sec and an escape velocity of 59.2 km/s. Thus, the gravity assist Jupiter can provide is more than the Earth can provide, and the required delta-v at that distance from the Sun far less—enough to entirely cancel the sun-orbiting velocity around the Sun, and let it begin the long plunge to the Solar orb at terminal velocity achieving Sun escape speed 617.6 km/s. Notice that for many space exploration maneuvers, we require a flyby of Jupiter, exactly to achieve such a gravity assist, so simply guarding against direct launches to the Sun from Earth would be futile! Question-2) Solar radiation will destroy any a probe on approach to the Sun or in the upper layers of its photosphere. In the updated version, Bolonkin replies-- Answer: It is easily shown; the high efficiency AB-reflector can fully protect the apparatus. See [7] Chapters 12, 3A, [8] Ch.5, [9]-[12].
7. Bolonkin A.A., "Non-Rocket Space Launch and Flight", Elsevier, 2006, 488 pgs. http://Bolonkin.narod.ru/p65.htm , or http://www.scribd.com/doc/24056182 . The book contains theories of the more then 20 new revolutionary author ideas in space and technology. 8. Bolonkin A.A., New concepts, ideas and innovations in aerospace and technology, Nova, 2007. The book contains theories of the more then 20 new revolutionary author ideas in space and technology. http://Bolonkin.narod.ru/p65.htm , or http://www.scribd.com/doc/24057071 .

3) The hydrogen density in the upper layers of the photosphere of the Sun is insignificant, and it would be much easier to ignite hydrogen at Earth oceans if it in general is possible. In the updated version, Bolonkin replies-- Answer: The hydrogen density is enough known. The Sun has gigantic advantage – that is PLASMA. Plasma of sufficient density reflects or blocks radiation—it has opacity. That means: no radiation losses in detonation. It is very important for heating. The AB Criterion in this paper is received for PLASMA. Other planets of Solar system have MOLECULAR atmospheres which passes radiation. No sufficient heating – no detonation! The water has higher density, but water passes the high radiation (for example γ-radiation) and contains a lot of oxygen (89%), which may be bad for the thermonuclear reaction. This problem needs more research. However it is not difficult to see, that in case of giant planets these conditions are removed or facilitated. That is to ignite a giant planet is immeasurably easier, than the Sun if it in general is possible. To fly to them is much easier, as it demands smaller change of speeds (delta-v), and such flights regularly are implemented. There is no great thermal radiation. (But powerful radiation belts.) It is not difficult to get into areas with very high pressure and density. Hydrogen density in

bowels of Jupiter is considerably above, the deep oceans of the Earth (because it is not water, also there is no oxygen). Let's notice, that analogies to falling of comet Schumacher-Levi (1994 collision with Jupiter) or huge lightning events in the atmosphere of Jupiter – do not work, that is do not prove safety of nuclear explosions in thickness of ocean of metallic hydrogen. Though the energy allocated at falling of a comet is enormous, at no point does the extensive heat pulse distributed on great volume reach the intensive ignition temperature necessary: 100 million degrees at least a one point. The most important thing is that this energy is most intensively distributed during the explosion in the upper atmosphere of Jupiter, instead of in the metallic H ocean, therefore the given situation is similar in no sense. Let's add that energy release of Jupiter exceeds its consumption of energy from the Sun that is connected or with its proceeding compression, or with presence of very weak nuclear reactions in it as assume some theories. In the latter case (if true, which we realize it may not be) it means the presence in Jupiter of areas in which these reactions are capable to proceed, at least slowly. Let's notice further, that ways to initialize thermonuclear reaction relates to nuclear weapon technology and consequently they are classified. Accessible data can contain casual and intended errors and cannot serve as a reliable guarantee of impossibility of any physical processes. Now we will address to a question on a way of combustion of thermonuclear fuel. Here is what I. Shklovsky (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iosif_Shklovsky ) writes about power sources of explosion of the supernovas in his book I.S. Shklovsky: Stars: Their Birth, Life, Death, San Francisco, 1978, ISBN 0-7167-0024-7 «It is the most natural to consider, that the large quantity of energy released at flashes of supernova has a nuclear origin. However not any nuclear fuel can be, at least theoretically, is responsible for star explosion. First of all it concerns to hydrogen - to the basic nuclear fuel supporting by corresponding thermonuclear reactions quiet radiation of stars on the main sequence. The matter is that though energy allocation at full transformation of hydrogen into helium is very great (6 · 10 ** 18 erg/g), it occurs slowly enough. Therefore an explosion (i.e. very fast release of the considerable quantity of energy) in this case cannot occur. The slowness of thermonuclear reactions with hydrogen nuclei has its’ reason in that the necessary chain reaction involving them contains b-decay process. The last proceed rather slowly and they cannot be accelerated in no way, and it is spontaneous processes. For example, even at the heat reaction of transformation of hydrogen in deuterium: p+p=D+b++n Occurs because of b-decay very slowly. However at high temperatures thanks to already considered in § 8 reactions 3He4 = 12С and the subsequent reactions of nuclei of carbon with nuclei of helium (alpha-particles): C 12+ He4 =O16 + g, O16 + He4 =20Ne + g In these reactions considerable quantity of light nuclei of carbon, oxygen and neon could arise. Nuclei of these light elements can at temperature about hundred

millions K already enter reactions with the protons, accompanied by significant, and the main thing, fast allocation of energy as such reactions are not accompanied by bdecay.
"However this way each nuclei of an LIGHT element can consistently attach to itself (absorbing or associating with?) NO MORE THAN three OR four protons that will supply an energy upon exit nearby of 10-20 Mev (Russian: МэВ ) on one nuclei."

For heavier nuclei formed by consecutive joining of protons, bdisintegration presence strongly slows down reactions; it will lose the explosive character. Nevertheless even 3-4 consecutive joinings of protons give a quite good explosive. The main question, however, consists in, whether it suffices at a star the necessary quantity of nuclei of light elements that at their explosion (how it can happen, we yet do not discuss) the necessary quantity of energy would be allocated. If a chemical compound of a star which should blow up, if same as at the Sun in each gramme of its substance it is contained approximately 5 · 10 ** 20 light nuclei. If somehow explosive reaction with light nuclei described above occurs, the specific exit of energy will be = 10 ** 16 Mev. It is little by comparison! After all in case of supernova of II type specific exit of energy at least is 10 times more. If we for a minute imagine to ourselves, that our Sun would blow up owing to such reaction energy 10 ** 49 erg would be allocated, and it all the same is less ten times, than is allocated energy at flashes of supernova of I type. If to assume, that for any unknown reason Sun bowels would heat up to temperature in hundred millions K explosion most likely would follow. However speed of retraction of gases would not exceed, say, 500 km/s, and it at least ten times is less, than observable speed of retraction at flash supernova (see § 15). If we wish to explain catastrophic allocation of energy at flash of supernova by nuclear reactions (and such explosive reactions can occur only to nuclei of easy elements) it is necessary to assume, that the chemical compound of bowels of the blown up star should be sharply distinct from the solar. This distinction should be expressed in incomparably bigger abundance of light elements (nitrogen, oxygen, carbon, neon) in relation to hydrogen, than on the Sun. For example, if on the Sun on each one thousand atoms of hydrogen it is necessary only one atom any of these elements at a star which should blow up, quantity of light atoms should make already 2-3 % from quantity of atoms of hydrogen». What for us it is important from the above citation? First, that though hydrogen also is not suitable for fast reactions, but carbon, oxygen and neon which are present at Jupiter (though and in insignificant quantities) – but in not less, than nuclei of light elements are in the Sun. Moreover, for the account of presence of a firm core, clouds etc., these light elements can be present at Jupiter even in more considerable quantities, than in the Sun because on it comets and other bodies hit and then rained down in the interior during its formation. And, besides, for the account of gravitational differentiation and other processes there should be layers where concentration of these elements is higher. (Besides, Neptune and Uranus have even more light elements, especially oxygen, and too can be object of purposeful explosions.) Structure of atmosphere of Jupiter: (wikipedia) 89.8±2.0 % Hydrogen (H2) 10.2±2.0 % Helium ~0.3 % Methane ~0.026 % Ammonia ~0.003 % Hydrogen deuteride (HD) 0.0006 % Ethane

0.0004 % water The mass fraction in atmosphere of other elements makes 1 %: and on all the whole mass of the planet but 5 per cent. Thus even it is less than neon and helium, than on the Sun that connect that they have settled on depth. Liquid hydrogen becomes metal at temperature near 10 000 K. Secondly, from Shklovsky's citation follows, that the Sun nevertheless can blow up, if it to heat up to 100 million degrees. It is interesting to us, whether it is possible to initiate such an staged chain reaction explosion, having heated a certain volume of a planet or a star and then with this preheating from the first explosion, to trigger a larger explosion to heat up the next volumes so that chain reaction goes runaway. In the Sun fusion occurs slowly, and processes are in equilibrium. If in any place nuclear reactions were accelerated, the temperature and pressure in it will grow, and for the account of hydrostatic equilibrium this area has extended, thus, having led to a temperature and speed of reaction decrease. (see Shklovsky. Stars: Their Birth, Life & Death.) However it is true, only if the speed of distribution of reaction is less than the speed of sound in that environment. In bowels of stars this speed of a sound is rather high for the account of huge pressure and temperatures (up to 10,000 km/s) that does make difficult occurrence of explosive reactions. In bowels of planets speed of a sound has an order 10 km/s. (It is easier). So the bowels of giant planet will not change dynamically in order to prevent chain fusion reaction as it happens in stars. Slow combustion of nuclear fuel in bowels of stars is the most known process of thermonuclear synthesis in the observable Universe, however explosive combustion in it also takes place. It occurs at flashes of new stars and at helium flashes on white dwarfs and in nuclei of red giants. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helium_flash Its basis is threefold helium reaction 3He4 = С12. the formula describing it energy relise, is that: E = p 2 X 3T 30 That is energy release is proportional to the square of density, to the cube of concentration, and to 30th power of temperature. Density in bowels of Jupiter is ~6 orders of magnitude below density in white dwarfs, and concentration of helium – ~1 order. Thus, at the same temperature energy realized would be, according to the formula, ~15 orders lower. However, to compensate this loss in energy release, it would be enough to increase temperature approximately three times. That is to, let us assume, 300 million degrees. Obviously, in natural conditions such temperature cannot arise, if the temperature mounted slowly, for the time of the reaction the reaction area would have time to disperse and dissipate (and possibly since it has not occurred, special conditions are required, namely degenerated gas in white dwarfs which leads to an invariance of density with temperature growth). However if the temperature would appear suddenly, above threshold level reaction, the reaction could become self-supporting. A nuclear bomb of sufficient power can create such conditions of explosion.

I will remind, that the detonation is «the supersonic fixed complex consisting of a shock wave and exothermal chemical reaction behind it. It should not be confused with deflagration — the wave of slow combustion accompanied by subsonic flows». http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Detonation Note that the substance inside the giant planets is also degenerate, as the substance of white dwarfs, namely, a degenerate electron gas in the metallic hydrogen. It is not known to what extent this similarity increases the likelihood of a selfsustaining fusion reaction, as is likely, with a sharp heat the state of hydrogen is destroyed. The Hariton (Harrison?) theorem that any exothermal substance is capable to a detonation if its characteristic size surpasses some critical minimum is widely known. (L.P.Feoktistov. A thermonuclear detonation. УФН 168 1247 (1998) http://www.ufn.ru/ru/articles/1998/11/f/) On the one hand, speed of the progress of the threefold helium reaction depends on the 30th power of temperatures (Shklovsky). On the other hand, the more the volume of fuel mix that has initially entered reaction, the more reaction time will be sustained. Thus volume growth will affect the balance between radiating area and area on which its energy dissipates which will result in much bigger heating of ambient areas, and which creates a possibility for self-supporting reactions. For example, at explosion of a nuclear bomb in the air, the size of a bomb is several meters, and the transparency distance on which goes its radiation is kilometers, and owing to it energy of explosion is very dispersed evenly over distance. At explosion of a bomb of the sizes of ten meters to the environment, whose transparency conditions areonly a few meters may be sufficient for starting chain reactions (for example, hydrates of methane on the Earth with high deuterium concentration). All the energy of the bomb passes on a volume of substance, much smaller than it. In such a circumstance, successful ignition is far more likely Otherwise it is possible to say: Energy realized is determined by bomb volume, and radiation losses by the surface area of that volume, therefore, the more the size of an initial bomb, the less problems with losses of energy and guaranteeing ignition of additional reactions. Thus, hypothetical start of a self-supporting reaction needs a certain combination of conditions: 1) Temperature of the mix 2) Volume of the mix 3) Mix of chemical compounds and correct isotopes 4) Initial pressure and mix temperature. On people directly depend only the two first parameters – namely: it is possible to create a bomb of such force to reach demanded values. The alternative version consists in an arrangement of set of bombs on a surface of an imagined sphere so that they at first ignite reactions in this sphere, and then already reaction from sphere can extend to its limits. (If this experiment implements on the Earth an exit of the reaction out of the target ‘to burn’ the target fuel sphere is not necessary for the guaranteed destruction of all life on the surface of the Earth, as radiation fallout even

from a small patch of material may lead to millions of tons of radioactive by products and be global in sweep.) Second two parameters are set mediated – namely, through selection of a place of application of such device. Before test of the first nuclear bomb in the USA was made the report LA-602 http://www.sciencemadness.org/lanl1_a/lib-www/la-pubs/00329010.pdf in which were considered risks that A-bomb explosion would create chain reaction of synthesis of nitrogen in earth atmosphere. (Besides, the bomb has been raised highly above ground as there were concerns about risk of that earth crust will be involved in decay or synthesis reaction). Conclusions that risks of starting chain reaction in the earth atmosphere are insignificant have been drawn as a result Besides, in the article «Unfulfilled Armageddon» http://www.zn.ua/3000/3150/41866/ it is asserted, that before explosion of first hydrogen bomb Mike, Gamow had conducted similar calculations which have proved impossibility of ignition of deuterium at world ocean for the account of explosion which was conducted on a marine atoll. Unfortunately, to find these proofs in the open press was not possible, that in particular can mean, that the situation is not so good, as was sought to present in public. Namely, from the Wood paper mentioned above setting minimum conditions which are necessary for ignition of 1:300 D-enriched marine water (force of explosion not less than 10 teratons (million megatons) (Russian: гигатонн) could follow) – and there may be even more dangerous revelations, still remaining classified. Later Compton declared, that chances of accident of ignition of atmosphere were less than 3 on one million, but A. Kent's investigation has shown, that he has took these figures from air. See Adrian Kent. “The critical review of estimations of risks of global catastrophes”. http://www.proza.ru/texts/2008/05/23/67.html The basic proof of safety of the first nuclear explosion in report LA-602 was that at synthesis of nuclei of nitrogen huge power losses will occur by radiation of all kinds, and consequently how the explosion reference temperature was great, reaction will inevitably fade out. Besides, if the sphere in which there is a reaction, exceeds the size in 50 metres in radius, in it the Compton effect will start to play a role consisting that at dispersion of photons on hot electrons there is a cooling of electrons and growth of energy of photons that leads still bigger ablation of energy by radiation and easing of thermonuclear reaction. The idea to make a hydrogen bomb (“Simple Super” idea of Teller), simply having attached a pipe with deuterium to a nuclear bomb did not work, in particular, because of the Compton dissipation, which cooled it too fast. On the other hand, in someone's memoirs it is noticed, that if the pipe would be very wide, then between temperatures of electrons and photons nevertheless would be established equilibrium. But technically it was unrealistic. Let's notice, that to the beginning thermonuclear reaction in deuterium corresponds to energy in 0.1 Mev (Russian: Мэв), and energy allocation makes approximately 10 Мev. It means, that reaction of one pair of atoms can give energy that bring in 100 atoms to the reaction, that is a gain – 1 to 50. But in the oceans 1 deuteron exists only on ~6500 atoms of hydrogen (154 ppm) that makes such a

reaction on deuterium impossible at in the open ocean. But it was said that in the Arctic concentration of deuterium is higher because of some natural reasons and because of that the Tsar-bomb explosion was feared of starting chain reaction in its water and so was conducted on air. But on the Sun is even less deuterium. (The analysis has shown, that on the Sun it is not enough deuterium, in thousand times it is less, than on the Earth. It is a qualitative argument in favor of thermonuclear reactions: deuterium is formed in the central zone of the Sun extremely slowly, and disappears in10 seconds after it is formed. For so small time it, of course, cannot leave on a surface, and primary deuterium from gaseous clouds which was saved on the Earth, on the Sun for a long time has already burnt away.» http://window.edu.ru/window_catalog/pdf2txt? p_id=4392 the NATURE And POWER SOURCES of STARS. I.Luchkov.) Let's pay attention to the following logic paradox arising in discussions about explosion of planets of giants – it is asserted, that self-supporting reaction in them is impossible, as the hot area will immediately extend and will dissipate. If this area extends in a planet the average density of substance will be equal in this area to average density of substance in a planet, and in this case it is impossible to tell, that the area has dissipated (unlike a case of explosion of a nuclear bomb in atmosphere where the density of a material of a bomb is much more than atmospheric density and there is a possibility to dissipate). Thus, if to tell, that the border of extending area will be denser, and interiors – emptier-- it will be similar to a shock wave front. If so, then the heated area will dissipate only at the limits of Jupiter –and it will be the explosion of Jupiter! Think of an analogy to combustion: If on a tip of a sheet of paper the small spark can go out itself and if the huge heap of rotten rags it can ignite spontaneously we see the volume of the burning weight even is more important than its temperature. Thus, absence of explosive thermonuclear reactions to the Sun with deuterium cannot serve as the proof of impossibility of these reactions on the Earth and in giant planets as on the Sun deuterium (as we have seen—at least in the interior) already is not present. However the given Compton argument does not work in relation to less transparent environments, moreover, it prompts, that the most dense and opaque substances as firm materials of a mantle of planets of earth type are should be the most dangerous prey to a potential explosion! These materials should contain enough of hydrogen, helium, oxygen and carbon that in them fast thermonuclear reactions could proceed. To these requirements, apparently, well suited is the sea-bottom of the Earth-- rich with fossils, in particular with hydrates of methane which contain H, O, C, and it is a lot of the impurities making them opaque to light radiation and for neutrons. (And also the deposits of natural gas rich with an impurity of helium.) The sea-bottom is under sufficient pressure to exclude the fast retraction (dispersion) of atoms undergoing fusion «as would occur in vacuum». Opacity of the metallic hydrogen ocean of Jupiter and other planets of giants depends on concentration of impurities, and it is impossible to exclude, that on any depth this concentration is great enough.

Besides, the important feature of Jupiter is that, unlike the Sun, on it was saved large quantities of highly combustable isotopes, first of all deuterium (and also lithium 6 and 7). Besides, there at significant amounts (unlike the Earth) of helium-3 which is considered as perspective nuclear fuel for the future earthen thermonuclear power stations, and there is a project proposed for its extraction on a giant planet, namely, on Uranus where the gravity is minimum. In the Uranian atmosphere the probe which will float and filter helium, purifying helium-3, and then from it a rocket to the Earth will launch with its’ rich prize. Bryan Palaszewski. "Atmospheric Mining in the Outer Solar System. http://gltrs.grc.nasa.gov/reports/2006/TM-2006-214122.pdf this project creates risks of nuclear explosion as such ship will demand for itself nuclear power installation, and, by definition, will be filled by nuclear fuel in the form of helium-3. I will remind, that lithium6 deuteride is the basic fuel of modern hydrogen bombs. It is possible to assume, that in some areas, thanks to the mass differentiation of hydrogen, the quantity of deuterium in Jupiter will be raised (though this would contradict data about a strong convection in its atmosphere). But on an ocean of metallic hydrogen if there is no strong convection, it is possible. It is possible to assume also, as itself natural lithium deuteride (in the form of areas of the raised concentration) is formed on Jupiter in certain unique conditions – also as on the Earth sometimes there are gold nuggets. In the future when development of planets becomes massive, there will be a set of the independent stations working in atmospheres of giant planets, and wars for the right of use of planets with application of the nuclear weapon that is besides fraught with its falling in bowels of these very planets and scientific nuclear depth explosions (for investigations akin to helioseismology but for giant planets) are possible also. Conclusion: the possibility of starting of the thermonuclear detonation of one of the giant planets looks possible though a fuse of huge force for this purpose can be demanded. (Or may not: In megabar conditions even a small thermonuclear warhead may suffice) In other words, at presence of an ultimately strong fuse, we, possibly, can ignite a giant planet. Without exact calculations it is impossible to estimate force of a fuse. Also as well as on the Earth not just any small nuclear explosion can lead to the kind of uncontrollable nuclear reaction we fear. Similarly, the future explosion of Cassini will not necessarily result in explosion of Saturn even if explosion of Saturn basically is possible with a sufficient detonator. All depends on the igniter and the place to be ignited. It is possible to give from following «expert estimations»: probability of explosion Cassini – less than 1 to 10 000, probability of that giant planets basically can blow up – 1 to 10, the probability of that explosion Cassini becomes a cause of the explosion of Saturn – too 1 to 10 000, probability of extinction as a result of explosion – 1. Then total probability of extinction as a result of mission Cassini – 1 to billion. But even this estimation is unacceptably great, according to A.Kent. Besides, an error in an estimation of this estimation could be more than the estimation, which is hardly less often, than 1 time in a billion.

The probability of accident with Cassini is approximately same, as well as chances of accident with LHC. It is sad that the mankind creates very many dangerous experiments simultaneously. Let's notice, that the problem of explosion of celestial bodies will arise and at a hypothetical future dicersion of comets menacing to the Earth and asteroids by means of nuclear explosions. As for such deviation some large bodies will be required explosions of gigaton scales, chances of fusion detonations of debris of comets will inevitably increase. (The assumption here, is that rare patches of enriched burnable isotopes may exist in some comets) And as such explosions, probably, will be near to the Earth (if to intercept comets at the last minute) consequences may be rather pitiable. Besides, radiation from the explosion of a nuclear interceptor rocket too will drop out to the Earth. Gravitational separation may also be at work, collecting deposits of heavy water inside cooled water bodies - such as satellites of giant planets. To destroy all intelligent life on the Earth it would be sufficient to blow up a cube of heavy water (on the Earth) an edge of 100 meters, which would roughly 1000 gigatons (equivalent to a strike of the asteroid with diameter of several kilometers), but more important then the blast is the killing mechanism of millions of tons of radioactive waste, dispersed world wide. Enough heavy water may be possible to get using genetically modified organisms, sensitive to the isotopic composition. «But at the same time know that physical and chemical properties D2O quite different than the H2O – its’ isomer. Thus, the boiling point of heavy water is +101,4 ° C and freezes it at +3,81 ° C. Its density is 10 per cent more than the usual. » (Be careful, heavy water! M. ADZHIEV http://nt.ru/tp/mr/otv.htm) The article alleged that the bottom ice in the northern rivers consists heavy water, as well as exist deposits of ice that is at the bottom of the Arctic. «Largest solar neutrino detector SNO (Canada) contains 1 kiloton of heavy water». (Wikipedia) http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Тяжелая_вода It could lead to 10-16 gigaton (10,000-16,000 megaton) explosion in case of detonation. Also many fission nuclear reactors contain heavy water. (A lesser quantity, though) Famous opponent of LHC Sancho wrote: “I have had several lengthy, hours-long discussions with Dr. Richard Webb concerning the thermonuclear detonation potential of the various fusible materials in high concentration at the LHC, which consist primarily of fusible C-12 in the one-ton graphite collimators and multi-ton graphite, the fusible N-14 in cylinders of compressed air at 100 atmosphere concentration, and the fusible liquid He-4 utilized as the coolant of the superconducting magnets that ring the full 27 kilometer circumference of the beam pipes of the LHC. He is likewise agreed that the potential for an accidental thermonuclear detonation of those fusible materials from an errant beam might be present, and needs to be examined in detail.» http://www.lhcdefense.org/pdf/SANCHO%20v.%20DOE%20%20%20September,%202008%20-%20Affidavit%20of%20WLW

%20in%20Support%20of%20Reply%20Memorandum%20%20%201.pdf Furthermore, if the helium from cooling system gets into the ring of accelerator, you get something like TOKOMAK fusion reactor mechanism! The same applies to the future ITER project, which, among other things, would be extremely dangerous to accumulate cobalt-60 in the walls of the chamber (blanket), and in case of an explosion of it will be a huge radioactive contamination. Sediments of deuterium are possible on Mars (check!!! deuterium develop from cosmic rays - neutron capture of hydrogen - hence, smaller space body will have greater concentration of deuterium, as their relation of surface to volume is more), and even in the nuclei of comets and icy dwarf planets. In this sense, it is dangerous to repel an in-falling comet by nuclear explosion because it could lead to its detonation and the fallout of formed radioactive elements on the Earth. (Remember the recent outbreak of the Holmes comet. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holmes_comet However, the default mechanism for cometary explosions is chemical, involving free radicals. This however does not affect our argument since we are focusing on the worst case only!) Moreover, if true, that deuterium develop from hydrogen under the influence of cosmic rays, the ancient surface of ice moon would be extremely rich with deuterium - because there is no mixing. For example, the surface of Enceladus, which Cassini regularly flies by and could smash into it. However, if the explosion will cover only the surface of Enceladus, rather than its volume, the number of the resulting radioactive elements may not be enough to harm the Earth, although the total destruction of the satellite and its residual spraying throughout the solar system (with subsequent «nuclear» winter on Earth) is very likely. As well as dispersion of highspeed shrapnel as a result of dissymmetrical explosion that could also fall to Earth. There is reason to believe that deuterium can be a separate layer of the innermost regions of Jupiter. «In the Livermore lab received evidence that deuterium D2 (heavy hydrogen) into a metallic phase at a pressure of 50 GPa and temperature of 8000 K. Some conditions are believed to exist in the bowels of the planet Jupiter. » http://nature.web.ru/db/msg.html?mid=1156483&s = «In today's thin Martian atmosphere attitude of deuterium to hydrogen in water vapor is five times higher than in the water on Earth. Past studies attributed this way hydrogen from Martian atmosphere over time. Because hydrogen is lighter deuterium, it evaporate more quickly, leading to relatively high levels of deuterium in the atmosphere of Mars in our time. » http://martiantime.narod.ru/Papers/01014.htm «In the meteorite containing hydrogen, the content of deuterium observed by dozens of times higher, compared with the earth.» «Such clashes of meteorites or asteroids in the solar system may be caused by some of the gamma-ray bursts (with the range and time), attributed to a remote extragalactic objects. » Mikhail Karpov. Cold nuclear fusion and education issues light elements in the Earth's crust and meteorites. http://www.sciteclibrary.ru/rus/catalog/pages/9070.html Hypothetically, you can imagine the two-stage (or even three) thermonuclear detonation of celestial body. Initially, explode very small (a few hundred meters in

size) area with very high concentrations of deuterium - say, a glacier. Then it ignites surrounding area with less deuterium, which requires for its combustion the starter of greater force. (the original area of high concentration serves as this primer charge). Then, the reaction becomes the triple helium reaction, which covers a considerable amount of the planet. However it was found that cosmic rays couldn’t produce lithium http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_ray_spallation Ultra-dense deuterium may be the nuclear fuel of the future http://www.science.gu.se/english/News/News_detail?contentId=879280 “The material is produced from heavy hydrogen, also known as deuterium, and is therefore known as “ultra-dense deuterium”. It is believed that ultra-dense deuterium plays a role in the formation of stars, and that it is probably present in giant planets such as Jupiter.”

Explosion consequences
Let's assume that explosion of Jupiter (or Saturn – but for simplicity we will consider Jupiter alone) has occurred. What will be negative consequences of this event for the Earth? Here there are two versions of events – 1 – explosion occurs at the moment in time (now) when people live only on the Earth. 2. Explosion occurs in 100 or more years when the mankind has extended over all the solar system. In the second case explosion is much more probable, but its’ consequences could be not as deadly to mankind as a species. Energy of explosion will be equal in the maximum case to energy of flash of a nova – if the most part of the thermonuclear fuel in Jupiter burns through. If explosion is of smaller force than this, we have a question--whether will be its forces enough to force the mass of Jupiter to escape velocity (59.2 km/sec) Jupiter to dump the atmosphere. I believe if this will occur, consequences for the modern Earth will be pitiable. As I already spoke, Jupiter cannot become a second steady-state star in Solar system, (owing to its’ small mass) and consequently only its explosive combustion is possible. Maximum time of this process is determined by speed of a sound in the core of Jupiter which is not less 10 km/sec. Second, by the size of burning area – no more than 100,000 km. Thus, maximum time of combustion no more than 10, 000 seconds-that is three hours. However the interior, more dense and smaller on a volume basis most likely will burn faster, and the burning rate will make up to 1000 km/sec, that corresponds to speed of gases in plasma, heated to hundreds of millions degrees. Thus, minimum time of combustion will be approximately 10 seconds. If only one thousand part of substance of Jupiter takes part in reaction, and the energy equal of one thousandth part weight of that substance which has entered the reaction it will be equivalent to a mass converted to energy of 10 ** 18 tons. Thus every second in bowels of the Sun 4*10 ** 6 tons of substance pass in energy. From here follows, that luminosity of Jupiter approximately over an hour (rough time of

dispersion and atmosphere—now plasma ball-- cooling) becomes ~100 million times more than the present luminosity of the Sun. On account of the 5 AU (average) distance from the Earth, this energy will decrease approximately by 25 times, but in any case, within an hour the radiation flux will exceed solar by a million times. There is no need to press in exact calculations, to tell, that it will result in failure of the atmosphere of the Earth and destruction of all its’ biosphere. Possibly, significant layer of rocky rocks will be broken (from tens of metres to kilometres by thickness). On the other hand, as flash will be short-term the underside of the Earth and other planets will suffer considerably smaller damage, and theoretically underground bases, deep in several kilometres in depth on Earth’s moon, could go through this flash. (It also means, in case of the future space conflict, that the party which will dispose such bases, can be interested in explosion of Jupiter on purpose to clear Solar system of the opponent.) The blast wave from the heated hydrogen will reach the Earth in some days or weeks, but nothing will be there left to destroy, and force of its effect will be less, than from the flash. If explosion will be less energetic (or as it was offered in one place, the Earth will be obscured from it by the Sun during this moment i.e. at the anti-jovian point) radioactive fall-out from explosion will be the factor that threatens the Earth. At supernovae, and at nuclear explosions, are created many radioactive elements (On account of acquisition of neutrons with heavy nuclei. This is how heavy elements are created, and initial debris products will contain a large percentage of unstable short half-life highly radioactive, elements As before, arrival of the remnants of Jupiter to the Earth will take from several days till several years; the worst isotopes will decay but the remnant will be quite enough. A significant amount of (‘hot’) isotopes with the decay periods greater than some years will remain and will drop out by meteoric action onto the Earth. For example, for full radioactive contamination of the Earth only a few hundreds thousand tons of cobalt-60 is required. It will mean long and painful death for all life. The viewable size of the Earth from Jupiter is approximately 1 to 100 000, and the share of the Earth in its firmament– (subtended angle of arc) 1 to 10 billionth of sky area. It is possible to assume, that the Earth will receive not a smaller share of the substances dumped by Jupiter (actually, more, for the account of gravitational acquisition, which sweeps out a far greater area than the planet’s physical sphere does). If it dumps 1/10 the proportional weight to the Earth there will drop out 10 ** 13 tons of jovian fallout (that is 10 000 cubic km at water densities). In case of explosion of the supernova the isotope nickel-56 with the decay period of 6 is transformed into an isotope cobalt-56 with the decay period of 77 days. At speed of explosion of a shell of Jupiter about 1000 km/s (about corresponding to speed of atoms of substance at temperatures of thermonuclear combustion) decay products will reach the Earth within 8 days. Even if only one ten-thousand part will consist of radioactive elements, it all the same will be 10 ** 9 tons, or 2 tons per square kilometre of an earth surface, that is 50 000 mol substances of nickel or 10 ** 29 atoms which will give 10 ** 17 decays (bequerels) on each square meter per second, that, is roughly speaking, there will correspond to one million roentgens in a

second, that is one thousand lethal doses a second. Even if radiation will be a billion times less then one lethal dose will take 10 days. Further, in case of destruction of Jupiter the Solar system will be filled with its remnants and the remnants of its satellites, many of which will get into the inner solar system and will result in intensive meteoritic bombardment of the Earth. Gravitational stability of the solar system also may suffer—The Sun is 99.86 percent of the mass of the Solar System, and Jupiter is .1 percent. Close flybys of large masses may change orbital geometries to some small extent. At last, the remnants of Jupiter can generate the new "protoplanetary" disk which part (also it will be temporary) in internal areas of Solar system and will disseminate the Sunlight that will result in «nuclear winter» on the Earth. The optical thickness of the disk will be especially great in an ecliptic plane so the Earth can plunge into full darkness. I will remind the reader, that insignificant weight tails of comets are very brightly visible in the sky, that a lot of mass is not required (given the large area) for darkening the Sun over a square meter. And if this exercise is repeated over the entire perceived disk area of the Sun as seen from Earth—we are in trouble in any case. These conclusions do not strongly differ for explosions of Saturn, Uranus and Neptune as uncertainty of these conclusions makes several orders of magnitude variation, however the reserve of "striking ability” makes many orders of magnitude of overkill. Hence, a nuclear explosion of any planet should be considered as threat to human existence. Only when the mankind will be settled far beyond inner Solar system, for example, in Kuiper belt, or Oort Cloud, only then will an explosion of Jupiter not represent for it danger of full extinction. You can also argue that high concentrations of deuterium would be only deep inside the giant planets, which is difficult to penetrate for the probe due to high pressure and temperature. But here are possible options. For example, Earth has a solid core of iron at a temperature of about 6000 degrees - that is possible to retain a firm shell probe by the fact that at high-pressure (3 million bars at the Earth’s core) substance remains solid at high temperatures. In addition, high temperatures should not penetrate into the probe, which imposes restrictions on the speed of immersion / size of the probe. Finally, the envelope must withstand pressure and not pass it on to the center. There is a presumption that in the liquid iron in Earth's is dissolved hydrogen in large quantities (and that even at the expense of it the earth is increasing) - if so, the bowels of the Earth can also be enriched with layers of deuterium. However, the probe should be dropped out in this environment quickly to survive the ambient heat. And to reach these depths is not difficult, because the planet is liquid. (It should be noted that the temperature at depth in the giant planets is tens of thousands of degrees. But the pressure aids nuclear reactions.

At 10,000 kilometers below Jupiter's cloud top liquid hydrogen reaches a pressure of 1,000,000 bar with a temperature of 6,000° K. At this state hydrogen changes into a phase of liquid metallic hydrogen. In this state, the hydrogen atoms break down yeilding ionized protons and electrons similar to the Sun's interiorhttp://www.solarviews.com/eng/jupiter.htm Other sources hold that it takes 4 million bar to transition to the metallic hydrogen phase. For comparison, the pressure at the core of the Earth is 3 million bar. http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Nwfaq/Nfaq4-4.htm gives the radiation implosion pressure in the 1952 Mike deuterium H-bomb as 73 megabars.) However, depending on the results of computer modeling, (specifically on the time required for descent to target depths and the insulation efficiency of a many-layer sinking body containing the warhead) there may be in principle ways to insulate a bomb to a given pressure level if the concentration of thermonuclear fuel is known in the target region before sinking the bomb there.) The key issue is penetration time. What will be terminal descent velocity? If less than a day, might a 100-layer thermal defense be sufficient to allow a bomb to survive until a pressure switch goes off? If slower, but more efficient insulation (or simply more layers with same efficiency) the result could be the same. If so, the technology of explosion of the giant planets, in principle, may be reachable for our civilization now. In the future, when the development of nanotechnology will allow quick and cheap way to master space, the question of finding the layers with high concentrations of deuterium and the creation of huge explosive devices to initiate the explosion will greatly simplified. In fact, hostile organizations may launch an invisible nanorobots into depths of a giant planet that will create a fuel source for a cosmic explosion in several years or even less. Moreover, nanotechnology will enable separation of isotopes, and this means that it will be possible to artificially create an inside layer in the planet with sufficiently high concentration of deuterium and other elements necessary for the explosion (lithium-6, for example, to create lithium deuteride, as in modern hydrogen bombs) and then be able to blackmail the entire solar system. In addition, the transformation of the planet can be made imperceptible to the outside observer, if he does not have monitoring devices placed in the bowels of the planet.

Other possible explosions of planets.
Some time back E.M.Drobyshevsky has made waves over all the Internet with the article «About prority of space missions» (Danger of explosion Callisto and priority of space missions www.ioffe.ru/journals/jtf/1999/09/p10-14.pdf) where he asserts, that the satellite of Jupiter Callisto can blow up because of chemical combustion reaction in ionised ice (caused by cosmic radiation and chemical radiolysis over time). We will admit, for this argument, that it so. Then spontaneous explosion of Callisto in the next 100 years has chances less, than 1 to 10 million, recognising that Callisto has existed whole not less than one billion years. On the other hand, an expedition to the satellite going about its’ business with deep drilling and other (explosive?) seismic sounding, can go awry and lead to explosion of Callisto

even such a minor vehicle falling on a surface explosion through a navigational mishap or implosion of plutonium batteries through collision at cosmic velocities without atmospheric slowdown). I think, that it will be fair to assume, that expedition on Callisto has not less than 1 chance from 1000 that it will result in accident (if such an accident is at all possible). In other words, the very probing expedition increases the chances of an accident by ten thousand times. Thus, priority of space missions should consist in: Not to direct any missions to Callisto! A prospective investigator might say, "It is necessary to investigate, whether can Callisto blow up. Its ices are how much strongly saturated by electrolysis products, we do not know, and no one can tell us. It is necessary to voyage to Callisto, to land there there, to drill, search," - the scientist might say. http://www.uralweb.ru/news/n325810.html Any number of self-booting jokes are possible, in which the precautions themselves become the trigger that causes doom to humanity. (One such joke here is pertinent: The autopsy has shown, that the patient has died of autopsy.) Besides, continuing in the worst-case vein, suppose we do find dramatic results: Callisto can blow up? We should deliver round it space patrols to protect it from collision with meteorites and from space terrorists? (Because, if knowledge of risks of explosion of Callisto will be promulgated, future versions of today’s terrorists may make it their prime target.) We should build bombproof shelters strenuously? Or we should start to evacuate from it surpluses of bomb isotopes, which itself is fraught with danger (since that will by definition concentrate them for export?) Besides, it is possible to consider a hypothetical possibility of collision of Cassini with the satellite of Saturn—Enceladus-- by which it regularly flies by at small altitude. Hypothetically, such collision can lead to impact implosion of nuclear tablets of Cassini, to nuclear explosion and then to the thermonuclear explosion of Enceladus consisting of water ice with impurity. Weight of Enceladus is 10 million times less than weight of Jupiter, therefore, proceeding from the resulted estimations, its luminosity at explosion too should be in ten millions times less. On the other hand, time of combustion Enceladus will be mere fractions of a second. In this case its luminosity for one second will exceed solar influx to the Earth by three thousand times at ground level. It is enough of it to boil a sheet of water of the thickness of several centimetres. Thus, all life on a surface of one hemisphere will be lost from burns as from explosion of a nuclear bomb, and also intensive fires will flash. Global consequences will be comparable with global nuclear war, but some number of people will survive. At the same time, at explosion Enceladus the significant amount of radioactive substances also would form, too in ten millions times less than in the case of an explosion of Jupiter. However we saw, that explosion of Jupiter gives a reserve of a billion times on more radioactivity than the minimum (well-distributed) needed for human extinction, it is quite possible that a mere explosion of Enceladus can suffice. Similar sort of a reasoning are applicable and for thermonuclear explosion of other satellites of planets, large asteroids and terrestrial planets if there will be ways of effecting their detonation. It is possible to imagine also, that intragalactic meteorites having speeds in hundreds of kilometres per second, (expelled, let us guess, from binary objects where inadvertent gravity assists make possible such speeds) might create fusion reactions in case of their collision with ice satellites. However unlikely, it only takes one…

Finally we mention the theory that explosions of planets are connected with natural uranium reactors in their centre. (Anisichkin. Voronin, Calculation of the fragmentation of planets at explosion http://www.vniitf.ru/rig/konfer/5zst/Section2/2-4r.pdf and their other activities.) Explosions occur after impact events when the natural uranium reactors in the planet centre contracts. Such reactor in the active form could be on the Earth and at planets of giants, and in sleeping (dormant) form – on other terrestrial planets and on some (iron) asteroids. This is comparable to the georeactor theory of Professor Herndon in the USA. Now there were projects of deeply drilling of the mantle by means of refractory probes with a radiation heat source or reactor (Aranovich). (A ‘hot drop’) Besides risks of creation of a supervolcano, such probes create also risk of nuclear explosions at sudden implosion under massive pressure of a shell of a probe and sharp compression of radioactive substance if it supports fission. Such explosion could become the initiator for awakening or strengthening of the activity of a hypothetical natural uranium reactor. Consider
a paper that is not comforting in this context http://arxiv.org/pdf/physics/0308058: Geo-engineering Gone Awry: A New Partial Solution of Fermi’s Paradox By Milan M. Cirkovic & Richard B. Cathcart http://arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/0308/0308058.pdf

(Fermi’s Paradox is the calculation that intelligent extraterrestrials should be visible everywhere yet are to be found nowhere. One common offered solution is that we are the first. Another common solution is that the Cosmos is far deadlier than we imagine, and we are just not a victim yet. We know for certain of natural uranium reactors whose traces are found in the uranium mine in Gabon where reaction went hundred thousand years in deposits of the uranium ore washed by flows of underground waters (as natural moderator in early times when U-235 was more abundant). http://www.rol.ru/news/misc/news/02/10/16_078.htm But there they write, that at the moment such reactors cannot work, as uranium-235 has broken up to level of concentration below 3 percent. (Currently 0.7 percent) Nevertheless, there is a thought about starting of nuclear explosion of the Earth for the account of explosion of a thermonuclear bomb in uranium mines. Though such explosion cannot capture all planet, the effect can be catastrophic for the account of huge allocation of radiation rich fallout. This is however probably impossible, barring a deliberate attempt to use huge amounts of fusion isotopes to trigger such uranium concentrations. When I studied physics in school, my friend has told me that if to collect all nuclear charges in the Marianas trench and to detonate them, an uncontrollable chain reaction will begin, the Earth will burn three days and destroy everything. The statement that it will burn three days, obviously, is false as there are no conditions for

a stable combustion, (a runaway explosion is rapid or nonexistent) and we may dismiss this case as just another ignorant rumor. This does not however mean that a sufficiently massive thermonuclear charge on the ocean floor near, say, a spreading ridge might not open a volcanic vent to a mantle plume that Mankind might well wish had stayed closed. This might cause a new Iceland sized island, but probably would not cause mass extinctions. Possibly an (also hypothetical!) planetary explosion might (with unlikely compressional geometries and efficiencies) result also in creation (or release!) of a small black hole and its immersion into a planet. At accretion onto the black hole 3050% of infalling matter’s mass is released into radiation. Too, concerns about strangelets, magnetic monopoles and other hypothetical objects whose risks of occurrence were discussed in connection with the LHC might be released. This is stacking improbable cases on top of each other until they teeter, but this paper cheerfully examines all worst cases! At the core of the Sun has already begun to shape the future white dwarf, into which the Sun will turn: the density of matter in the core is 150 tons per cubic meter and the concentration of helium 4 is sufficiently high, and temperature is 15 million degrees. Hypothetically it can be assumed that such conditions is sufficient for detonation of helium (but not for its slow burning) in the triple helium reaction. However, to deliver at the center of the Sun a «blasting cap» is at least problematic. But again there are possibilities to a malevolent future scientist/dictator/terrorist/ignorant probing fool—Advanced matter substances could penetrate deeply inside the sun --objects inaccessible now for Earth technologies: neutrinos, dark matter, microscopic black holes. An example is A.A. Bolonkin’s ‘ABMatter’. Every risk is worth considering, because we don’t know how small it is until we calculate it. I estimate that probability of theoretical possibility of ignition of giant planet is around 1 per cent. (Hopefully the 99% chance is correct—that such a thing is impossibility.) And I estimate that chances of intended or occasional detonation of any planet is also 1 per cent for next several hundreds years. So, the chances of human extinction from given risk is around ~ 1 to 10 000 —if these calculations are correct. But facts are facts. If it is possible, it can happen. If impossible it cannot. Yet only a fool does not investigate if he might be in danger. There was a famous cartoon around the time of the fall of the USA’s Skylab space station in 1979: A computer tells a scientist, “Look, either it hits you or it doesn’t. The odds are 50-50.” Until we investigate, the joke is on us! You may try to dream about the opportunity to influence the flare on the sun, which are magnetic in nature. (However, they have the upper limit of energy equal to the total energy of magnetic field of the Sun - see A. Dar.) Finally, in a collision of two planets also provides enormous energy. For example, if two terrestrial planets crashed, the realized energy would be equal to about 100 days of luminosity of the Sun. Much of that energy would be released as heat. For example, if all this energy release occurred during a 24 hour interval-- it would have

led to the luminosity of 100 times greater than that of the sun. (The actual time scale would be on the order of under an hour) This would lead to burn up of the biosphere on the side of the Earth where the collision is visible. Even if the colliding planets are obscured by (say) fragment clouds after the first hour, that first one hour of incredible heat would cause burning of a hemisphere on Earth. The consequences of meteoritic rain and sun shadow dust (like nuclear winter) also will follow. As the resulting breakup dust will be in the form of a disk around the sun, it will change the orientation of solar luminosity - more light will scatter to the side of the disc, and less along the edge of the disk. Therefore, the planet in the ecliptic plane will receive much less radiation, even taking into account the balance between absorbed and radiated dust emission. This might lead to an ice age punctuated by meteoric fireballs day and night for ages to come. Natural H-bomb In 1989, Serge J.D. D'Alessio and Archie A. Harms suggested that some of the deuterium in a comet entering the Earth's atmosphere may have undergone a nuclear fusion reaction,[33] leaving a distinctive signature in the form of carbon-14. They concluded that any release of nuclear energy must have been almost negligible. Independently, in 1990, César Sirvent proposed that a deuterium comet, i.e., a comet with an anomalous high concentration of deuterium in its composition, could have exploded as a natural hydrogen bomb, generating most of the energy released. The sequence would be first a mechanical or kinetic explosion, triggering a thermonuclear reaction. These proposals are inconsistent with knowledge both of the composition of comets and of the temperature and pressure conditions necessary for initiating a nuclear fusion reaction.[34] Studies have found the concentration of radioactive isotopes in the blast region to be inconsistent with those expected following a nuclear explosion, fusion or otherwise.[18] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tunguska_event The nuclear and aerial dynamics of the Tunguska event, Planetary and Space Science, Vol. 37, No. 3, pp. 329-340, 1989. http://www.math.uwaterloo.ca/~sdalessi/Tunguska.pdf However, this paper (as is known) is written in the spirit of the worst case, so let us consider—suppose there was such a comet and it was (also!) on a collision course for Earth—and intercepted (say) at the distance of Earth’s Moon. The warhead we send to deflect it hits the enriched deuterium patch (a third improbability!) Now—
To calculate nuclear fallout of comet explosion (if it is thermonuclear) we should devide surfase of Earth on surfase of imaginable sphere with the centre in the point of explosion. This will be part за fallout which reach the Earth. Earth is 4 sq. grads from Moon http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grad_(angle) and sky is 42. 252 sq grad. So, Only 1 of 10 000 fallout atoms would reach the Earth in case of such a comet explosion. So, (assuming 1,000 gigatons=1 teraton=1 million megatons) thermonuclear yield is enough to destroy most significant life on earth through nuclear fallout and isotopes (during the peak of the Cold War total megatonnage was never as much as 40,000 megatons, and most times less than 20,000 megatons) we need a 10 000 times more powerfull explosion to contaminate the earth from the distance of the moon’s orbit, ie 10,000,000 gigatons of TNT.

Given a yield of 82.4

kT/kg of deuterium, 12.14 kilograms are needed for 1 megaton. Given a heavy water deuterium concentration of 20% by weight (16 +4 rather than 16 +2) 60.68 kilograms of heavy comet ice are needed for 1 megaton. Therefore we need 1 million times 10,000 times say 61 kilograms of heavy ice, or say 610000 million
kilograms or 610 million tons of heavy ice. This is under a cubic kilometer; many medium size comets would have sufficient deuterium, some of which may be sufficiently enriched to light up under a thermonuclear warhead stimulus and ignite the rest. For example, see this article on the Wild 2 comet on Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/81P/Wild mass approximately 230 billion tons. Supposing that this was a fragment of a larger comet with such an enriched deuterium deposit, and the enriched fragment was (in the spirit of this paper!) the one to fly by us closely, it might pay to test for deuterium before firing! (An unenriched comet with sufficient deuterium would be many times larger). But we need not be so paranoid to imagine frying the earth with radiation alone—a small pocket of enriched deuterium would convert a ‘routine’ comet deflection warhead mission to a disastrous fragmentation event that could have radioactive (!) cometary pieces impacting Earth both this orbit and for many years to come.

The literature: Artificial Explosion of Sun. AB-Criterion for Solar Detonation
http://www.scribd.com/doc/24541542/Artificial-Explosion-of-Sun-ABCriterion-for-Solar-Detonation

Jacco van der Worp. Could NASA Use Galileo to Create a Jovian Nagasaki? YOWUSA.COM, 07-September-03 http://yowusa.com/space/2003/space2003-09a/1.shtml About a stain on a floodlight. http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/jupiter_dark_spot_031023.html Forum: Nuclear ignition of gas giant atmospheres http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php? t=3156 The Lucifer Project This is a documentation and study of the feasibility of creating a sustainable fusion reaction from an initial fission reaction on Saturn caused by a significant quantity of Plutonium-238 being inserted deep into the atmosphere. http://www.rinf.com/news/nov05/lucifer-project.html

Richard C. Hoagland. Did NASA Accidentally “Nuke” Jupiter? http://www.enterprisemission.com/NukingJupiter.html Spacecraft Power for Cassini http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/spacecraft/safety/power.pdf Updated Critical Mass Estimates for Plutonium-238 http://www.osti.gov/bridge/purl.cover.jsp? purl =/6009-YSy5TG/native/

Artificial explosion of the Sun: real threat to mankind? http://www.pravda.ru/science/planet/space/05-01-2007/208894-sun_detonation-0 The superbomb of Teller – does not work. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/bomb/peopleevents/pandeAMEX71.html The "George" Test http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/bomb/peopleevents/pandeAMEX55.html L.P.Feoktistov. A thermonuclear detonation. УФН 168 1247 (1998) http://www.ufn.ru/ru/articles/1998/11/f/ Nuclear Reaction When Galileo Spacecraft Impacts Into Jupiter In September 2003 Unlikely But Possible. http://www.cyberspaceorbit.com/JUPFULLx.htm Artificial firing of a star http://www.astronomy.ru/forum/index.php/topic, 36939.0.html Discussion about Cassini http://www.astronomy.ru/forum/index.php/topic, 4673.1580.html Anisichkin. CALCULATION OF THE FRAGMENTATION OF PLANETS AT EXPLOSION http://www.vniitf.ru/rig/konfer/5zst/Section2/2-4r.pdf Drobyshevsky E.M. Danger of explosion of Callisto and priority of space missions www.ioffe.ru/journals/jtf/1999/09/p10-14.pdf A.V. Turchin. «Natural accidents http://www.proza.ru/texts/2007/04/12-13.html and antropic principle»

L.P.Feoktistov. A thermonuclear detonation. УФН 168 1247 (1998) http://www.ufn.ru/ru/articles/1998/11/f/ Interesting discussion about a possibility of ignition of deuterium at oceans And in general about consequences of nuclear war. http://forum.inosmi.ru/forum//themes/printpost? post=474170 http://forum.inosmi.ru/forum//themes/viewthread? thread=17531&offset=60 Discussion at a scientific forum about project Болонкина. http://elementy.ru/blogs/users/chronicler/10780/ In Saturn and Jupiter liquid metal helium is found http://www.lenta.ru/news/2008/08/07/giants/ In the novel « colder than ice» floodlight explosion for the account of a collapse of hydrogen in the metal form is discussed. http://fantlab.ru/work40400 **

With first such prevention in the Nobel lecture in 1922 F.Aston – the inventor mass спектрографа, experimentally opened the first isotopes and relativistic defect of weight in an atomic nucleus has acted. Then he has stated for the first time idea of thermonuclear reaction of transformation of hydrogen in helium, and also fears concerning that this artificial reaction can be globalized in earth hydrosphere and to become "bickford fuse" of space accident of a birth on a place of the former Earth of a short-lived new star. Since then a possibility of transformation of physical laboratory in epicentre of space accident that more it is less briskly discussed to this day … http://www.radonezh.ru/analytic/articles/? ID=2763 (Necessary conditions for the initiation and propagation of nuclear detonation waves in plane atmospheres. Thomas A. Weaver and Lowell Wood, Physical review 20 - 1 July 1979, http://www.lhcdefense.org/pdf/LHC%20-%20Sancho%20v.%20Doe%20%20Atmosphere%20Ignition%20-%202%20-%20Wood_AtmIgnition-1.pdf) Debunk: Project Lucifer: Will Cassini Turn Saturn into a Second Sun? (Part 1) http://www.universetoday.com/2008/07/24/project-lucifer-will-cassini-turnsaturn-into-a-second-sun-part-1/ Bryan Palaszewski. "Atmospheric Mining in the Outer Solar System. http://gltrs.grc.nasa.gov/reports/2006/TM-2006-214122.pdf http://www.lhcdefense.org/pdf/SANCHO%20v.%20DOE%20%20%20September,%202008%20-%20Affidavit%20of%20WLW %20in%20Support%20of%20Reply%20Memorandum%20%20%201.pdf http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Nwfaq/Nfaq4-4.htm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deuterium