Timeline for How much charge would destroy the world?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
14 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 1, 2019 at 1:26 | comment | added | slimer | Photon with a wavelength (λ) of 6e^-52 meter. (h∙c)/λ h: 6.62607015e^-34 J∙s c: 2.99792458e^8 m/s h∙c = 1.9865e-25 J / 6e^-52 m = 3.26e^26 J | |
| Nov 5, 2015 at 0:09 | comment | added | Hennes | Indeed. Full fledged helium atoms escape from earth all the time. And that atom contains 2 electrons and 4 barryons, so about 4000x electron mass. Add enough electrons and we will start loosing them to space, so in the long run we can sustain this if we do not add too many too fast. | |
| Nov 3, 2015 at 8:28 | comment | added | Ville Niemi | @Samuel Nice. The mass is low enough for the gravity not really matter. The explosion caused by the explosion of electrons will dwarf any gravitic attraction easily. | |
| Nov 3, 2015 at 1:36 | comment | added | Thucydides | Try reading this first: what-if.xkcd.com/140 | |
| Nov 2, 2015 at 20:29 | comment | added | Samuel | @VilleNiemi Electrons have mass, this makes them Catholic (and attracted to Earth). | |
| Nov 2, 2015 at 15:39 | answer | added | user3294068 | timeline score: 2 | |
| Nov 2, 2015 at 7:33 | comment | added | Ville Niemi | Electrons repel each other and are not attracted to the Earth. Neither do the repel neutral atoms. As such the only effect would be lots of electrons flying into space? I guess that if you did it carelessly, it might create a very spectacular explosion. | |
| Nov 2, 2015 at 6:04 | comment | added | Brenn_ | Well, if you want an upper bound for complete and utter annihilation: what-if.xkcd.com/140 | |
| Nov 2, 2015 at 5:49 | comment | added | user6760 | yr machine sounds like electron gun I keep thinking of quasar, but surely you must meant something else hence I like to clarify. | |
| Nov 2, 2015 at 5:38 | comment | added | user6760 | may I know why and how your dooms day device can destroy the world? | |
| Nov 2, 2015 at 5:12 | comment | added | Cort Ammon | If that's part of the question, my hypothetical people will naturally try to use it to break science. Conservation of energy would be my first check. If the region the machine outputs into doesn't want to become more negatively charged, such as if its the negative side of a charged capacitor, do I have to put energy into it to account for the increased potential energy being stored in the capacitor? | |
| Nov 2, 2015 at 4:34 | comment | added | abcde | @Frostfyre That's part of the question. | |
| Nov 2, 2015 at 4:33 | comment | added | Frostfyre | Why would the typical individual want to use the machine in the first place? | |
| Nov 2, 2015 at 4:22 | history | asked | abcde | CC BY-SA 3.0 |