Comment

That, and have you seen the amount of propellant required to overcome gravity? Compare that to the amount of fissile material you need to make a viable nuclear device. It’s peanuts.

You inadvertently argued against your point. It takes only a tiny amount of fissile material to generate the energy needed to escape the gravitation of an entire planet.

But not really because you only compared chemical energy to fission.

source

Sort:hotnew top

archonet@lemy.lol ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago
Yeah, but we have no useful way to channel the energy from nuclear fission into propulsion, so that’s a moot point if we’re talking in practical terms. At least, we don’t without irradiating everything.

source
- Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago
  You can do nuclear without irradiating everything just like a nuclear plant doesn’t irradiate everything. The only reason it isn’t done is safety. Rockets fail too often.
  
  The argument that gravity is in anyway a more powerful force than weak force (fission) or strong force (fusion) is wrong. The only thing gravity has is distance. The strong force is 100 trillion trillion trillion times stronger than gravity.
  
  source