What would happen if someone would just nuke the earth poles?

What now you wanna launch 50 at once?
The south pole is a continent so it'd have less effect, so maybe all at the north they'd have a blast radius of maybe 30km and probably totally melt a lot less if you use a tsar bomba, so like 1750 square km you could evaporate a decent amount of, theres over a millions of square km of ice at the north pole.. see where I'm goin?

oh, I see.

sad

Actually I fucked that up a bit, with the 1750, but either way, its not a lot

Nah, the thermal energy of a nuke is pretty small compared to the energy necessary to melt all that ice. The fallout would be a bigger deal, unless it was a relatively clean nuke like a later-developed hydrogen bomb.

Plus, even if all the poles' ice melted, it wouldn't raise sea levels more than 30m, likely even less. Anywhere that wasn't a coastal region would be fine. For example, I live in a region that is at 1300m altitude, so I would be relatively untouched, as would my entire local society and its necessary infrastructure.

the amount of energy released by the nukes is completely insignificant compared to the amount required to melt the poles
The Tsar Bomba, the largest nuke ever detonated, had a yield of 50 Megatons of TNT; an energy yield of 210 Petajoules
A disk of ice 1m thick and 1000 kilometers in radius has a volume of about 3,140,000,000,000 m^3
The ice caps are even thicker and larger in diameter. About 98% of Antarctica is covered by ice that averages 1.9 km (1.2 mi; 6,200 ft) in thickness.
Each cubic meter of ice is about one metric ton, and the heat of fusion of water is 333.55 Joules per gram. A metric ton is 1000 kilograms or 1,000,000 grams.
To melt this disk of ice would require at least 1.047x109^21 Joules, or 1,047,878 Tsar Bombas.
That's to melt a tiny fraction of the ice caps, and not even taking into account the energy required to heat the ice up to its freezing/melting point, just the energy required to melt the ice once it is at 32 F/ 0C
My math may be off but tl;dr all the nukes on earth are nowhere near enough to put a dent in the ice caps

Theoretically, controlled detonations of hydrogen bombs could move, even if slightly, the Earth's axis

Attached: 1200px-Earth_precession.svg.png (1200x1368, 205K)

1.047x10^21, not 1.047x109^21
it makes little difference either way
nowhere near enough nukes to do anything

Tsar Bomba detonated in '61 was a version downgraded to 238.5 PJ. At full power it could have released 420 PJ, 60 years ago. I think we do not know, but we (you or Russia) can build warheads at least 100 times more powerful.

Why does everyone hate Poland, is it just because they started WW2?

The Teller-Ulam design can be scaled more or less indefinitely. However, there isn't much room for efficiency gains in modern nukes, so making it 100x as powerful as the Tsar Bomba would require making it around 100x as big and heavy, i.e. undeliverable by air. And it would be much less effective at causing destruction than 100 Tsar Bombas spread over a larger area, which would be much less effective than ten thousand ~1 megaton nukes. Guess what modern nuclear arsenals use.

>The Teller-Ulam design can be scaled more or less indefinitely. However, there isn't much room for efficiency gains in modern nukes, so making it 100x as powerful as the Tsar Bomba would require making it around 100x as big and heavy, i.e. undeliverable by air. And it would be much less effective at causing destruction than 100 Tsar Bombas spread over a larger area, which would be much less effective than ten thousand ~1 megaton nukes. Guess what modern nuclear arsenals use

In 1945 the Americans unhooked an atomic bomb, of which the world was unaware of the existence, on Hiroshima. In 1961, Russia performs a test with a 3,000 times more powerful bomb, 16 years later. Are we sure we know what we (as human beings or 'they', black projects) can do after another 60 years?

Attached: 41784.png (1500x1552, 631K)

Not much
What do you think is at the poles? A giant hamster on a sideways hamster wheel to scarred to slow down incase he falls off.

Already detonated 2500 warheads of various sizes and to be honest it's a big con. They exist alright but no one has the balls. A perfect opportunity was to fuck Afghanistan after 9-11. Every excuse was made not to. The message sent was anything under changing a cities skyline is acceptable. Even if they dirty bomb no one will do anything so I'm hoping they'll just get on other it.
We're faggots period

the entire inventory of american and russian nukes (100k+ megatons) could not melt the ice caps.
at most it will cause slightly radioactive rain for a while, and some penguins might die.

it would be much safer than detonating them on land instead, where the fallout would spread everywhere instead of mostly condensing due to the cold temperature, raining/snowing down nearby, and freezing to ice immediately.

Attached: 345645673567.jpg (500x500, 53K)

Maybe if they were cobalt bombs. In any case it wouldn't do much. Even if some device could wipe out all existence of life on earth we would just be transported to another reality where the extermination never took place. Quantum immortality is most likely the reason the Mandela effect exists. Also it's better to just nuke Israel.