At 10:48 AM 12/17/03, Michael Harney wrote:

From: "Travis Edmunds" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


> >From: Ronn!Blankenship <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <snip> > > > >Forget the neutronium hull. What I want is some of the stuff they used to > >brace the interior so the neutronium hull wouldn't collapse into a solid > >sphere under its own weight and self-gravity. Now _that_ has to be strong > >stuff . . . > > > > > > > >-- Ronn! :) > > > > I'm pretty sure that's a highly improbable scenario. Isn't gravity based on > size and not weight? If so, then I should also point out that the planet > killer isn't THAT big. So the neutronium may be dense enough to create a few > engineering problems, but the gravitational pull would technically be too > weak to cause problems, right?

Nope, mass causes gravity, size doesn't.  Admitted, most very large objects
also have lots of mass, but a volume of highly dense matter would produce
more gravity than an equal volume of low density matter.  Technically,
though, since it was almost cylindrical (which would act like an arch) and
mostly hollow, I imagine that, if the neutronium is strong enough to be
impervious to most weapons, it would probably be able to support it's own
inward gravity as that gravity shouldn't be that massive.



Neutron stars aren't hollow.


And any deviation from a perfect spherical shape is likely to be measures in millimeters.

IOW, "neutronium" is not strong enough to support itself against its own weight due to its self-gravity, so the existence of the planet-killer implies requires the existence of something stronger to support it.



-- Ronn! :)

_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Reply via email to