Skip to Content

The Return of Nuclear Weapons!

Republibot 3.0's picture

Part of our mandate here at Republibot is to point out changes in the mental weather of the SF community when they turn up. Sometimes these changes are subtle and gradual, so it's entirely possible that they may go unnoticed by the general population. Fortunately, our highly-paid staff in the "Department Of Noticing Stuff" is both highly-paid, and notices stuff, and periodically we pass their findings on to you, the consumer. And that's when you take it home and enjoy it!

Today's entry: Nukes! They're back! They're Now! They're Hip!

Once upon a time, Nuclear Weapons were a great thing. They ended World War II a full 18 months early, and saved the lives of 36 million people who were projected to have died if we'd invaded Japan the way we did Europe. Sure, they killed 70 thousand people in two cities more-or-less instantly, and at least twice that number from radiation sickness and cancer in the 30 years following the war, but when torn between the cost of 210,000 people dead over 30 years, or 31,000,000 people dead over 18 months, the Bomb looked not only like an effective weapon, it actually looked decidedly *humane*. Granted, it's the humanity of the guilotine, but that's still something. The population of Japan was about 72 million people in 1945, and thanks to the Atomic Bomb, it was 73 Million in 1947, and not a mere 42 million.

A weird concept to wrap your brain 'round, but there it is.

So the A-bomb was a good thing, used by good people for a good purpose, though lamentably a sad one.

Atomic Bombs became a fun-filled part of Science Fiction. When the Soviet Union got/stole the bomb, and the Cold War started heating up, they ceased to be fun, and became more a cautionary tale. Philip K. Dick's "Dr. Bloodmoney" and Pat Frank's "Alas, Babylon" were obviously intended to be cautionary tales about the perils and horrors that would follow World War III, but in both cases I think they failed, I think they made the post-apocalyptic landscape look preferable to the modern one. Dick's Bloodmoney version of Northern California is no worse than the 19th century in the same location, and in many ways a lot more fun. Who doesn't want to be a country squire? Likewise, Frank's Babylon version of Florida is meant to be horrifying, but actually plays out as a romantic semideserted fringeland where rugged individualists left to their own devices survive and prosper, and the dross of society withers and dies. There's an Ayn Rand quality to that, if we discount the awful scene where all the diabetics run out of insulin and die.

Time passed, and since the bomb saved the lives of 31 million people, those 31 million people who didn't die had kids who were annoying baby boomers who were keen on peace, drugs, giving each other the crabs, and little else began to believe that "All you need is love," as opposed to "All you need is love and superior firepower," which had been the status quo up until then.

Concerned inteligencia, artists, and celebrities - truth be told, mostly celebrities - grew increansingly concerned over the potential for a nuclear war, and suddenly *the Bomb* became a taboo, a demon to be opposed, or kept lamentably under lock and chain, but either way one we really don't talk about in anything as frivolous as entertainment.

Unless it's preachy, of course: "On The Beach" (Both the book and the movie) portrays a postapocalyptic world that is no worse off than the people in Babylon or Bloodmoney - Australia was completely untouched by the conflagration - but in which humanity meekly goes extinct for no real reason, aside from the author was trying to make a political statement, even if that statement insists on completely ignoring every known tenet of human behavior.

"Doctor Strangelove" was just as preachy, but far, far cleverer and with a different point: The war changes nothing. The war is over before it began, the survivors are being hearded in to facilities that will save our species, but it's fully obvious that in a hundred years, when the survivors come up to the surface again, the fighting will pick up right where it left off. Why? 'Cuz we're human, it's what we do. We're loony like that.

The Novelization of "Strangelove" sort of blows this with a useless coda in which we're told the "Mineshaft solution" didn't work, and humanity went extinct, this book being compiled from records aliens

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Republibot 3.0
Republibot 3.0's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/27/2008
mirror

Easier just to put up a big mirror. Ultra-thin reflective material, a few angstroms thick, a couple thousand miles wide. Stick it at the earth's L1 point, where gravity will hold it relatively steady. Spin it for rigidity. The earth dies slow and shivering, and there's not a thing anyone could do about it.

The Artist Formerly Known As Republibot 3.0

Jim Stiles
Jim Stiles's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/04/2011
Re: Right on both counts

Analog ran a story back in the 1990's that talked about a small scale nuclear war that was used to offset the effects of global warming. Too bad the science of sending soot to the stratosphere does not work out.

Maybe, if the Cylons were to send asteroids on a collision path with the colony planets, then they possibly could kick up enough dust and dirt to cause global climate change.

Republibot 3.0
Republibot 3.0's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/27/2008
Right on both counts

Right on both counts.

The producers of BSG didn't seem to really know this. They knew of N-weaponry, knew what it was for, but didn't seem to understand the relative lack of fallout or whatnot. To their credit, they *did* avoid the goofy "Nuclear Winter" crap.

The Artist Formerly Known As Republibot 3.0

kelloggs2066
kelloggs2066's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/04/2011
Neutron bombs

Actually, neutron bombs wouldn't leave much/any fallout.
Fast neutrons don't go very far, and they do not last longer than the blast itself.

21st Century Fox
The Future's So Bright You Gotta Wear Shades
http://techfox.comicgenesis.com/

kelloggs2066
kelloggs2066's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/04/2011
Problem of shielding a capsule

The problem of shielding a capsule (If I recall correctly) is that cosmic rays (or is it high energy gamma) found in space don't normally react much with body tissue.

They DO however, have a much higher interaction with metals like steel and lead. When they hit the metal, they throw off secondary radiation, which is in fact higher than the amount of radiation present in space.

The idea is basically, you have a shielded area of a ship, into whcih you can retreat, say during a solar flare, but an unshielded part of the ship where you work normally. The solar conditions would dictate which area of the ship would have a higher rad count at any particular time.

21st Century Fox
The Future's So Bright You Gotta Wear Shades
http://techfox.comicgenesis.com/

Republibot 3.0
Republibot 3.0's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/27/2008
Antiradiation serum

Interesting. I didn't know that. Thank you! I knew there were antiradiation meds, but I was under the impression that they were mostly aimed at containing the damage done after exposure (For instance, repairing damage to mucus membranes, etc) rather than preventative. I was (shamefully) unaware of the Apollo antirad meds.

NASA studied the radiation problem seriously, since there's no way to get to the moon without going through the Van Allen belts, which have really high radiation. Apollo couldn't carry enough insulation to do much, and there was some concern that shielding might actually make the problem worse by slowing the radioactive particles down and focusing them somewhat, effectively turning the capsule into a convection oven "Hotter" than the surrounding space. Ultimately their solution was to treat it like a lawn sprinkler: Run through it really fast, and you shouldn't get too wet. Go slow, and you'll get drenched. I hadn't realized they were hedging their best w/ meds.

Interestingly, only Jack Swiggert (Apollo 13) died of cancer attributable to that kind of radiation. Evidently the strategy worked.

In the RDM BSG, the 'antiradiation meds' were a sickly-looking fluid in a very large syringe injected directly into the neck. Helo used these things for months with no apparent ill effects. Starbuck used 'em for a couple weeks. There was some talk about "holing up in the mountains, above the radiation," which didn't make much sense.

Worth noting: It's strongly implied the Cylons were using neutron weaponry to take out as much of the population as possible, but many of the urban areas seemed mostly-undamaged. Caprica City, for instance, mostly just seemed to have a lot of overturned tables and some rats.

The Artist Formerly Known As Republibot 3.0

kelloggs2066
kelloggs2066's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/04/2011
I didn't get to watch the new Galactica

(I was in an area with no cable at the time.)

However, you mention survivors living in radioactive areas using some sort of serum.

I have to point out that there are drugs that can increase one's ability to withstand higher doses of background radiation. This has limits of course.

It's been many years since it came up, but I recall that the Apollo astronauts were given a drug that increased their radiation resistance.

It works like this:
Most ionizing radiation can affect your DNA, not by hitting the DNA directly, but by hitting water molecules in your cells. The ionization that takes place can leave free radicals near enough to the DNA that they can attack it. Large doses of anti-oxidents can neutrilize the H+ and OH+ radicals, enough to have a measureable effect.

If I recall correctly (Mind you it was 1996 when I was reading this) the drug used for the Apollo astronauts would essentually double one's ability to withstand radiation. Thus, someone who got 8 Gray (800 Rem) with the drug would have the same chance of survival as someone who got 4 Gray (400 Rem) without it. 4 Gray (400 Rem) is approximately LD50, that is, the leathal dose of radiation required to kill 50% of the population.

(Part of my responsibility as an Engineer is as the Deputy Radiation Safety Officer at the plant.)

Not having seen the New Galactica, I can't comment on the use of such medications in the show being realistic or not.

In any case, part of my duties as RSO is to give training classes for people who encounter radiation where we work. Most of the work in my classes constitute giving people the real facts about radiation exposure and demystifying the whole thing. Thank god, I'm working with some pretty smart folks, otherwise, I don't know how effective I'd be.

On the other hand, the folks who trained me have to deal with public paranoia about radiation all the time. Their newsletters can be rather interesting reads, with the frustrations they have to deal with.

21st Century Fox
The Future's So Bright You Gotta Wear Shades
http://techfox.comicgenesis.com/

Republibot 3.0
Republibot 3.0's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/27/2008
Nukes: It's what's for dinner! (Dunno why I keep saying that)

>>>I did not find the nuclear explosions in episode 3.22, "Z'ha'dum", to be particularly unrealistic because the explosions did take place in the poisonous atmosphere of the planet Z'ha'dum. The nuclear explosions in the TNT movie "Babylon 5: In the Beginning" were unrealistic because they showed a shock wave forming in space. A more realistic depiction of a nuclear explosion would show a small explosion with the crew of the Minbari ship being killed with radiation.<<<

In Z'ha'dum, it appears to have been two nukes of unspecified yield that went off simultaneously while the Whitestar was crashing into the underground city. It actually was through the dome and into the city when it went blooey. I'd assume the canyon walls would contain the blast somewhat, but what struck me as unrealistic about that is that Sheridan survived (Sort of) by jumping into a big hole in the ground. Of course, arguably he died there, so that's a line judge call.

The one I object to is the one from "In the Beginning," for just the reasons you cite, and because it was a *huge* explosion for something they just cobbled together. I'm trying to remember if the one in Thirdspace was bothersome or not...

The Artist Formerly Known As Republibot 3.0

Republibot 3.0
Republibot 3.0's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/27/2008
fixed

>>Book is spelled with a k, not an n.<<

Fixed

The Artist Formerly Known As Republibot 3.0

Jim Stiles
Jim Stiles's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/04/2011
Nuclear Weapons and Babylon 5

During this same period, Babylon 5 made guarded use of nuclear weapons amongst the more standard high-tech kill-o-zap rayguns and such, though the bombs themselves didn't behave in a very realistic capacity. We're looking at a baby boomer mindset trying to adjust itself to a post-cold war mindset, a noble try if not entirely successful: Nukes here are vastly, vastly more destructive than they could ever be in reality. A holdover from the old "Nukes=extinction" mindset, perhaps?

I did not find the nuclear explosions in episode 3.22, "Z'ha'dum", to be particularly unrealistic because the explosions did take place in the poisonous atmosphere of the planet Z'ha'dum. The nuclear explosions in the TNT movie "Babylon 5: In the Beginning" were unrealistic because they showed a shock wave forming in space. A more realistic depiction of a nuclear explosion would show a small explosion with the crew of the Minbari ship being killed with radiation.

Jim Stiles
Jim Stiles's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/04/2011
spelling

Unless it's preachy, of course: "On The Beach" (Both the boon and the movie) portrays a

Book is spelled with a k, not an n.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Status

Bleeding Heart does not have a status.

Latest Status Updates

Ginrummy Ray Harryhausen, Visual Effects Master, Dies Aged 92 1 week ago
SheldonCooper Iron Man 3 review will be live first thing in the morning! 2 weeks ago
SheldonCooper @Kevin Long Second, it reminds us to never stop looking to the future and trying to make it better. Everything Trek's ever stood for 2 weeks ago
SheldonCooper @Kevin Long Observing a fictional event like First Contact Day is, first and foremost, just fun. 2 weeks ago
Kevin Long @SheldonCooper: can you comemorate an event before it happens? Or what about celebrating an event that didn't, like September 13th, 1999? 3 weeks ago
SheldonCooper @Kevin Long according to Star Trek, April 5, 2063 will be the day we make FC with the Vulcans. Thus, April 5 is FC day 3 weeks ago
Kevin Long @SheldonCooper: Huh? First contact day? 4 weeks ago