Doomsday Scenario: Lavos

[saridon]

can antimatter even be stored? from what i know of it when it touches any normal matter both antimatter and matter are destroyed and with attacking lavos biological warfare would be the best bet as a outsider to the planet he would have no imunittys to know'n diesease's thus nuke one his head till it caves in and then shove a bio missle with every posible diesease shoved in it and hope he dies

[Daniel Krispin]

can antimatter even be stored? from what i know of it when it touches any normal matter both antimatter and matter are destroyed

I'm not precisely sure, but I considering that I've heard it said that they have a few nano-grams of the stuff in existance from particles acclerators, there must be a way. I wager it's done using magnetic fields to hold it apart from everything else. But in some sense it doesn't actually destroy itself: it merely changes form into energy, following the E=mc^2 equation. Thus from a nanogram you get something in the order of 90MJ... a lot, but not all that much if used for destructive purposes.

And as far as the reply before last... that sounds familiar. I think I just heard about the zirconium the other day in my MecE 364 class, and it is something in the order of 80x harder than hardened steel. But as you said, to layer carbon into a diamond lattice really would be the way to go, and this may well be what the shell is. And, by some speculations on the term, it would then be a shell of adamant.

[Hadriel]

I was just thinking that the shell might be made out of that -- but if the shell was destroyed, would it not be impossible to grow another one if it wasn't somehow organic?

[Lazarus Plus]

I really doubt it's organic, most shells aren't. I was also thinking that it's possible Lavos' shell didn't survive its impact, but instead served the purpose of absorbing all the energy so the organic part could survive.

If we're talking from a purely scientific point of view, it's extremely unlikely that anything could be harder than diamond (well, short of neutronium, but that's just not an option). The strength of Carbon-Carbon bonds and the covalent lattice make it unparalleled in strength. Heavier elements form weaker bonds, and no lighter element can form a lattice structure. The only known material that even comes close to diamond's properties is Cubic Zirconium, but its hardness is 8.5 to diamond's 10 (10 being the top of the scale). Maybe, just maybe, if we could get Carbon Dioxide to crystallize, we'd have a winner here...

One material I know of is harder than diamond, and that is the extremely rare and hard to synthesize Carbon-60 molecule, which is double and triple bonded into a geodesic ball. Incredibly tough, scientists say it is practically unbreakable and frictionless. It is called "buckministerfullerene", or a buckyball.



Buckyballs are more common in airless high radiation envirmoents such as space. Perhaps Lavos has bonded his shell with them?

[GrayLensman]

Neutron Bombs
 

On the neutron bomb: The biggest advantage to this is it avoids
collateral damage, harming only biological components. This means that its effect would likely pierce through Lavos' shell (most shells have few organic components in them) and hit the core directly.

That's not quite how a neutron bomb, or enhanced radiation warhead (ERW), works.  An ERW is a small atomic bomb which has been modified so that neutrons created during detonation are not contained within the device, but allowed to escape, producing an intense burst of radiation.  ERWs were intended to be used against  armoured forces because tanks are resistant to the blast and heat of a nuclear weapon, but only offer limited protection against neutron radiation.  An ERW is not any less destructive than a conventional warhead.

Living things and electronics are more vulnerable to radiation than other materials due to their intricate components, but non-organic materials are not transparent to neutron radiation as you seem to suggest.

Antimatter

Some Calculations

1 Ton of TNT = 4.2 * 10^9 J

100 trillion Ton of TNT (1e14) = 4.2 * 10^23 J

The annihilation of 1 kg of matter with 1 kg of antimatter yields

E = mc^2 = (2 kg)(3 * 10^8 m/s)^2 = 1.8 * 10^17 J

An explosive device equivalent to 100 trillion Ton of TNT would require about 2.3 million Kg of antimatter.

Antimatter production is currently very costly and inefficient.  Antimatter is also difficult to contain.  The production of 2.3 million Kg of antimatter, let alone containing this amount with sufficient density to produce an effective weapon would be a scientific and engineering marvel far beyond our capability.

To put this into perspective, CERN can produce about 10^7 antiprotons per second.

There are 6.02 * 10^23 antiprotons in one gram of anti-hydrogen.

To produce one gram of anti-hydrogen would require

(6.02 * 10^23) / (10^7) = 6.02 * 10^15 seconds (1.9 Billion years!)


Guardian_of_Ages, 90 MJ is about the energy released by the combustion of 2 Kg of gasoline, which isn't very much at all.

Physical Properties of Diamond and Lavos' Shell

Diamond is the hardest known naturally occurring substance and has good physical properties, but it is not some sort of magic material.  Diamond will actually combust at about 800 degrees C.  Any quantity of diamond incorporated into a nuclear warhead will be instantly vapourized by the explosion.

The K-T impact vapourized, melted, or ejected over 200 thousand cubic kilometers of the earth's crust, producing a crater 180 kilometer wide and several kilometers deep.  The object penetrated 15 kilometers into the earth before being almost completely vapourized.  If Lavos survived this type of impact, it's shell must be far more durable than diamond.  Leebot mentioned Neutronium, which would have sufficient physical properties.  Lavos' shell could also be a magic material, like the elemental weapons and armour produced in Zeal.

I don't think that Lavos' shell was destroyed by the impact, because it appears to be an integral part of its body.  It may also need its shell to protect it form the extreme temperature and pressure in the core of the earth.

Strategies

Gamaray lasers, as mentioned by Hadriel, are promising.  A nuclear warhead can be configure to produce an intense, focused burst of Gama radiation (a Gama-ray laser) which may have some effect on Lavos.

It may be possible to produce miniature black holes in a particle accelerator.  I'd like to see Lavos deal with a stream of exploding mini black holes.

[Leebot]

The reason I didn't bring up C-60 is that although the balls themselves are practically unbreakable, they don't combine together into solds well, instead existing as dust. This makes C-60 practically useless for construction purposes.

The shell would be healed the way most shells are healed: by gathering more mineral deposits on it.

Aside on Adamantium: It's my belief that Titanium worked like steel is the best approximate for adamantium.

[Lazarus Plus]

Another concept that hasn't been dealt with is the usefulness of "Rail" weaponry, IE, a magnetic accelerator for firing ordinance at near lightspeed (or at least, some fraction of lightspeed) into a target. Firing nuclear warheads through a rail could be very effective indeed, as each succesive blast would dig deeper and become more effective as the blast's energy was more and more contained by the hole dug into Lavos. (That's assuming you could get any penetration at all. Perhaps lead up with a barrage of depleted uranium slugs, or titanium rounds, or some similarly hard and well penetraing weapon.)

[Leebot]

The problem with that is that nuclear weapons are rather large (at least, larger than a mere rail gun can handle), so we'd have to have a large track already built, or somehow manage to build it.

[GrayLensman]

It depends on the type of nuclear weapon.  Some warheads, like those Neutron Bombs, can be delivered by artillery.  For a larger, thermonuclear device, increasing the size of the rail gun is a simple matter.  You may not be able to mount it on a battleship, but it is entirely feasible.

[Hadriel]

A radiation bomb might also work against Lavos, but the inherent problem with that is whether various groups would be willing to accept the risk of contaminating the area.  I probably would, but I of all people can't speak for everyone.

A rail warhead might help, but I'm wondering how much more effective it would be.  To direct 4.2e23 J against Lavos with a mere railgun, with a velocity of ~3500 m/s, the mass of the projectile used would have to be ~1.7e16 kg.  To take a comparison, the mass of an F-16 fighter is about 12,000 kg.  The required mass is 1.417e12 times that of said fighter.  Not only that, even the 3500 m/s speed is theoretical -- to provide enough magnetic force, or Lorentz force, to accelerate such a mass that fast of its own accord would require such a high voltage that the energy would likely vaporize the rails.  Better to simply ram that many fighters into the hull...good luck finding them.  But what about using a warhead instead of just a mass?  

Well, the rail guns operate on inductance principles.  Inductance is a physical characteristic of an inductor, which produces a voltage proportional to di/dt, the instantaneous change in current flowing through the inductor.  Mathematically, inductance M is given by

M = phi/I

where phi is the magnetic flux and I is the current.

This interaction creates a magnetic field, and by extension a magnetic force that propels the object forward.  We can calculate this force, and thus the energy required to produce it, via some math.

Let's start with the basic F = ma, where a = dv/dt.  Since we're operating with 3500 m/s as terminal velocity, and assuming a large warhead like the Tsar Bomba device, which weighed in at 27,000 kg, the force is 9.45e7 N.  Picking a random distance out of the air -- I'll say 1 km  -- for the rails' length, we get 9.45e10 J applied to the mass as it hurtles toward Lavos' shell.  We could use the formula for the Lorentz force, which is given by

F = .5 * dM/dt * I^2

where M is the inductance by which the gun operates and I is the current, if anyone cares.  But you know what?  It isn't necessary for this purpose, and it's after midnight here anyway.  For the durability of the rails themselves, which is what we're trying to measure, we can go with V = IR.  As voltage equals J/C, you're obviously going to have an energy requirement to charge the rails up to levels at which sufficient magnetic force can be exercised.  But, as I can't find any figures for the average material used in the construction of a rail gun (help?) I'm simply going to rest on that fact and let it lead to another.  In order to find the necessary energy and current to accelerate an object to the required speed, you're going to need one hell of a durable superconductor, something that I don't think exists yet.  And even if you manage to do this, the bomb's yield per m^2 is still woefully inadequate to crack the shell.  In fact, to account for the explosive deficit, the bomb would have to be traveling at a good fraction of c, if not at FTL speeds.  Which is too bad, really, because it sounds pretty 1337 on the proposal paperwork.

Mounting some sort of defensive system in orbit would be the best vantage point from which to strike at Lavos.  Though I suppose it would be a point of some contention on who assumed primary responsibility for building them -- we could end up with a situation where, in the unlikely event that Lavos was defeated, whoever controlled, or managed to take control of the orbiting weapons would likely have a stranglehold on the entire world, and Lavos would win anyway.  He's powerful enough in corporeal form -- I don't even want to think about what would happen should Lavos have emerged in Time Devourer form and started devouring stuff.

This brings up the question of why Lavos chose to emerge in 1999 -- taking into account all the methods of attack that are still viable after analysis, none of the methods we've suggested have a very high probability of success.  So why now?  Why not wait until a few hundred or even thousand years in the future?

[Leebot]

This brings up the question of why Lavos chose to emerge in 1999 -- taking into account all the methods of attack that are still viable after analysis, none of the methods we've suggested have a very high probability of success. So why now? Why not wait until a few hundred or even thousand years in the future?

Here's the theory I came up with for my article:

This then raises the question of why Lavos chose to ascend in 1999 AD. if it had the ability to ascend at any time. The reason for this can be inferred from Lavos' original purpose.

Lucca wrote: "Now I understand...

It lives on a planet for as long as
possible, stealing away the most vital
resources...

It combined the DNA it found here
with its own, and gave birth to those
creatures up on Death Peak."

Robo wrote: "This was Lavos's goal...!

Using the DNA of every organism...

And achieving the ultimate in
evolution!"

It is likely that Lavos determined that 1999 AD. was the best balance of collecting as much DNA as possible and having as low a chance as possible of the inhabitants defeating him.

[Hadriel]

Lavos must have 1337-@$$ |\/|47|-| 5|<1llz if he can figure that out.  Though I don't think he'll be very forthcoming with a way to help us send his spiny ass back to hell where it belongs.

So, let's recap the methods:

1) M/AM Annihilation Bomb
Unfeasible given the small amounts of stable antimatter in our possession.  Rejected.

2) Neutron Bomb
Possibility given effects on biological organisms -- limitation that some factions might not want to use it for fear of contamination.

3) Air Strike
Bombs not powerful enough to break through Lavos' shell.  Likely insufficient percentage of mouth hits.  Recommendation for rejection.

4) Tank Strike
Tanks' limited mobility relative to fighters results in much greater loss of life than airstrike, though the percentage of mouth hits will be far greater due to closer proximity.  Strong recommendation for rejection.

5) Gamma Ray / X-Ray Lasers
Strong possibility because of biological damage without the risk of contamination associated with radiative nuclear weaponry.  Limitations include not knowing the Lavos shell's capacity for absorbing radiation or its precise composition.

6) Strike at the Core ("Death Star Trench Run")
Possibility because Lavos' mouth is observed to be weaker than the rest of the shell, as well as the fact that it opens, allowing for a direct strike at the core.  Limitations include the fact that most jet fighters and bombers don't fly low enough to deliver the ordnance, making some sort of vehicle the only optional medium -- but such a vehicle might be quickly destroyed by Lavos, and its remaining ordnance could not likely pierce the core.  Strong backup required, in the form of tanks and other specialized strike vehicles.  Tesseract banishment possible result of Lavos destruction while in the vicinity of temporal distortion -- scientific analysis of temporal distortions possibly triggering popular opposition to this tactic due to cultural proclivities.

7) ICBM Strike
Numerous missiles launched at mouth.  Remotely guided missiles a possibility here.

"Star Wars" orbit-based missile and energy weapon attack
Probable political infighting and construction difficulties, though this is the safest medium from which to attack Lavos.

9) Rail Gun
Current technology level incapable of powering a sufficiently strong rail gun, unless I'm missing something.  Pretty much rejected.

...when I typed that, it wasn't supposed to be a smiley.  But it fits nonetheless.

So, we've been able to mostly strike down classical military assault as a viable option against Lavos, even though that much was obvious from the get-go.  Among the options remaining (plus any I forgot or didn't think of) what's the best option or combination of options when taking everything into account?

[Daniel Krispin]

The reason I didn't bring up C-60 is that although the balls themselves are practically unbreakable, they don't combine together into solds well, instead existing as dust. This makes C-60 practically useless for construction purposes.

The shell would be healed the way most shells are healed: by gathering more mineral deposits on it.

Aside on Adamantium: It's my belief that Titanium worked like steel is the best approximate for adamantium.

Well, I was speaking adamant, not adamantium. Adamantium is some strange new fantasy-like invention; Adamant is truly from myth, and comes from the Greek, essentially meaning 'untameable.' In truth it is either thought to be diamond, lodestone, or, most likely, simple steel.
But as far as C-60 goes, if that doesn't work, perhaps nano-tubes would.

[Leebot]

Well, nano-tubes are better than simple C-60, but at best I'd expect them to act like some type of plastic rather than diamon.

Of the options we've discussed, I'd recommend at least trying the neutron bomb first. After that, I'd go with ICBMs aimed roughly at the mouth.

[Hadriel]

Is there even a chemical formula or any scientific description for adamantium besides *snikt*?  I've heard of an incredibly hard material having been accidentally synthesized during research on bone transplants -- so hard, it actually scratched the diamond.  I'll go look that up.