I don't know what chain reaction exactly they were thinking of, but from modern fusion research, I believe we can confidently say that the atmosphere would need to be interior-of-a-large-star-level dense, and even then I'm not sure you'd get nitrogen fusing with anything without a lot of hydrogen or helium around. Nitrogen-nitrogen fusion seems extremely implausible for sure
Fusion of two nitrogen-14 nuclei and a hydrogen nucleus. That was the feared chain reaction, since both elements are abundant.
Prolly the most relevant paragraph from the linked article for this discussion:
Today, especially after the detonation of the 50 MT Tsar hydrogen bomb on Novaya Zemlya in 1961, it is also experimentally verified that the danger of atmospheric or even oceanic ignition does not exist. Also, the experimental measurements obtained by Zucker and others demonstrate that the fusion probability is much smaller than the geometric cross-section for 14N+14N assumed by Teller and coworkers, further reducing the chances for such an event. Furthermore, the atmosphere is also heated only to temperatures of a few million degrees, so that the most efficient energies of the fusing nuclei are a few 100 keV and thus well below the Coulomb barrier and very much reduced by penetrability. These temperatures are noticeably lower than those in the late hydrostatic burning stages of massive stars.
Basically the temperature of the atmosphere is over an order of magnitude too low to have any chance of ignition (need 10s of millions of K), and the reaction rate is thus several orders of magnitude lower than the threshold.
Thank you, the page you sourced references a 2024 paper inspired by the Oppenheimer movie that was super interesting to read
i think the idea is that the part that already fused creates a blast wave that could create the conditions, including preassure required for more fusion. i have no idea if it's possible though.
It would turn scary if the atmosphere would become as dense as the core of a star. Then too, a lot of stuff depends on the type of star we're talking about. Are we talking about some wimpy red dwarf core density? Yeah, we'll fuse the hydrogen in the atmosphere/on the surface all right. U wanna fuse nitrogen? Oof. U'r gonna need a much bigger star than that.
So basically, to become scary, ur atmosphere would have to be a lot more dense than what it would be if it was fkin solid (like if the gases were literally solid). It wouldn't thus be an atmosphere.
So don't worry. Have fun blowing up ur nukes!
for fission, nothing in the atmosphere is fissable and so it can't. Fusion would be possible but that starts spontaniously via pressure.
at least that is how I read wikipedia, I await a real phyiscist to tell me how close I am.
Yeah, you're not going to get a self-sustaining reaction in Earth's atmosphere if it wasn't already hot and compressed enough that there would be a self-sustaining reaction happening anyway. It's just not a plausible concern. You only get self-sustaining fusion in stars, so Earth would have to be a star in this scenario.
Community Rules
Rule 1: Be respectful and inclusive.
Treat others with respect, and maintain a positive atmosphere.
Rule 2: No harassment, hate speech, bigotry, or trolling.
Avoid any form of harassment, hate speech, bigotry, or offensive behavior.
Rule 3: Engage in constructive discussions.
Contribute to meaningful and constructive discussions that enhance scientific understanding.
Rule 4: No AI-generated answers.
Strictly prohibit the use of AI-generated answers. Providing answers generated by AI systems is not allowed and may result in a ban.
Rule 5: Follow guidelines and moderators' instructions.
Adhere to community guidelines and comply with instructions given by moderators.
Rule 6: Use appropriate language and tone.
Communicate using suitable language and maintain a professional and respectful tone.
Rule 7: Report violations.
Report any violations of the community rules to the moderators for appropriate action.
Rule 8: Foster a continuous learning environment.
Encourage a continuous learning environment where members can share knowledge and engage in scientific discussions.
Rule 9: Source required for answers.
Provide credible sources for answers. Failure to include a source may result in the removal of the answer to ensure information reliability.
By adhering to these rules, we create a welcoming and informative environment where science-related questions receive accurate and credible answers. Thank you for your cooperation in making the Ask Science community a valuable resource for scientific knowledge.
We retain the discretion to modify the rules as we deem necessary.