Project Lucifer: Will Cassini Turn Saturn into a Second Sun? (Part 2)

The story: The Lucifer Project is allegedly the biggest conspiracy theory NASA could possibly be involved in. First, back in 2003, the space agency (in co-operation with secret and powerful organizations) dropped the Galileo probe deep into Jupiter’s atmosphere. On board, was a significant quantity of plutonium. As the probe fell though the atmosphere, NASA hoped atmospheric pressures would create an implosion, generating a nuclear explosion thereby kick-starting a chain reaction, turning the gas giant into a second Sun. They failed. So, in a second attempt, they will drop the Cassini probe (again, laden with plutonium) deep into Saturn’s atmosphere in two years time, so this smaller gas giant can succeed where Jupiter failed…

The reality: As investigated briefly in Project Lucifer: Will Cassini Turn Saturn into a Second Sun? (Part 1), we looked at some of the technical problems behind Galileo and Cassini being used as makeshift nuclear weapons. They cannot generate an explosion for many reasons, but the main points are: 1) Tiny pellets of plutonium used to heat and power the probes are in separate, damage-proof cylinders. 2) The plutonium is not weapon grade, meaning the 238Pu makes a very inefficient fissionable fuel. 3) The probes will burn up and break apart, therefore disallowing any chance of lumps of plutonium forming “critical mass” (besides, there is no chance the plutonium could possibly form a configuration to create an implosion-triggered device).

OK, so Galileo and Cassini cannot be used as crude nuclear weapons. But say if there was a nuclear explosion inside Saturn? Could it cause a chain reaction in the core, creating a second Sun?

Thermonuclear bombs

The Soviet 50-megaton Tsar Bomba, the largest weapon ever detonated (1961)
The Soviet 50-megaton Tsar Bomba, the largest weapon ever detonated (1961)

Unless nuclear fusion can be maintained within a stellar body, the reaction will very quickly fizz out. So the Lucifer Project proposes Cassini will plunge many hundreds of miles into the atmosphere of Saturn and explode as a crude plutonium-fuelled fission explosion. This explosion will cause a chain reaction, creating enough energy to trigger nuclear fusion inside the gas giant.

I can see where this idea has come from, even though it is inaccurate. The fusion bomb (or “thermonuclear weapon”) uses a fission trigger to kick-start an uncontrolled fusion reaction. The fission trigger is constructed to explode like a normal fission bomb much like the implosion device described in Part 1 of this series. When detonated, huge quantities of energetic X-rays are produced, heating the material surrounding the fusion fuel (such as lithium deuteride), causing the phase transition to a plasma. As very hot plasma is surrounding the lithium deuteride (in a very confined and pressured environment) the fuel will produce tritium, a heavy hydrogen isotope. Tritium then undergoes nuclear fusion, liberating huge quantities of energy as the tritium nuclei are forced together, overcoming the electrostatic forces between nuclei and fusing. Fusion releases large quantities of binding energy, more-so than fission.

How does a star work?

A comparison of the size of Jupiter, a brown dwarf, a small star and the Sun (Gemini Observatory/Artwork by Jon Lomberg)
A comparison of the size of Jupiter, a brown dwarf, a small star and the Sun (Gemini Observatory/Artwork by Jon Lomberg)

The point that needs to be emphasised here is that in a thermonuclear device, fusion can only be attained when immense temperatures are reached within a very confined and pressurized environment. What’s more, in the case of a fusion bomb, this reaction is uncontrolled.

So, how are nuclear fusion reactions sustained in a star (like our Sun)? In the thermonuclear bomb example above, tritium fusion is achieved through inertial confinement (i.e. rapid, hot and energetic pressure on the fuel to cause fusion), but in the case of a star, a sustained mode of confinement is required. Gravitational confinement is needed for nuclear fusion reactions to occur in the core. For significant gravitational confinement, the star requires a minimum mass.

In the core of our Sun (and most other stars smaller than our Sun), nuclear fusion is achieved through the proton-proton chain (pictured below). This is a hydrogen burning mechanism where helium is generated. Two protons (hydrogen nuclei) combine after overcoming the highly repulsive electrostatic force. This can only be achieved if the stellar body has a large enough mass, increasing gravitational containment in the core. Once the protons combine, they form deuterium (2D), producing a positron (quickly annihilating with an electron) and a neutrino. The deuterium nucleus can then combine with another proton, thus creating a light helium isotope (3He). The outcome of this reaction generates gamma-rays that maintain the stability and high temperature of the star’s core (in the case of the Sun, the core reaches a temperature of 15 million Kelvin).

Ian O'Neill
The proton-proton chain that fuels nuclear fusion inside the core of our Sun. Credit: Ian O'Neill

As discussed in a previous Universe Today article, there are a range of planetary bodies below the threshold of becoming a “star” (and not able to sustain proton-proton fusion). The bridge between the largest planets (i.e. gas giants, like Jupiter and Saturn) and the smallest stars are known as brown dwarfs. Brown dwarfs are less than 0.08 solar masses and nuclear fusion reactions have never taken hold (although larger brown dwarfs may have had a short period of hydrogen fusion in their cores). Their cores have a pressure of 105 million atmospheres with temperatures below 3 million Kelvin. Keep in mind, even the smallest brown dwarfs are approximately 10 times more massive than Jupiter (the largest brown dwarfs are around 80 times the mass of Jupiter). So, for even a small chance of the proton-proton chain occurring, we’d need a large brown dwarf, at least 80 times bigger than Jupiter (over 240 Saturn masses) to even stand the hope of sustaining gravitational confinement.

There’s no chance Saturn could sustain nuclear fusion?

Saturn, seen by Cassini. Image credit: NASA/JPL/SSI

Sorry, no. Saturn is simply too small.

Implying that a nuclear (fission) bomb detonating inside Saturn could create the conditions for a nuclear fusion chain reaction (like the proton-proton chain) is, again, in the realms of science fiction. Even the larger gas giant Jupiter is far too puny to sustain fusion.

I have also seen arguments claiming that Saturn consists of the same gases as our Sun (i.e. hydrogen and helium), so a runaway chain reaction is possible, all that is needed is a rapid injection of energy. However, the hydrogen that can be found in Saturn’s atmosphere is diatomic molecular hydrogen (H2), not the free hydrogen nuclei (high energy protons) as found in the Sun’s core. And yes, H2 is highly flammable (after all it was responsible for the infamous Hindenburg airship disaster in 1937), but only when mixed with a large quantity of oxygen, chlorine or fluorine. Alas Saturn does not contain significant quantities of any of those gases.

Although fun, “The Lucifer Project” is the product of someone’s lively imagination. Part 1 of “Project Lucifer: Will Cassini Turn Saturn into a Second Sun?” introduced the conspiracy and focused on some of the general aspects why the Galileo probe in 2003 simply burned up in Jupiter’s atmosphere, scattering the small pellets of plutonium-238 as it did so. The “black spot” as discovered the next month was simply one of the many dynamic and short-lived storms often seen to develop on the planet.

This article has gone one step further and ignored the fact that it was impossible for Cassini to become an interplanetary atomic weapon. What if there was a nuclear explosion inside Saturn’s atmosphere? Well, it looks like it would be a pretty boring affair. I dare say a few lively electrical storms might be generated, but we wouldn’t see much from Earth. As for anything more sinister happening, it is highly unlikely there would be any lasting damage to the planet. There would certainly be no fusion reaction as Saturn is too small and it contains all the wrong gases.

Oh well, Saturn will just have to stay the way it is, rings and all. When Cassini completes its mission in two years time, we can look forward to the science we will accumulate from such an incredible and historic endeavour rather than fearing the impossible…

Update (Aug. 7th): As pointed out by some readers below, molecular hydrogen wasn’t really the cause of the Hindenburg airship disaster, it was the aluminium-based paint that may have sparked the explosion, hydrogen and oxygen fuelled the fire.

48 Replies to “Project Lucifer: Will Cassini Turn Saturn into a Second Sun? (Part 2)”

  1. Hi Sean! You’re totally right, but the conspiracy theorists have an answer for that too. When the comet struck, it exploded high in the atmosphere of Jupiter. Whereas Galileo penetrated hundreds of miles deeper and exploded there…. Hmmm, I’ll let you decide on that one 😉

    Cheers, Ian

  2. lol, yeah, I was going to address that concern as well, but then they’d have nothing to fight back with. I think it’s more sporting this way 😉

    Cheers, Ian

  3. I bet if it were to happen the gravitational effect’s on our solar sysytem would be devastating

  4. I know I’m arguing against the illogical, here, but – Comet Shoemaker-Levy 9, anyone? If the power of a billion hydrogen bombs did nothing lasting to Jupiter, why would a few kilos of non-fissile plutonium?

  5. So how do the conspiracy theorists get past the fact that Saturn contains an extreme lack of flammable materials needed to ignite the fusion process as mentioned in the previous article…perhaps another conspiracy theory that Saturn is indeed a star and NASA has simply edited the photos to appear as a planet 🙂

  6. Although fun, “The Lucifer Project” is the product of someone’s lively imagination.

    Or they just ate too much pizza and then fell asleep reading Arthur C. Clarke. 😀

  7. Cool replies, thanks everyone. A few questions that need to be answered:

    Fenring Says:
    Is Plutonium-238 even fisible?

    – Apparently it is fissionable, but not very efficient to make a nuclear weapon. I’d be interested to find out if any bombs were tested that used 238Pu…

    Dan Says:
    Er… hm… don’t you think that heat from niclear explosion _could_ turn molecular hydrogen into plasma?

    – You might be right, but I doubt the resulting plasma would last very long. If there is no gravitational confinement, there is nothing to maintain pressure. I’ll see what does happen to H2 when heated rapidly and update the post – thanks!

    willphoenix1 Says:
    Anyhow, my first question is, as I read this article it seemed to me that Galileo in 2003 actually did have plutonium in it. Is that true?

    – Yes, Galileo did carry plutonium on board (check out my first article:
    Plutonium-238 (NOT weapon-grade plutonium-239 – very different isotopes) was used as an energy source and a heat source. This is absolutely critical for missions beyond Mars as sunlight is too weak to power spacecraft. Therefore a radioactive source must be used.

    Looking forward to reading more! And yes RL, I’ll be sure to research your monolith idea and call it “RL’s Theory” 😉

    Cheers all, Ian 😀

  8. Hi YOGIH:

    Yes, a large brown dwarf might sustain fusion, but Jupiter is far too small to do this.

    There are three different ways to cause fusion:
    1) Intertial confinement (rapid fusion, like an atomic bomb)
    2) Gravitational confinement (in the core of a star)
    3) Magnetic confinement (like the Tokamaks that use powerful magnetic fields for containment.

    Obviously the gravitational confinement cannot be achieved by man, but magnetic and intertial confinement can.

    Hope that helps a little 🙂

    Cheers, Ian

  9. @Steve: “So how do the conspiracy theorists get past the fact that Saturn contains an extreme lack of flammable materials needed to ignite the fusion process as mentioned in the previous article…”

    Simple, they ignore the finer facts as always. ^_^

  10. Is Plutonium-238 even fisible? It’s highly alpha radioactive which makes it a good heat source, but I seriously doubt it would split as easily as Pu-239 or U-235.

  11. >However, the hydrogen that can be found in Saturn’s atmosphere is diatomic molecular hydrogen (H2), not the free hydrogen nuclei (high energy protons) as found in the Sun’s core.

    Er… hm… don’t you think that heat from niclear explosion _could_ turn molecular hydrogen into plasma? (Yes, I know you won’t get self-sustaining reaction that way. But oversimplification looks strange).

  12. This is one of the dumbest conspiracy theories ever.

    These idiot “theorists” just don’t understand basic science, and are simply trying to get some internet fame.

  13. II’ve got two questions.

    First let me say that the facts are interesting, though the light show would have been cool.

    Anyhow, my first question is, as I read this article it seemed to me that Galileo in 2003 actually did have plutonium in it. Is that true? If so, why would that be the case? Why are scientists actually sending a probe to saturn with plutonium in it. What is the science in that?

    Just a thought. If someone could get back to me with the answers to that I would apreciate it. Much Peace!


  14. Think about it folks. HAARPs is a High Frequency system that could change weather patterns on planets.

    NASA is probably trying to launch this soon to a distant world to try to test what would happen.

    HAARPs is much more interesting.

  15. I really think they should be called Conspiracy Hypotheses. Calling them Theory lends far too much credit. Of course, they could also accurately be called inane speculation and fear mongering for the mindless.

  16. This is slightly off tangent but springs to mind. I like to think free association is a gift!

    In the movie 2010: A space oddessy, Jupiter is turned into a star. It seemed as if the monoliths were reproducing to create mass and start the fusion inside the planet to make it into a star.

    Now, I know this is just a movie, but is it anywhere near remotely plausible, that NASA could turn Jupiter into a star if it could do a similar thing to dramatically increase Jupiters mass to give it sufficient gravity to become a stable star?

    Just wondering…

  17. I Mean remotely plausible in the vein that IF NASA could create monoliths from nothing in sufficient quantities, blah, blah, blah…not trying to start a new conspiracy theory…but if it takes off please call it RL’s Theory. Thanks.

  18. hi there everyone,
    very interesting comments. I wonder, why no one is mentioning the presence of huge gravitation for a sun-like reaction to kick. So for this reaction to start we need a huge gas planet, something of above the mass of a brown dwarf (100-170 Jupiter mass?) and then the reaction will kick itself under the gravitation compression isn’t it? So why everyone’s talking about the gases and types of hydrogen and misses the real point? I might be wrong, please comment.

  19. Sorry, it’s me again. I got another one: Why would they try to recreate the fusion here on Earth on the billions costing labs -Tokamaks- if the gravitation force is the only one responsible for maintaining the fusion reaction?

  20. Thanks Ian! Actually, Arthur C Clarke deserves the credit. One of these days I need to read the book.

  21. But what if the rocky core of Saturn was made from solid Uranium?! Eh?! Eh?! Where’s your Science NOW?!!!

    Meh. How stupid. I mean they can’t even come up with a decent conspiracy. Any idiot can check that TNGs can’t explode. If Teh Illuminazorz really wanted to detonate a fission bomb inside Saturn, why not send a real bomb, dressed up as a satellite for show, and then once it arrived tell the unsuspecting public that due to an unfortunate short circuit they couldn’t get any of the science payload (which in this picture was never aboard in the first place) to work? Problem solved! You now have bomb at Saturn.

    See, I can come up with a better conspiracy than them in the time it took me to read this!

    By the way, I think the culprit in the case of Hindenburg was the powdered aluminium they’d coated the skin in to protect against UV-radiation.

  22. Nice article again.

    BUT WAIT! Maybe the new device has a secret hidden powerful electromagnet to pull the planet into itself to cause fusion!
    There goes another CT….

  23. heh, this theory is just so stupid that you *know* millions will believe it. i sure hope that minimal UT readers are amoung them.

  24. pantzov,

    sure, millions believe it…but the elite few on UT get it right all the time. whatever. i don’t think that’s what Ian’s article implied, but if you read this into it, maybe you’re hovering closer to the millions…

  25. Kudos, Sili on the Hindenburg remark. It has been shown that it was the aluminum powder and the other bits in the coating they used to try and avert electrical charges per Saint Elmo. Ironically, the concoction was damned close to modern rocket fuel, so the Static fires actually ignited the Blimp’s skin which burned until it got hot enough to ignite the Hydrogen onside. H2 is actually pretty safe, per it has a fairly high ignition temperature. If it weren’t for this coating flubber, lighter than air travel could very well have continued to take off (pun intended) and we’d have had a world similar to that envisioned in Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow…

  26. Why not drag these conspiracy idiots onto prime time television in front of a group of astronomers etc and force them to explain in scientific detail exactly how the tiny amounts of non-weapons grade plutonium will ‘go nuclear’. If they can’t then send them to Guantanamo Bay to replace the poor sods who are there. Anyway, why are we still seriously discussing crackpot ideas here? Poke fun at them but let’s not get bogged down. [as I so obviously have been!!].

  27. The cause of the hindenberg explosion was only due in part to H2. The skin of the ship was coated with an aluminum paint (simular to rocket fuel). Also why would we need another sun in our small solar system?

  28. My only question to this is, for what conceivable purpose would NASA even want to turn either of these planetary bodies into another sun? What would they get out of it? No one does anything without some kind of reason. Even if it is a very poor reason there is a reason.

  29. “What would they get out of it?”

    more working hours in a day, of course, if there’s no more night.

    or wait, it’s the farmers, conspiring to get more sunlight to create more crops.

    or it’s an anti-vampire conspiracy… what better way to kill vampires than to rid ourselves of darkness.

    i’m suddenly reminded of Asimov’s Nightfall.

  30. what if gallieo tested juiper for the bomb that would’ve come if it weren’t for the buget cuts

  31. All this sounds like Velikovsky in reverse – he believed Earth once orbitted Saturn, but was blown out of orbit by a “nova explosion” that also caused the Great Flood… idiotic ideas and almost as incorrigible as the current Cassini nonsense.

  32. La historia: Es posible que el Proyecto Lucifer sea la mayor teoría conspirativa en la que la NASA pueda estar envuelta. Primero, en 2003, la agencia espacial —en colaboración con organizaciones secretas y poderosas— envió a la sonda Galileo, con una cantidad importante de plutonio, a lo profundo de la atmósfera de Júpiter. […] Fuente: Ian O’Neill para Universe Today.

  33. Hello Ian,

    Great information. And I like your response to YOGIH about a brown dwarf star causing fusion. Now I’m curious. Planet X (a.k.a. Nibiru, Sirius C) is supposedly ta reddish brown star that will orbit our galaxy in late 2012. Does this star have enough energy to ignite gases from Jupiter, Saturn, and even Neptune into a 2nd SUN?

  34. Hi ASJIV. In short: no. For a start, Planet X doesn’t exist (certainly not in an astronomical sense anyway). Secondly, the gas giants are too small, fusion really cannot happen.

    In Arthur C.Clarke’s 2010, I believe he gets around this problem by increasing the mass of Jupiter with those alien monoliths, even excellent science fiction novelists were highly aware that Jupiter simply does not have enough mass.

    Hope that helps a little.


  35. Hello Again Ian,

    Your analysis about Jupiter, Saturn, and Neptune’s gases being too small seems very accurate. However, there are astronomers who have confirmed that the mythical Planet X (Nibirus) is the same as the “factual” reddish-brown dwarf star Sirius C which is part of a three-star system called Sirius. Check out a book called “The Sirius Mystery.” Apparently, this star system may be orbiting our galaxy soon and could very well be the final piece to ignite the plutonium gases from Jupiter & Saturn, and maybe Neptune into a 2nd SUN. If this proves wrong, great! But if true, at least this study won’t leave us blindsided! PEACE!!!

  36. Maybe if there were planets that were 10 Jupiter Mass, highly enriched with Dueterium and Helium-3, out at the edge of the solar system, with Earth mass moons…

  37. Dr.Nothing seems to suggest that hydrogen is hard to ignite. His is the voice of ignorence
    and danger. I suggest that he should stay far
    away from any charging wet cell batterys least
    he learn how easy it is to ignite. Painted
    canvas ? (giggle) Perhaps the next generation of shuttle will use canvas instead
    of hydrogen as fuel! (chorttle!)

  38. Heehee. Smart people are funny. Now look away from these planets you call Jupiter and Saturn, foolish humans, and cover your eyes!

  39. If we could somehow kick start the collapse of Jupiter, would its gravity be enough to sustain a Fusion reaction?

  40. In the main article i read it says that the whole point of this is to terraform one of saturns moons “titan” into a sustainable habitable planet much like earth by 2033…..its one of the stupidest things iv ever seen… i really dont get where these conspiracy theorists come up with this

  41. You have to admit, the idea of turning one of our gas giants into a star is an interesting idea, especially after 2010 came out. When you think about it (as pointed out here and in part 1), it’s not logically possible, but the idea is attractive to those who like to find conspiracies in things.

    and seeing two stars in the sky, the obvious harmful effects aside, would be pretty awesome…

  42. You forgot about deiterium, so your article is at least incomplete.

    See this scientific article:

    “Necessary conditions for the initiation and propagation of nuclear detonation waves in plane atmospheras”.
    Tomas Weaver and A. Wood, Physical review 20 – 1 Jule 1979,

    This article rejected the possibility of extending the thermonuclear detonation in the Earth’s atmosphere and in Earth’s oceans because of balance of the loss of radiation (one that does not exclude the possibility of reactions, which take little space: say, small deposit of heavy ice on the ocean floor, comparing with the amount of earthly matter – but it’s enough to disastrous consequences and human extinction.)

    There it is said: “We, therefore, conclude that thermonuclear-detonation waves cannot propagate in the ter¬restrial ocean by any mechanism by an astronom¬ically large margin.

    It is worth noting, in conclusion, that the susceptability to thermonuclear detonation of a large body of hydrogenous material is an ex¬ceedingly sensitive function of its isotopic com¬position, and, specifically, to the deuterium atom fraction, as is implicit in the discussion just preceding. If, for instance, the terrestrial oceans contained deuterium at any atom fraction greater than 1:300 (instead of the actual value of 1: 6000), the ocean could propagate an equilibrium thermonuclear-detonation wave at a temperature £2 keV (although a fantastic 1030 ergs—2 x 107 MT, or the total amount of solar energy incident on the Earth for a two-week period—would be required to initiate such a detonation at a deuter¬ium concentration of 1: 300). Now a non-neg-ligible fraction of the matter in our own galaxy exists at temperatures much less than 300 °K, i.e., the gas-giant planets of our stellar system, nebulas, etc. Furthermore, it is well known that thermodynamically-governed isotopic fractionation ever more strongly favors higher relative concentration of deuterium as the temperature decreases, e.g., the D:H concentration ratio in the ~102 ? Great Nebula in Orion is about 1:200.45 Finally, orbital velocities of matter about the galactic center of mass are of the order of 3 x 107 cm /sec at our distance from the galactic core.

    It is thus quite conceivable that hydrogenous matter (e.go, CH4, NH3, H2O, or just H2) rela¬tively rich in deuterium (1 at. %) could accumu¬late at its normal, zero-pressure density in substantial thicknesses or planetary surfaces, and such layering might even be a fairly common feature of the colder, gas-giant planets. If thereby highly enriched in deuterium (£10 at. %), thermo¬nuclear detonation of such layers could be initiated artificially with attainable nuclear ex¬plosives. Even with deuterium atom fractions approaching 0.3 at. % (less than that observed over multiparsec scales in Orion), however, such layers might be initiated into propagating thermo¬nuclear detonation by the impact of large (diam 102 m), ultra-high velocity (^?? 107 cm/sec) meteors or comets originating from nearer the galactic center. Such events, though exceedingly rare, would be spectacularly visible on distance scales of many parsecs.”

    See more in
    Giant planets ignition

  43. If ignition is possible, the goal is not a star, but a black hole. In the paper titled “Scattering and Absoption of Gravitational Plane Waves By Rotating Black Holes” by Sam R. Dolan, the idea that a small rotating black hole would counter the waves of the Gravitational Plane and create a “glory”. The hope, I assume, would be to create a smooth entry point of Earth on 12-21-2012. Saturn crosses plane 10-06-2011. Look for ignition 10-03-2011. Would take 3 days to collapse to a black hole… Thoughts?

  44. Foolish Arrogant ignorant freaks..there is no way to beat Gods greatness by purposely innovating an experiment that would start “a second sun”…HAHAH!!!

  45. I find it most bozare that this matter is being discussed as fact, surely the low mass of saturn is the glaring truth, that fusion cannpt be sustained. It may be inistialized(doubtfull), however with the serious lack of mass that both saturn and jupiter posses, it cannot possibly continued by natural processes in these particular environments. What we need to endevour towards is to reduce the size of one of these gas giants, effectively increasing its relative mass. We then follow up by increasing the mass by matter introduction. this could be attained with a concerted effort in several thousand years. Then we induce a planetary implossion to induce black hole status for gravity minning purposes. Long after the death of our univers the black hole will remain, our only true hope is Gravity mining.

Comments are closed.