Plasma Shots

From the wikipedia article on the Project Orion:
------------------------------
"The shape of the bomb's reaction mass is critical to efficiency. The original project designed bombs with a reaction mass made of tungsten. The bomb's geometry and materials focused the x-rays and plasma from the core of nuclear explosive to hit the reaction mass. In effect each bomb would be a nuclear shaped charge.

A bomb with a cylinder of reaction mass expands into a flat, disk-shaped wave of plasma when it explodes.

A bomb with a disk-shaped reaction mass expands into a far more efficient cigar-shaped wave of plasma debris. "
----------------------------------------
So a specifically shaped nuclear device with a disk-shaped reaction mass should result in a perfect anti-spaceship-weapon, much like the parabolically shaped anti-tank weapons..?
the reaction mass would be the equivalent to the otherwise missing athmospheric effects- maybe more efficient against spacecraft, because directed to one spot/one direction

Doomsday machinas

Spotted this article on Wired where they listed doomsday machines in movies.

http://www.wired.com/culture/culturereviews/multimedia/2008/11/gallery_doomsday

Unfortunately no nukes in space, but interesting reference material though. And kind of like all the satelite super weapons which could be used in space battles.

Was done by the USA

The USA did lauch nukes into space early sixties:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starfish_Prime

The article descripe what is seen from Earth.

Also here is a list with nuke tests:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_nuclear_tests

Sound

I don’t think there would be any sound because there is a vacuum in space and thus nothing to carry the sound waves, which are “density variations in the carrier medium”.

Some more Nuke-research...

I have found an old question in Google Answers (the page is not available but there was a cached version which I will paste below)

----------
Subject: Re: Nuclear Bomb in Outer Space

segwonk-ga: What would a nuclear explosion in outer space look like?
maxhodges-ga: Very interesting question!

I'm going to quote several sources, so you can see that a consensus
seems to have formed.

Q: How does an explosion in space differ from that on Earth?
A: It would appear as a point or globe of light, with no huge clouds of
smoke or vapor. Any such gases would diffuse very quickly. There
would also be no blast (pressure wave). That means a near miss by a
torpedo would cause no damage other than from radiation.

Q: No nuclear mushroom cloud?
A: Not in space. Fallout, irradiated dust resulting from matter vaporized
by the explosion, would also be absent. Nukes are less deadly in space,
with no atmospheric effects. Most space habitations would also have
protection from radiation, an expected hazard of space.

From, "The Science of Science Fiction" edited by Peter Nicholls:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0394530101/qid=1046698588/sr=1-4/ref=sr_1_4/002-6147980-5735243?v=glance&s=books

The main hazard of space nuclear explosions is EMP (electromagenetic pulse).

The output of an atomic detonation is:

1) Blast: An explosion creates a wall of air (shock wave) which moves
outward from the fireball. In the vacuum of space this does not occur.
There is a smaller wave of vaporized bomb material, but this is minor
at orbital distances.

2) Ionizing radiation: The X-rays, gamma rays, and neutrons would be
both absorbed by the atmosphere and lowered in intensity by the
distance from the bomb (Inverse scaling)

3) Fallout: It is already pretty nasty in space. If the weapon is in
orbit, most of the fallout will have decayed long before re-entry. If
all re-enters, it will be diluted rather majorly. The most serious
pollutant would be plutonium. It is lethal in inhaled concentrations
of one millionth of a gram. The weapon will contain many thousands
grams (which implies many billions of lethal doses).

The re-entering material will be vaporized into gas. The vast bulk
will never be deposited into mammal's lungs. Even the inhaled material
will tend to be less than millionth of a gram quantity. The true
danger depends on the strength of the so-called linear-dosage
hypothesis (which is the current official standard). This is the view
that health effects do not drop off below a minimum dosage, they just
get weaker or less likely. One of its various implications means, for
example, if 1 microgram causes one cancer, then if ten people inhale
only a tenth of a microgram, then, statistically, one should develop
tumors.

4) Light and heat: The light and heat should be diluted sufficiently
to minimize surface damage. (DON'T look directly at it!)
found on the Explosions in Space discussion board:
http://pub80.ezboard.com/feverythingspacefrm2.showMessage?topicID=17.topic

Again, in other words:
If a nuclear weapon is exploded in a vacuum-i. e., in space-the
complexion of weapon effects changes drastically:

First, in the absence of an atmosphere, blast disappears completely.

Second, thermal radiation, as usually defined, also disappears. There
is no longer any air for the blast wave to heat and much higher
frequency radiation is emitted from the weapon itself.

This effects are elaborated here:
http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/conghand/nuclear.htm#REF17-4

A less well known effect of high altitude bursts, but also one with
potentially devastating consequences, is the artificial "pumping" of
the Van Allen belt with large numbers of electrons. The bomb-induced
electrons will remain trapped in these belts for periods exceeding one
year. All unhardened satellites traversing these belts in low earth
orbit could demise in a matter of days to weeks following even one
high altitude burst.

Elaborated here:
http://www.fas.org/spp/starwars/congress/1997_h/h970716u.htm

For a detailed study of the effects of such an explosion on
communicaton satelites, read here:
http://www.eas.asu.edu/~holbert/eee460/tiondose.html

----------

Then a couple of additional links:

What would an explosion in space look like?
http://www.madsci.org/posts/archives/1998-08/899689009.Ph.r.html

Atomic Rocket: Space War: Weapons:
http://www.projectrho.com/rocket/rocket3x.html#nuke

Hope this helps! (Although you may have already found these links yourselves)

Nuclear Blast on Moon Would Also Have Columnar Shape

From: http://www.allanstime.com/UnifiedFieldTheory/N-Blast_Moon/index.html and http://www.allanstime.com/News/PressReleases/N-blast_moon.htm

"In the case of a nuclear blast on the moon, though there would be the initial explosion of dust particles in all directions along with the fireball, there would be no mushroom cloud formation due to the lack of an atmosphere. On the earth, it is the atmosphere pushing back on the column of particles and dust as they rocket vertically along these diallel lines that causing the billowing out in a giant doughnut shape that makes the head of the mushroom cloud on earth. In the new theory, a nuclear blast on the moon with its high-energy particles, carrying large amounts of dust as well, and photons would continue out in a column from the moon. If the blast were facing the earth, then it would result in tremendous bombardment with high-energy particles that would only partially be mitigated by the earth's atmosphere.

According to the new theory, one very significant thing that is not currently recognized about nuclear blasts is that high-energy particles and photons are emitted in both directions -- up and down. An extrapolation of the new model is that the cumulative effect from nuclear tests and blasts in the past and the present has caused core heating at the center of the earth to such an extent that it is a primary cause of global warming."

Some more:

Nuke the Moon! - http://utenti.lycos.it/paoloulivi/nuke.html
The E-4 project - exploding a nuclear bomb on the Moon - http://www.svengrahn.pp.se/histind/E3/E3orig.htm

Two pics of nukes in space

From: http://gimbalock.blogspot.com/2007/07/images-of-day-nukes-in-space.html

Real Iron Sky

Just trying some idea:
Maybe from that radiation we can get a REAL IRON SKY...
The van allen belt is sparkling with metalic colors...
Creating silver rain (not black rain) and causing surprising winter (like in the day after tomorrow)...
In the end earth will have it's own ring....
A ring that resonates a kind of melody...
I think it's good for the ending...
no more blue planet, but a planet under the iron sky...

Using Nukes as rockets

Yup, blow up lots of little nukes behind a space ship it's go very fast! I knew it was project daedelus but found it in Wiki under Project Orion:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Orion_(nuclear_propulsion)

A nuke is still the transmission of explosive force through a medium. Without air, there is nothing to translate the energy so there is a bright flash "photon emmision from the fission event" though no fire ball in a vacuum. As the article says the big problem is high energy radiation which would flood the local vann allen radiation belts - not a good idea!

As for looks and sound, you wouldn't got too far wrong IMHO if you looked at the Jango Fett seismic charge from Attack of the Clones.

Nukes in space and elsewhere

At
http://www.nv.doe.gov/library/films/testfilms.aspx
you can purchase the department of energy's declassified footage of nuclear test shots. This footage has been preserved by the DOE by transferring the old celluoid film footage, which was rapidly deteriorating, to DVD and the project was funded by the sale of the DVDs.

And as for explosions in space...just go to NASA's picture archives and search supernova...they happen somewhere every day.