If There Was Any Doubt Of Labour's Anti...
News2 mins ago
Asteroid Straight Through Earth
23 Answers
What would happen if a hypothetical asteroid was traveling so fast it punched a hole right through the earth with entry and exit holes in the oceans? Let's leave out the facts that it would end all earths life etc.. In this theory i'd like the the hole to be big but not too big, how does 1000 miles sound?
Okay so let's say it's done that and gone through so fast that all we felt is a large bang and a 7.6 richter scale aftershock or shudder, what would then happen? Would there be a tsunami on both sides? Would lava pour out nonstop and cover the the world, or would the sea pour in and react with the lava to seal the holes or would the lava boil the seas, turn to steam and boil everyone and thing in the atmosphere?
What would happen in your opinion in this scenario?
Okay so let's say it's done that and gone through so fast that all we felt is a large bang and a 7.6 richter scale aftershock or shudder, what would then happen? Would there be a tsunami on both sides? Would lava pour out nonstop and cover the the world, or would the sea pour in and react with the lava to seal the holes or would the lava boil the seas, turn to steam and boil everyone and thing in the atmosphere?
What would happen in your opinion in this scenario?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Knuckledragger. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
it would be a bigger earthquake than 9.8......way bigger.
And sorry knuckle, only the outer band is liquid; the core is solid unless you want to argue with 50+ years of fundamental geology and seismology. The Earth was discovered to have a solid inner core distinct from its liquid outer core in 1936, by the seismologist Inge Lehmann.
He worked out that it was like this from observations of earthquake-generated seismic waves that reflect off the boundary of the inner core and can be detected by sensitive seismographs on the Earth's surface.
The boundary is known as the Bullen discontinuity or sometimes as the Lehmann discontinuity.
In 1940, it was hypothesised that this inner core was made of solid iron and its rigidity was confirmed in 1971.....
And sorry knuckle, only the outer band is liquid; the core is solid unless you want to argue with 50+ years of fundamental geology and seismology. The Earth was discovered to have a solid inner core distinct from its liquid outer core in 1936, by the seismologist Inge Lehmann.
He worked out that it was like this from observations of earthquake-generated seismic waves that reflect off the boundary of the inner core and can be detected by sensitive seismographs on the Earth's surface.
The boundary is known as the Bullen discontinuity or sometimes as the Lehmann discontinuity.
In 1940, it was hypothesised that this inner core was made of solid iron and its rigidity was confirmed in 1971.....
As you may have deduced fro mteh answers, folk feel it is such an impossible scenario anything goes as an answer.
I do not believe the core is liquid, it is under too much pressure, and getting hit at speed would ensure it was pretty dense anyway. Such an impact is likely to either fail to exit and add to the Earth's mass or shatter it on it's way through. Given the size of your 100 miles diameter asteroid I'd suspect the former.
Trying to get my head around the 'hole through' result you describe instead, a bit of both may be a possible outcome. Lava flows out, cold water hits and initially turns to steam but gradually the lave solidifies and plugs the gap. Seems a reasonable guess.
I do not believe the core is liquid, it is under too much pressure, and getting hit at speed would ensure it was pretty dense anyway. Such an impact is likely to either fail to exit and add to the Earth's mass or shatter it on it's way through. Given the size of your 100 miles diameter asteroid I'd suspect the former.
Trying to get my head around the 'hole through' result you describe instead, a bit of both may be a possible outcome. Lava flows out, cold water hits and initially turns to steam but gradually the lave solidifies and plugs the gap. Seems a reasonable guess.
The velocity of the asteroid would its initial velocity plus the effect of gravity There must be a point where the effect of gravity would become equal in all directions and after it reached half way gravity would be pulling it back, to the centre again. So the net effect of gravity would be zero.
Think of it the other way whatever the velocity of the asteroid the earth would in effect be travelling at the same velocity in the opposite direction so the asteroid would be destroyed/vapourised within seconds of the impact..
Think of it the other way whatever the velocity of the asteroid the earth would in effect be travelling at the same velocity in the opposite direction so the asteroid would be destroyed/vapourised within seconds of the impact..
KD You can't ignore the effect on the earth at the point and even prior to impact . Known impact craters are twenty times the diameter of the asteroid ,therefore your 1000 mile asteroid would create a crater 20,000 miles across which is about three times the diameter of the earth. In addition the energy released would extend thousands of miles beyond that into space.
Another point to consider : asteroids and meteorites lose 90% of their mass
going through our atmosphere . If that is true your 1000 mile asteroid hitting the earth would have been 10,000 mile across when it entered our atmosphere. That would be some firework display. I wonder what the sonic boom would be like !
going through our atmosphere . If that is true your 1000 mile asteroid hitting the earth would have been 10,000 mile across when it entered our atmosphere. That would be some firework display. I wonder what the sonic boom would be like !
I think that might only be true for small asteroids, since the mass loss rate is going to be based on time spent in the atmosphere and speed, and is unlikely to scale so fast. An asteroid large enough would probably lose a similar sort of mass to a smaller one, but it wouldn't be so big as a percentage.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.