Jobs & Education1 min ago
Megatsunami - Skyscrapers
If a chunk of La Palma falling into the sea ( television programme last night) were to cause a supercolossal tsunami, would shoreline skyscrapers ( e.g. in New York) resist the force of the water or would they collapse ? Would such skyscrapers slow the rush of water at all ? ( bearing in mind that such a tsunami is predicted by some scientists to be able to reach at least 30 miles inland from the East coast of N America )
Answers
1 to 8 of 8
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by atalanta. 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.
I remember a similar program a few years ago, and it predicted the effective end of life on the Eastern Seaboard of America.
The few hours notice of the tsunami would only cause a massive and useless evacuation of all those big cities. If this would ever to happen, it would be the end of the world for many millions.
The few hours notice of the tsunami would only cause a massive and useless evacuation of all those big cities. If this would ever to happen, it would be the end of the world for many millions.
-- answer removed --
places like Kiribati and the Maldives could easily be wiped out without a tsunami at all, just from rising sea levels. Even in London the Thames Barrier, which was supposed to be a once-in-a-blue-moon thing to deal with freak weather, is used a lot.
All the same, I don't know there's much we can do about mega-events like the one you suggest.
All the same, I don't know there's much we can do about mega-events like the one you suggest.
“And spare a thought for the West Indies, Bahamas, etc. which would be utterly wrecked.”
Not necessarily, db. It depends on the topography of the individual islands. Tsunamis cause damage where there are long, gradually sloping approaches from the deep water to the land. The very long wavelength of the tsunami only does damage when it meets resistance from a rising seabed. I was in the Maldives a week or so after the Boxing Day tsunami of 2006. Whilst some (of the 1,200) islands sustained damage, many of them survived relatively unscathed. The island on which we stayed had a resident marine biologist. He noticed, on the morning of the tsunami, that the tide had been “sucked out” of the island’s lagoon and beach bungalows which were usually in 8 to 10 feet of water, were high and dry. He knew what was happening. Over the next hour or two the water was replaced and the level rose so as to flood many parts of the island. But this then subsided. The process was repeated two or three times, each time a little less severe than the previous. By the late afternoon things had returned to normal and the only signs that anything unusual had happened was that debris and seaweed had been deposited across the island well above the usual high water mark. He had copious photos of the phenomenon. Nobody had been injured. A party of divers who were underwater had been “sucked down” by the enormous currents but they had the presence of mind to stay down and perform a controlled ascent (thus avoiding “the bends”).
This was the manifestation of the ultra-long wavelength the tsunami produced which, as you explained, would be almost unnoticed on the surface of the deep ocean.
Not necessarily, db. It depends on the topography of the individual islands. Tsunamis cause damage where there are long, gradually sloping approaches from the deep water to the land. The very long wavelength of the tsunami only does damage when it meets resistance from a rising seabed. I was in the Maldives a week or so after the Boxing Day tsunami of 2006. Whilst some (of the 1,200) islands sustained damage, many of them survived relatively unscathed. The island on which we stayed had a resident marine biologist. He noticed, on the morning of the tsunami, that the tide had been “sucked out” of the island’s lagoon and beach bungalows which were usually in 8 to 10 feet of water, were high and dry. He knew what was happening. Over the next hour or two the water was replaced and the level rose so as to flood many parts of the island. But this then subsided. The process was repeated two or three times, each time a little less severe than the previous. By the late afternoon things had returned to normal and the only signs that anything unusual had happened was that debris and seaweed had been deposited across the island well above the usual high water mark. He had copious photos of the phenomenon. Nobody had been injured. A party of divers who were underwater had been “sucked down” by the enormous currents but they had the presence of mind to stay down and perform a controlled ascent (thus avoiding “the bends”).
This was the manifestation of the ultra-long wavelength the tsunami produced which, as you explained, would be almost unnoticed on the surface of the deep ocean.
And I forgot to add that the Maldives avoided serious damage because they have no long, sloping beaches. They are volcanic in origin and most of the islands have a relatively narrow and shallow "shelf" a short distance offshore surrounding the island. Beyond that there is a sheer drop to very deep water.
-- answer removed --
1 to 8 of 8
Latest Posts
Home & Garden3 mins ago
Film, Media & TV4 mins ago
Motoring5 mins ago
ChatterBank6 mins ago
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.