Like trigger the whole moon to go volcanic, sending enough ash and dust to block out the sun's light, therefore causing our veiw of the moon to be dark, as in no light coming from the moon. Come on closet scientists, I know you are out there, this is a serious question, expecially considering NASA's planned moonbase in 2023
2006-12-05 04:34:12 · 6 answers · asked by vjatigerrr 2 in Science & Mathematics ➔ Astronomy & Space
Hi,
An atomic blast could only trigger a volcanic eruption if there were indeed a molten magma (Lava) center as on earth.
Considering the ancient Mayan calendar, which abruptly ends on December 2012, there are those who believe there is a possibility we may not be around after 2012.
Good question,
Darryl S.
2006-12-05 04:58:53 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
The good old, nuke-the-moon question.
Dust would definitely be kicked up, but dust also has reflective properties (when you look as dust in the air through sunshine, it's reflecting the sun's light), but volcanic activity? Probably not. Nukes have very little explosive power relative to such events as asteroid collisions, and even those don't always cause volcanic activity. (And of course, how could I forget that fact that the moon is solid all the way through, so that's a no)
2006-12-05 04:45:31 · answer #2 · answered by pito16places 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No it would not happen. For starters the moon is a dead world. There is no magma under its surface. The moon reflects sun light and that is why it appears to glow at night. So if it were possible to have enough ash to cover the surface of the moon, the ash would still reflect light just as the moons surface reflects light now. Maybe it would even glow brighter.
2006-12-05 04:48:40 · answer #3 · answered by acidms2 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. Nuclear testing has been minimum contained in the previous two decades. If such checks were responsible for quakes and volcanoes we would want to have seen a rash of them contained in the 60's and 70's, something that purely did not ensue. i imagine the Mythbuster's in a unmarried of their experiments are extra in all danger to reason an earthquake than nuclear guns testing. replace: the article you correct to is 4 years previous. If there change into something to it do not you may want to were able to locate something slightly extra modern-day? Any time you be conscious a declare like this attributed to an unnamed source, that would want to be a purple flag. I mean, come on. that is purely immediately ahead experience.
2016-11-23 18:12:47 · answer #4 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Hi. Nuclear activity is not going to cause tectonic motion on the Moon I'm afraid. This is what drives volcanoes on Earth.
2006-12-05 04:46:48 · answer #5 · answered by Cirric 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. The moon, unlike the Earth, is solid rock. No piddly little nuclear explosion is going to change that.
2006-12-05 04:49:14 · answer #6 · answered by cosmo 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋