How well would the Moon protect the Earth from an Asteroid?If the Moon were impacted by a suitably sized meteor, how long would it take to impact the Earth?How can we tell if the asteroid 2013 TV135 will hit Earth in 2032?How gently could a comet/asteroid/meteorite “hit” Earth?Would a killer asteroid shattered into thousands of pieces produce the same devastation?If an Asteroid was to strike the Earth, would it affect the Earth's rotation?Could an impact have resurfaced Venus 300 million years ago?How big would the Earth look from the Moon?Does the Giant Impact Hypothesis explain how the Moon circularized its orbit?When the Moon formed and early on, did it orbit over the Earth's equator?What percentage of a lunar meteor strike is blown back into space?How would the Tycho Impact have appeared from Earth?
Infeasibility in mathematical optimization models
What does "sardine box" mean?
What are the uses and limitations of Persuasion, Insight, and Deception against other PCs?
Visa National - No Exit Stamp From France on Return to the UK
Generator for parity?
Non-OR journals which regularly publish OR research
Acceptable to cut steak before searing?
How can you evade tax by getting employment income just in equity, then using this equity as collateral to take out loan?
How can I iterate this process?
Why "ch" pronunciation rule doesn't occur for words such as "durch", "manchmal"?
sed delete all the words before a match
Pretty heat maps
How does The Fools Guild make its money?
Plausibility of Ice Eaters in the Arctic
What word can be used to describe a bug in a movie?
I was asked to prove the Principle of Cauchy Induction
Was the 2019 Lion King film made through motion capture?
Do other countries guarantee freedoms that the United States does not have?
Double blind peer review when paper cites author's GitHub repo for code
How do I calculate the difference in lens reach between a superzoom compact and a DSLR zoom lens?
A stranger from Norway wants to have money delivered to me
Why did the RAAF procure the F/A-18 despite being purpose-built for carriers?
In Pokémon Go, why does one of my Pikachu have an option to evolve, but another one doesn't?
Are any jet engines used in combat aircraft water cooled?
How well would the Moon protect the Earth from an Asteroid?
If the Moon were impacted by a suitably sized meteor, how long would it take to impact the Earth?How can we tell if the asteroid 2013 TV135 will hit Earth in 2032?How gently could a comet/asteroid/meteorite “hit” Earth?Would a killer asteroid shattered into thousands of pieces produce the same devastation?If an Asteroid was to strike the Earth, would it affect the Earth's rotation?Could an impact have resurfaced Venus 300 million years ago?How big would the Earth look from the Moon?Does the Giant Impact Hypothesis explain how the Moon circularized its orbit?When the Moon formed and early on, did it orbit over the Earth's equator?What percentage of a lunar meteor strike is blown back into space?How would the Tycho Impact have appeared from Earth?
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;
$begingroup$
Would the Earth fare better if the Moon blocked the meteor, comet, rogue planet, or otherwise rather than a direct impact? At what point would the Moon's debris would be an extinction event?
The limit of the impactor is the size, angle of attack, or composition in which to moon would no longer be of any protection.
the-moon earth asteroids impact rogue-planet
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Would the Earth fare better if the Moon blocked the meteor, comet, rogue planet, or otherwise rather than a direct impact? At what point would the Moon's debris would be an extinction event?
The limit of the impactor is the size, angle of attack, or composition in which to moon would no longer be of any protection.
the-moon earth asteroids impact rogue-planet
$endgroup$
6
$begingroup$
Question needs to address the size/weight/speed of the impacting object. Numerous craters exist on the moon from small and large objects impacting it.
$endgroup$
– CrossRoads
Jul 30 at 14:13
$begingroup$
So, Seveneves, huh?
$endgroup$
– Carl Witthoft
Jul 30 at 14:52
$begingroup$
Agree with the answers then, everyone dies.
$endgroup$
– CrossRoads
Jul 30 at 15:40
1
$begingroup$
You should be aware that an impactor can be large/fast enough to cause a mass extinction if it hit Earth without being anywhere near big enough to blast chunks out the other side of the moon. Life is much more fragile than the physical structure of the moons and planets themselves. Case in point, the crater from the impactor that probably killed the dinosaurs, while very large for a crater, is still small on a global scale, and wasn't even discovered until the 70s
$endgroup$
– Ray
Jul 30 at 19:04
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Would the Earth fare better if the Moon blocked the meteor, comet, rogue planet, or otherwise rather than a direct impact? At what point would the Moon's debris would be an extinction event?
The limit of the impactor is the size, angle of attack, or composition in which to moon would no longer be of any protection.
the-moon earth asteroids impact rogue-planet
$endgroup$
Would the Earth fare better if the Moon blocked the meteor, comet, rogue planet, or otherwise rather than a direct impact? At what point would the Moon's debris would be an extinction event?
The limit of the impactor is the size, angle of attack, or composition in which to moon would no longer be of any protection.
the-moon earth asteroids impact rogue-planet
the-moon earth asteroids impact rogue-planet
edited Jul 30 at 22:46
Muze
asked Jul 30 at 4:28
MuzeMuze
9016 silver badges26 bronze badges
9016 silver badges26 bronze badges
6
$begingroup$
Question needs to address the size/weight/speed of the impacting object. Numerous craters exist on the moon from small and large objects impacting it.
$endgroup$
– CrossRoads
Jul 30 at 14:13
$begingroup$
So, Seveneves, huh?
$endgroup$
– Carl Witthoft
Jul 30 at 14:52
$begingroup$
Agree with the answers then, everyone dies.
$endgroup$
– CrossRoads
Jul 30 at 15:40
1
$begingroup$
You should be aware that an impactor can be large/fast enough to cause a mass extinction if it hit Earth without being anywhere near big enough to blast chunks out the other side of the moon. Life is much more fragile than the physical structure of the moons and planets themselves. Case in point, the crater from the impactor that probably killed the dinosaurs, while very large for a crater, is still small on a global scale, and wasn't even discovered until the 70s
$endgroup$
– Ray
Jul 30 at 19:04
add a comment |
6
$begingroup$
Question needs to address the size/weight/speed of the impacting object. Numerous craters exist on the moon from small and large objects impacting it.
$endgroup$
– CrossRoads
Jul 30 at 14:13
$begingroup$
So, Seveneves, huh?
$endgroup$
– Carl Witthoft
Jul 30 at 14:52
$begingroup$
Agree with the answers then, everyone dies.
$endgroup$
– CrossRoads
Jul 30 at 15:40
1
$begingroup$
You should be aware that an impactor can be large/fast enough to cause a mass extinction if it hit Earth without being anywhere near big enough to blast chunks out the other side of the moon. Life is much more fragile than the physical structure of the moons and planets themselves. Case in point, the crater from the impactor that probably killed the dinosaurs, while very large for a crater, is still small on a global scale, and wasn't even discovered until the 70s
$endgroup$
– Ray
Jul 30 at 19:04
6
6
$begingroup$
Question needs to address the size/weight/speed of the impacting object. Numerous craters exist on the moon from small and large objects impacting it.
$endgroup$
– CrossRoads
Jul 30 at 14:13
$begingroup$
Question needs to address the size/weight/speed of the impacting object. Numerous craters exist on the moon from small and large objects impacting it.
$endgroup$
– CrossRoads
Jul 30 at 14:13
$begingroup$
So, Seveneves, huh?
$endgroup$
– Carl Witthoft
Jul 30 at 14:52
$begingroup$
So, Seveneves, huh?
$endgroup$
– Carl Witthoft
Jul 30 at 14:52
$begingroup$
Agree with the answers then, everyone dies.
$endgroup$
– CrossRoads
Jul 30 at 15:40
$begingroup$
Agree with the answers then, everyone dies.
$endgroup$
– CrossRoads
Jul 30 at 15:40
1
1
$begingroup$
You should be aware that an impactor can be large/fast enough to cause a mass extinction if it hit Earth without being anywhere near big enough to blast chunks out the other side of the moon. Life is much more fragile than the physical structure of the moons and planets themselves. Case in point, the crater from the impactor that probably killed the dinosaurs, while very large for a crater, is still small on a global scale, and wasn't even discovered until the 70s
$endgroup$
– Ray
Jul 30 at 19:04
$begingroup$
You should be aware that an impactor can be large/fast enough to cause a mass extinction if it hit Earth without being anywhere near big enough to blast chunks out the other side of the moon. Life is much more fragile than the physical structure of the moons and planets themselves. Case in point, the crater from the impactor that probably killed the dinosaurs, while very large for a crater, is still small on a global scale, and wasn't even discovered until the 70s
$endgroup$
– Ray
Jul 30 at 19:04
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
The Moon orbits the Earth from $approx$ 380000 km, but its radius is only $approx$ 3500 km. The sky has 41253 sq degrees, and the Moon covers only $approx$ 0.25 sq degree from it.
Thus, the probability that an incoming meteor is blocked by the Moon, is $approx$ 1:160000. Thus, the Moon is totally unfeasible to protect us from anything.
The debris would work like an "insurance": it will be more likely that some debris will finally end up on the Earth, but their summed damage will be likely negligible, compared to the meteor.
Note also, different meteors regularly cross the orbit of the Moon, but they have still a very small probability to hit us.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
If you consider that meteors can come from other trajectories rathen than from the ecliptic plane, then the probability of a meteor being blocked by the Moon is even less. The sky has an area of 41253 square degrees, and the Moon only covers 0.25 sq degrees of them. So roughly 1:160000.
$endgroup$
– Iván Pérez
Jul 30 at 11:11
$begingroup$
I think @IvanPerez's argument is correct: You want to compute the solid angle that the moon protects, and then the probability must be a ratio of solid angles. What you gave in your answer is a solid angle! Not a probability.
$endgroup$
– AtmosphericPrisonEscape
Jul 30 at 11:47
$begingroup$
@IvánPérez Right, I improved the answer.
$endgroup$
– peterh
Jul 30 at 11:56
2
$begingroup$
This doesn't answer the question. You answered, "how likely is the moon to block a meteor"; the question is "would the Earth fare better if the moon did block the meteor, compared to a direct impact."
$endgroup$
– kingledion
Jul 30 at 13:37
5
$begingroup$
It's not quite as bad as that. Most meteors lie roughly in the ecliptic, and so does the moon. Also a meteor whose straight line path comes close to the moon but appears to miss it, will probably be deflected by the moon's gravity into the moon. Overall that probably reduces the odds to about 1:100.
$endgroup$
– Martin Bonner
Jul 30 at 16:30
|
show 3 more comments
$begingroup$
It would be much better for Earth if the impactor hit the moon...
In this Worldbuilding answer, I used a paper on ejecta kinematics to do calculations for ejecta velocity upon impact. Without going into too much detail here, much of the ejecta from a large impactor would not exceed the moon's escape velocity of 2.38 km/s. You can examine Figure 7 from the linked paper which shows the logarithmic relationship between ejecta velocity and the edge of the crater. Only material within a few tens of meters of the edge of the formed crater can attain the velocity needed to escape the Moon's gravity.
The mass of the asteroid increases with the cube of its radius; while the mass of material within $n$ meters of the edge of the impact crater increases with radius; so it is evident that the the larger the meteor itself gets, the lower the danger of the any potential ejecta relative to the original impactor.
Furthermore, material ejected from the Moon has the potential to land back on the Moon, enter a stable orbit of Earth, or be ejected from the Earth-Moon system; so only a (probably small) fraction of Moon ejecta would threaten Earth.
Overall, fewer, smaller rocks are much better than large rocks when it comes to getting hit by things (except maybe for your car's windshield).
...unless the impactor knocked the Moon into Earth.
Of course, there is always the possibility that a very, very large impactor would knock the moon into a different orbit, potentially one that eventually impacts Earth. That would, obviously, be the worst case scenario. Significant changes to the orbit of the moon, even if these changes do not cause a collision with Earth, have the potential to do significant damage in terms of tides; not just ocean tides but also the poorly understood effect of tidal forces on Earth's mantle.
In any case; it is probably much better for a large impactor to hit the Moon instead of the Earth, but possibly much, much worse.
$endgroup$
7
$begingroup$
If the impactor is large enough to knock the Moon into Earth, a direct collision would most likely not be preferable, either.
$endgroup$
– Chieron
Jul 30 at 14:48
2
$begingroup$
If it knocked the moon into the Earth it wouldn't matter--anything that could do that would have left Earth permanently uninhabitable anyway (blow off the atmosphere and oceans.)
$endgroup$
– Loren Pechtel
Jul 30 at 14:48
$begingroup$
There's nothing in the Solar System that is both large enough to knock the Moon out of orbit and on a possible collision trajectory. They've all been either thrown out of the Solar System by Jupiter, or absorbed into the planets.
$endgroup$
– Mark
Jul 30 at 20:01
1
$begingroup$
Running the numbers... knocking the Moon into Earth means killing roughly 3e28 J of orbital energy (that's 100,000 more energy than Chicxulub). You'd need something the size of Pallas, one of the most massive asteroids, smacking into the Moon head on at 14 km/s. 3e28 J is not far away from its gravitational binding energy of 1e29 J. That close to its binding energy would probably shatter the Moon, the bits raining down on the Earth before it can reform. It's moot to say whether this is "better" than being directly hit by such a beast.
$endgroup$
– Schwern
Jul 31 at 1:48
add a comment |
$begingroup$
A meteor is a small, sand grain or pea-sized fragment which burns up in the atmosphere before hitting the ground. Those large enough to reach the ground ae called meteorites. It seems to me the ones you are talking about are large enough to be called asteroids. The moon affords hardly any protection against asteroids, and those that strike the moon do very occasionally cause tektites (small glassy beads) and small pieces of debris to hit the Earth. The next asteroid on a collision course for Earth is most unlikely to be blocked by the moon, but there's no need to worry. Chelyabinsk or Tunguska events are fairly common and occur several times a century, usually striking the sea, but the really big ones like Manicouagan or Chicxulub occur on average about once every 150 - 200 million years. We will probably have already become extinct by the time the next one hits.
$endgroup$
8
$begingroup$
This doesn't answer the question, which is "Would it be better for the Earth if a meteor hit the moon instead".
$endgroup$
– kingledion
Jul 30 at 13:55
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "514"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fastronomy.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f32844%2fhow-well-would-the-moon-protect-the-earth-from-an-asteroid%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
The Moon orbits the Earth from $approx$ 380000 km, but its radius is only $approx$ 3500 km. The sky has 41253 sq degrees, and the Moon covers only $approx$ 0.25 sq degree from it.
Thus, the probability that an incoming meteor is blocked by the Moon, is $approx$ 1:160000. Thus, the Moon is totally unfeasible to protect us from anything.
The debris would work like an "insurance": it will be more likely that some debris will finally end up on the Earth, but their summed damage will be likely negligible, compared to the meteor.
Note also, different meteors regularly cross the orbit of the Moon, but they have still a very small probability to hit us.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
If you consider that meteors can come from other trajectories rathen than from the ecliptic plane, then the probability of a meteor being blocked by the Moon is even less. The sky has an area of 41253 square degrees, and the Moon only covers 0.25 sq degrees of them. So roughly 1:160000.
$endgroup$
– Iván Pérez
Jul 30 at 11:11
$begingroup$
I think @IvanPerez's argument is correct: You want to compute the solid angle that the moon protects, and then the probability must be a ratio of solid angles. What you gave in your answer is a solid angle! Not a probability.
$endgroup$
– AtmosphericPrisonEscape
Jul 30 at 11:47
$begingroup$
@IvánPérez Right, I improved the answer.
$endgroup$
– peterh
Jul 30 at 11:56
2
$begingroup$
This doesn't answer the question. You answered, "how likely is the moon to block a meteor"; the question is "would the Earth fare better if the moon did block the meteor, compared to a direct impact."
$endgroup$
– kingledion
Jul 30 at 13:37
5
$begingroup$
It's not quite as bad as that. Most meteors lie roughly in the ecliptic, and so does the moon. Also a meteor whose straight line path comes close to the moon but appears to miss it, will probably be deflected by the moon's gravity into the moon. Overall that probably reduces the odds to about 1:100.
$endgroup$
– Martin Bonner
Jul 30 at 16:30
|
show 3 more comments
$begingroup$
The Moon orbits the Earth from $approx$ 380000 km, but its radius is only $approx$ 3500 km. The sky has 41253 sq degrees, and the Moon covers only $approx$ 0.25 sq degree from it.
Thus, the probability that an incoming meteor is blocked by the Moon, is $approx$ 1:160000. Thus, the Moon is totally unfeasible to protect us from anything.
The debris would work like an "insurance": it will be more likely that some debris will finally end up on the Earth, but their summed damage will be likely negligible, compared to the meteor.
Note also, different meteors regularly cross the orbit of the Moon, but they have still a very small probability to hit us.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
If you consider that meteors can come from other trajectories rathen than from the ecliptic plane, then the probability of a meteor being blocked by the Moon is even less. The sky has an area of 41253 square degrees, and the Moon only covers 0.25 sq degrees of them. So roughly 1:160000.
$endgroup$
– Iván Pérez
Jul 30 at 11:11
$begingroup$
I think @IvanPerez's argument is correct: You want to compute the solid angle that the moon protects, and then the probability must be a ratio of solid angles. What you gave in your answer is a solid angle! Not a probability.
$endgroup$
– AtmosphericPrisonEscape
Jul 30 at 11:47
$begingroup$
@IvánPérez Right, I improved the answer.
$endgroup$
– peterh
Jul 30 at 11:56
2
$begingroup$
This doesn't answer the question. You answered, "how likely is the moon to block a meteor"; the question is "would the Earth fare better if the moon did block the meteor, compared to a direct impact."
$endgroup$
– kingledion
Jul 30 at 13:37
5
$begingroup$
It's not quite as bad as that. Most meteors lie roughly in the ecliptic, and so does the moon. Also a meteor whose straight line path comes close to the moon but appears to miss it, will probably be deflected by the moon's gravity into the moon. Overall that probably reduces the odds to about 1:100.
$endgroup$
– Martin Bonner
Jul 30 at 16:30
|
show 3 more comments
$begingroup$
The Moon orbits the Earth from $approx$ 380000 km, but its radius is only $approx$ 3500 km. The sky has 41253 sq degrees, and the Moon covers only $approx$ 0.25 sq degree from it.
Thus, the probability that an incoming meteor is blocked by the Moon, is $approx$ 1:160000. Thus, the Moon is totally unfeasible to protect us from anything.
The debris would work like an "insurance": it will be more likely that some debris will finally end up on the Earth, but their summed damage will be likely negligible, compared to the meteor.
Note also, different meteors regularly cross the orbit of the Moon, but they have still a very small probability to hit us.
$endgroup$
The Moon orbits the Earth from $approx$ 380000 km, but its radius is only $approx$ 3500 km. The sky has 41253 sq degrees, and the Moon covers only $approx$ 0.25 sq degree from it.
Thus, the probability that an incoming meteor is blocked by the Moon, is $approx$ 1:160000. Thus, the Moon is totally unfeasible to protect us from anything.
The debris would work like an "insurance": it will be more likely that some debris will finally end up on the Earth, but their summed damage will be likely negligible, compared to the meteor.
Note also, different meteors regularly cross the orbit of the Moon, but they have still a very small probability to hit us.
edited Jul 30 at 12:12
answered Jul 30 at 10:33
peterhpeterh
1,8193 gold badges13 silver badges32 bronze badges
1,8193 gold badges13 silver badges32 bronze badges
$begingroup$
If you consider that meteors can come from other trajectories rathen than from the ecliptic plane, then the probability of a meteor being blocked by the Moon is even less. The sky has an area of 41253 square degrees, and the Moon only covers 0.25 sq degrees of them. So roughly 1:160000.
$endgroup$
– Iván Pérez
Jul 30 at 11:11
$begingroup$
I think @IvanPerez's argument is correct: You want to compute the solid angle that the moon protects, and then the probability must be a ratio of solid angles. What you gave in your answer is a solid angle! Not a probability.
$endgroup$
– AtmosphericPrisonEscape
Jul 30 at 11:47
$begingroup$
@IvánPérez Right, I improved the answer.
$endgroup$
– peterh
Jul 30 at 11:56
2
$begingroup$
This doesn't answer the question. You answered, "how likely is the moon to block a meteor"; the question is "would the Earth fare better if the moon did block the meteor, compared to a direct impact."
$endgroup$
– kingledion
Jul 30 at 13:37
5
$begingroup$
It's not quite as bad as that. Most meteors lie roughly in the ecliptic, and so does the moon. Also a meteor whose straight line path comes close to the moon but appears to miss it, will probably be deflected by the moon's gravity into the moon. Overall that probably reduces the odds to about 1:100.
$endgroup$
– Martin Bonner
Jul 30 at 16:30
|
show 3 more comments
$begingroup$
If you consider that meteors can come from other trajectories rathen than from the ecliptic plane, then the probability of a meteor being blocked by the Moon is even less. The sky has an area of 41253 square degrees, and the Moon only covers 0.25 sq degrees of them. So roughly 1:160000.
$endgroup$
– Iván Pérez
Jul 30 at 11:11
$begingroup$
I think @IvanPerez's argument is correct: You want to compute the solid angle that the moon protects, and then the probability must be a ratio of solid angles. What you gave in your answer is a solid angle! Not a probability.
$endgroup$
– AtmosphericPrisonEscape
Jul 30 at 11:47
$begingroup$
@IvánPérez Right, I improved the answer.
$endgroup$
– peterh
Jul 30 at 11:56
2
$begingroup$
This doesn't answer the question. You answered, "how likely is the moon to block a meteor"; the question is "would the Earth fare better if the moon did block the meteor, compared to a direct impact."
$endgroup$
– kingledion
Jul 30 at 13:37
5
$begingroup$
It's not quite as bad as that. Most meteors lie roughly in the ecliptic, and so does the moon. Also a meteor whose straight line path comes close to the moon but appears to miss it, will probably be deflected by the moon's gravity into the moon. Overall that probably reduces the odds to about 1:100.
$endgroup$
– Martin Bonner
Jul 30 at 16:30
$begingroup$
If you consider that meteors can come from other trajectories rathen than from the ecliptic plane, then the probability of a meteor being blocked by the Moon is even less. The sky has an area of 41253 square degrees, and the Moon only covers 0.25 sq degrees of them. So roughly 1:160000.
$endgroup$
– Iván Pérez
Jul 30 at 11:11
$begingroup$
If you consider that meteors can come from other trajectories rathen than from the ecliptic plane, then the probability of a meteor being blocked by the Moon is even less. The sky has an area of 41253 square degrees, and the Moon only covers 0.25 sq degrees of them. So roughly 1:160000.
$endgroup$
– Iván Pérez
Jul 30 at 11:11
$begingroup$
I think @IvanPerez's argument is correct: You want to compute the solid angle that the moon protects, and then the probability must be a ratio of solid angles. What you gave in your answer is a solid angle! Not a probability.
$endgroup$
– AtmosphericPrisonEscape
Jul 30 at 11:47
$begingroup$
I think @IvanPerez's argument is correct: You want to compute the solid angle that the moon protects, and then the probability must be a ratio of solid angles. What you gave in your answer is a solid angle! Not a probability.
$endgroup$
– AtmosphericPrisonEscape
Jul 30 at 11:47
$begingroup$
@IvánPérez Right, I improved the answer.
$endgroup$
– peterh
Jul 30 at 11:56
$begingroup$
@IvánPérez Right, I improved the answer.
$endgroup$
– peterh
Jul 30 at 11:56
2
2
$begingroup$
This doesn't answer the question. You answered, "how likely is the moon to block a meteor"; the question is "would the Earth fare better if the moon did block the meteor, compared to a direct impact."
$endgroup$
– kingledion
Jul 30 at 13:37
$begingroup$
This doesn't answer the question. You answered, "how likely is the moon to block a meteor"; the question is "would the Earth fare better if the moon did block the meteor, compared to a direct impact."
$endgroup$
– kingledion
Jul 30 at 13:37
5
5
$begingroup$
It's not quite as bad as that. Most meteors lie roughly in the ecliptic, and so does the moon. Also a meteor whose straight line path comes close to the moon but appears to miss it, will probably be deflected by the moon's gravity into the moon. Overall that probably reduces the odds to about 1:100.
$endgroup$
– Martin Bonner
Jul 30 at 16:30
$begingroup$
It's not quite as bad as that. Most meteors lie roughly in the ecliptic, and so does the moon. Also a meteor whose straight line path comes close to the moon but appears to miss it, will probably be deflected by the moon's gravity into the moon. Overall that probably reduces the odds to about 1:100.
$endgroup$
– Martin Bonner
Jul 30 at 16:30
|
show 3 more comments
$begingroup$
It would be much better for Earth if the impactor hit the moon...
In this Worldbuilding answer, I used a paper on ejecta kinematics to do calculations for ejecta velocity upon impact. Without going into too much detail here, much of the ejecta from a large impactor would not exceed the moon's escape velocity of 2.38 km/s. You can examine Figure 7 from the linked paper which shows the logarithmic relationship between ejecta velocity and the edge of the crater. Only material within a few tens of meters of the edge of the formed crater can attain the velocity needed to escape the Moon's gravity.
The mass of the asteroid increases with the cube of its radius; while the mass of material within $n$ meters of the edge of the impact crater increases with radius; so it is evident that the the larger the meteor itself gets, the lower the danger of the any potential ejecta relative to the original impactor.
Furthermore, material ejected from the Moon has the potential to land back on the Moon, enter a stable orbit of Earth, or be ejected from the Earth-Moon system; so only a (probably small) fraction of Moon ejecta would threaten Earth.
Overall, fewer, smaller rocks are much better than large rocks when it comes to getting hit by things (except maybe for your car's windshield).
...unless the impactor knocked the Moon into Earth.
Of course, there is always the possibility that a very, very large impactor would knock the moon into a different orbit, potentially one that eventually impacts Earth. That would, obviously, be the worst case scenario. Significant changes to the orbit of the moon, even if these changes do not cause a collision with Earth, have the potential to do significant damage in terms of tides; not just ocean tides but also the poorly understood effect of tidal forces on Earth's mantle.
In any case; it is probably much better for a large impactor to hit the Moon instead of the Earth, but possibly much, much worse.
$endgroup$
7
$begingroup$
If the impactor is large enough to knock the Moon into Earth, a direct collision would most likely not be preferable, either.
$endgroup$
– Chieron
Jul 30 at 14:48
2
$begingroup$
If it knocked the moon into the Earth it wouldn't matter--anything that could do that would have left Earth permanently uninhabitable anyway (blow off the atmosphere and oceans.)
$endgroup$
– Loren Pechtel
Jul 30 at 14:48
$begingroup$
There's nothing in the Solar System that is both large enough to knock the Moon out of orbit and on a possible collision trajectory. They've all been either thrown out of the Solar System by Jupiter, or absorbed into the planets.
$endgroup$
– Mark
Jul 30 at 20:01
1
$begingroup$
Running the numbers... knocking the Moon into Earth means killing roughly 3e28 J of orbital energy (that's 100,000 more energy than Chicxulub). You'd need something the size of Pallas, one of the most massive asteroids, smacking into the Moon head on at 14 km/s. 3e28 J is not far away from its gravitational binding energy of 1e29 J. That close to its binding energy would probably shatter the Moon, the bits raining down on the Earth before it can reform. It's moot to say whether this is "better" than being directly hit by such a beast.
$endgroup$
– Schwern
Jul 31 at 1:48
add a comment |
$begingroup$
It would be much better for Earth if the impactor hit the moon...
In this Worldbuilding answer, I used a paper on ejecta kinematics to do calculations for ejecta velocity upon impact. Without going into too much detail here, much of the ejecta from a large impactor would not exceed the moon's escape velocity of 2.38 km/s. You can examine Figure 7 from the linked paper which shows the logarithmic relationship between ejecta velocity and the edge of the crater. Only material within a few tens of meters of the edge of the formed crater can attain the velocity needed to escape the Moon's gravity.
The mass of the asteroid increases with the cube of its radius; while the mass of material within $n$ meters of the edge of the impact crater increases with radius; so it is evident that the the larger the meteor itself gets, the lower the danger of the any potential ejecta relative to the original impactor.
Furthermore, material ejected from the Moon has the potential to land back on the Moon, enter a stable orbit of Earth, or be ejected from the Earth-Moon system; so only a (probably small) fraction of Moon ejecta would threaten Earth.
Overall, fewer, smaller rocks are much better than large rocks when it comes to getting hit by things (except maybe for your car's windshield).
...unless the impactor knocked the Moon into Earth.
Of course, there is always the possibility that a very, very large impactor would knock the moon into a different orbit, potentially one that eventually impacts Earth. That would, obviously, be the worst case scenario. Significant changes to the orbit of the moon, even if these changes do not cause a collision with Earth, have the potential to do significant damage in terms of tides; not just ocean tides but also the poorly understood effect of tidal forces on Earth's mantle.
In any case; it is probably much better for a large impactor to hit the Moon instead of the Earth, but possibly much, much worse.
$endgroup$
7
$begingroup$
If the impactor is large enough to knock the Moon into Earth, a direct collision would most likely not be preferable, either.
$endgroup$
– Chieron
Jul 30 at 14:48
2
$begingroup$
If it knocked the moon into the Earth it wouldn't matter--anything that could do that would have left Earth permanently uninhabitable anyway (blow off the atmosphere and oceans.)
$endgroup$
– Loren Pechtel
Jul 30 at 14:48
$begingroup$
There's nothing in the Solar System that is both large enough to knock the Moon out of orbit and on a possible collision trajectory. They've all been either thrown out of the Solar System by Jupiter, or absorbed into the planets.
$endgroup$
– Mark
Jul 30 at 20:01
1
$begingroup$
Running the numbers... knocking the Moon into Earth means killing roughly 3e28 J of orbital energy (that's 100,000 more energy than Chicxulub). You'd need something the size of Pallas, one of the most massive asteroids, smacking into the Moon head on at 14 km/s. 3e28 J is not far away from its gravitational binding energy of 1e29 J. That close to its binding energy would probably shatter the Moon, the bits raining down on the Earth before it can reform. It's moot to say whether this is "better" than being directly hit by such a beast.
$endgroup$
– Schwern
Jul 31 at 1:48
add a comment |
$begingroup$
It would be much better for Earth if the impactor hit the moon...
In this Worldbuilding answer, I used a paper on ejecta kinematics to do calculations for ejecta velocity upon impact. Without going into too much detail here, much of the ejecta from a large impactor would not exceed the moon's escape velocity of 2.38 km/s. You can examine Figure 7 from the linked paper which shows the logarithmic relationship between ejecta velocity and the edge of the crater. Only material within a few tens of meters of the edge of the formed crater can attain the velocity needed to escape the Moon's gravity.
The mass of the asteroid increases with the cube of its radius; while the mass of material within $n$ meters of the edge of the impact crater increases with radius; so it is evident that the the larger the meteor itself gets, the lower the danger of the any potential ejecta relative to the original impactor.
Furthermore, material ejected from the Moon has the potential to land back on the Moon, enter a stable orbit of Earth, or be ejected from the Earth-Moon system; so only a (probably small) fraction of Moon ejecta would threaten Earth.
Overall, fewer, smaller rocks are much better than large rocks when it comes to getting hit by things (except maybe for your car's windshield).
...unless the impactor knocked the Moon into Earth.
Of course, there is always the possibility that a very, very large impactor would knock the moon into a different orbit, potentially one that eventually impacts Earth. That would, obviously, be the worst case scenario. Significant changes to the orbit of the moon, even if these changes do not cause a collision with Earth, have the potential to do significant damage in terms of tides; not just ocean tides but also the poorly understood effect of tidal forces on Earth's mantle.
In any case; it is probably much better for a large impactor to hit the Moon instead of the Earth, but possibly much, much worse.
$endgroup$
It would be much better for Earth if the impactor hit the moon...
In this Worldbuilding answer, I used a paper on ejecta kinematics to do calculations for ejecta velocity upon impact. Without going into too much detail here, much of the ejecta from a large impactor would not exceed the moon's escape velocity of 2.38 km/s. You can examine Figure 7 from the linked paper which shows the logarithmic relationship between ejecta velocity and the edge of the crater. Only material within a few tens of meters of the edge of the formed crater can attain the velocity needed to escape the Moon's gravity.
The mass of the asteroid increases with the cube of its radius; while the mass of material within $n$ meters of the edge of the impact crater increases with radius; so it is evident that the the larger the meteor itself gets, the lower the danger of the any potential ejecta relative to the original impactor.
Furthermore, material ejected from the Moon has the potential to land back on the Moon, enter a stable orbit of Earth, or be ejected from the Earth-Moon system; so only a (probably small) fraction of Moon ejecta would threaten Earth.
Overall, fewer, smaller rocks are much better than large rocks when it comes to getting hit by things (except maybe for your car's windshield).
...unless the impactor knocked the Moon into Earth.
Of course, there is always the possibility that a very, very large impactor would knock the moon into a different orbit, potentially one that eventually impacts Earth. That would, obviously, be the worst case scenario. Significant changes to the orbit of the moon, even if these changes do not cause a collision with Earth, have the potential to do significant damage in terms of tides; not just ocean tides but also the poorly understood effect of tidal forces on Earth's mantle.
In any case; it is probably much better for a large impactor to hit the Moon instead of the Earth, but possibly much, much worse.
answered Jul 30 at 13:54
kingledionkingledion
3361 silver badge10 bronze badges
3361 silver badge10 bronze badges
7
$begingroup$
If the impactor is large enough to knock the Moon into Earth, a direct collision would most likely not be preferable, either.
$endgroup$
– Chieron
Jul 30 at 14:48
2
$begingroup$
If it knocked the moon into the Earth it wouldn't matter--anything that could do that would have left Earth permanently uninhabitable anyway (blow off the atmosphere and oceans.)
$endgroup$
– Loren Pechtel
Jul 30 at 14:48
$begingroup$
There's nothing in the Solar System that is both large enough to knock the Moon out of orbit and on a possible collision trajectory. They've all been either thrown out of the Solar System by Jupiter, or absorbed into the planets.
$endgroup$
– Mark
Jul 30 at 20:01
1
$begingroup$
Running the numbers... knocking the Moon into Earth means killing roughly 3e28 J of orbital energy (that's 100,000 more energy than Chicxulub). You'd need something the size of Pallas, one of the most massive asteroids, smacking into the Moon head on at 14 km/s. 3e28 J is not far away from its gravitational binding energy of 1e29 J. That close to its binding energy would probably shatter the Moon, the bits raining down on the Earth before it can reform. It's moot to say whether this is "better" than being directly hit by such a beast.
$endgroup$
– Schwern
Jul 31 at 1:48
add a comment |
7
$begingroup$
If the impactor is large enough to knock the Moon into Earth, a direct collision would most likely not be preferable, either.
$endgroup$
– Chieron
Jul 30 at 14:48
2
$begingroup$
If it knocked the moon into the Earth it wouldn't matter--anything that could do that would have left Earth permanently uninhabitable anyway (blow off the atmosphere and oceans.)
$endgroup$
– Loren Pechtel
Jul 30 at 14:48
$begingroup$
There's nothing in the Solar System that is both large enough to knock the Moon out of orbit and on a possible collision trajectory. They've all been either thrown out of the Solar System by Jupiter, or absorbed into the planets.
$endgroup$
– Mark
Jul 30 at 20:01
1
$begingroup$
Running the numbers... knocking the Moon into Earth means killing roughly 3e28 J of orbital energy (that's 100,000 more energy than Chicxulub). You'd need something the size of Pallas, one of the most massive asteroids, smacking into the Moon head on at 14 km/s. 3e28 J is not far away from its gravitational binding energy of 1e29 J. That close to its binding energy would probably shatter the Moon, the bits raining down on the Earth before it can reform. It's moot to say whether this is "better" than being directly hit by such a beast.
$endgroup$
– Schwern
Jul 31 at 1:48
7
7
$begingroup$
If the impactor is large enough to knock the Moon into Earth, a direct collision would most likely not be preferable, either.
$endgroup$
– Chieron
Jul 30 at 14:48
$begingroup$
If the impactor is large enough to knock the Moon into Earth, a direct collision would most likely not be preferable, either.
$endgroup$
– Chieron
Jul 30 at 14:48
2
2
$begingroup$
If it knocked the moon into the Earth it wouldn't matter--anything that could do that would have left Earth permanently uninhabitable anyway (blow off the atmosphere and oceans.)
$endgroup$
– Loren Pechtel
Jul 30 at 14:48
$begingroup$
If it knocked the moon into the Earth it wouldn't matter--anything that could do that would have left Earth permanently uninhabitable anyway (blow off the atmosphere and oceans.)
$endgroup$
– Loren Pechtel
Jul 30 at 14:48
$begingroup$
There's nothing in the Solar System that is both large enough to knock the Moon out of orbit and on a possible collision trajectory. They've all been either thrown out of the Solar System by Jupiter, or absorbed into the planets.
$endgroup$
– Mark
Jul 30 at 20:01
$begingroup$
There's nothing in the Solar System that is both large enough to knock the Moon out of orbit and on a possible collision trajectory. They've all been either thrown out of the Solar System by Jupiter, or absorbed into the planets.
$endgroup$
– Mark
Jul 30 at 20:01
1
1
$begingroup$
Running the numbers... knocking the Moon into Earth means killing roughly 3e28 J of orbital energy (that's 100,000 more energy than Chicxulub). You'd need something the size of Pallas, one of the most massive asteroids, smacking into the Moon head on at 14 km/s. 3e28 J is not far away from its gravitational binding energy of 1e29 J. That close to its binding energy would probably shatter the Moon, the bits raining down on the Earth before it can reform. It's moot to say whether this is "better" than being directly hit by such a beast.
$endgroup$
– Schwern
Jul 31 at 1:48
$begingroup$
Running the numbers... knocking the Moon into Earth means killing roughly 3e28 J of orbital energy (that's 100,000 more energy than Chicxulub). You'd need something the size of Pallas, one of the most massive asteroids, smacking into the Moon head on at 14 km/s. 3e28 J is not far away from its gravitational binding energy of 1e29 J. That close to its binding energy would probably shatter the Moon, the bits raining down on the Earth before it can reform. It's moot to say whether this is "better" than being directly hit by such a beast.
$endgroup$
– Schwern
Jul 31 at 1:48
add a comment |
$begingroup$
A meteor is a small, sand grain or pea-sized fragment which burns up in the atmosphere before hitting the ground. Those large enough to reach the ground ae called meteorites. It seems to me the ones you are talking about are large enough to be called asteroids. The moon affords hardly any protection against asteroids, and those that strike the moon do very occasionally cause tektites (small glassy beads) and small pieces of debris to hit the Earth. The next asteroid on a collision course for Earth is most unlikely to be blocked by the moon, but there's no need to worry. Chelyabinsk or Tunguska events are fairly common and occur several times a century, usually striking the sea, but the really big ones like Manicouagan or Chicxulub occur on average about once every 150 - 200 million years. We will probably have already become extinct by the time the next one hits.
$endgroup$
8
$begingroup$
This doesn't answer the question, which is "Would it be better for the Earth if a meteor hit the moon instead".
$endgroup$
– kingledion
Jul 30 at 13:55
add a comment |
$begingroup$
A meteor is a small, sand grain or pea-sized fragment which burns up in the atmosphere before hitting the ground. Those large enough to reach the ground ae called meteorites. It seems to me the ones you are talking about are large enough to be called asteroids. The moon affords hardly any protection against asteroids, and those that strike the moon do very occasionally cause tektites (small glassy beads) and small pieces of debris to hit the Earth. The next asteroid on a collision course for Earth is most unlikely to be blocked by the moon, but there's no need to worry. Chelyabinsk or Tunguska events are fairly common and occur several times a century, usually striking the sea, but the really big ones like Manicouagan or Chicxulub occur on average about once every 150 - 200 million years. We will probably have already become extinct by the time the next one hits.
$endgroup$
8
$begingroup$
This doesn't answer the question, which is "Would it be better for the Earth if a meteor hit the moon instead".
$endgroup$
– kingledion
Jul 30 at 13:55
add a comment |
$begingroup$
A meteor is a small, sand grain or pea-sized fragment which burns up in the atmosphere before hitting the ground. Those large enough to reach the ground ae called meteorites. It seems to me the ones you are talking about are large enough to be called asteroids. The moon affords hardly any protection against asteroids, and those that strike the moon do very occasionally cause tektites (small glassy beads) and small pieces of debris to hit the Earth. The next asteroid on a collision course for Earth is most unlikely to be blocked by the moon, but there's no need to worry. Chelyabinsk or Tunguska events are fairly common and occur several times a century, usually striking the sea, but the really big ones like Manicouagan or Chicxulub occur on average about once every 150 - 200 million years. We will probably have already become extinct by the time the next one hits.
$endgroup$
A meteor is a small, sand grain or pea-sized fragment which burns up in the atmosphere before hitting the ground. Those large enough to reach the ground ae called meteorites. It seems to me the ones you are talking about are large enough to be called asteroids. The moon affords hardly any protection against asteroids, and those that strike the moon do very occasionally cause tektites (small glassy beads) and small pieces of debris to hit the Earth. The next asteroid on a collision course for Earth is most unlikely to be blocked by the moon, but there's no need to worry. Chelyabinsk or Tunguska events are fairly common and occur several times a century, usually striking the sea, but the really big ones like Manicouagan or Chicxulub occur on average about once every 150 - 200 million years. We will probably have already become extinct by the time the next one hits.
answered Jul 30 at 7:08
Michael WalsbyMichael Walsby
8611 silver badge6 bronze badges
8611 silver badge6 bronze badges
8
$begingroup$
This doesn't answer the question, which is "Would it be better for the Earth if a meteor hit the moon instead".
$endgroup$
– kingledion
Jul 30 at 13:55
add a comment |
8
$begingroup$
This doesn't answer the question, which is "Would it be better for the Earth if a meteor hit the moon instead".
$endgroup$
– kingledion
Jul 30 at 13:55
8
8
$begingroup$
This doesn't answer the question, which is "Would it be better for the Earth if a meteor hit the moon instead".
$endgroup$
– kingledion
Jul 30 at 13:55
$begingroup$
This doesn't answer the question, which is "Would it be better for the Earth if a meteor hit the moon instead".
$endgroup$
– kingledion
Jul 30 at 13:55
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Astronomy Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fastronomy.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f32844%2fhow-well-would-the-moon-protect-the-earth-from-an-asteroid%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
6
$begingroup$
Question needs to address the size/weight/speed of the impacting object. Numerous craters exist on the moon from small and large objects impacting it.
$endgroup$
– CrossRoads
Jul 30 at 14:13
$begingroup$
So, Seveneves, huh?
$endgroup$
– Carl Witthoft
Jul 30 at 14:52
$begingroup$
Agree with the answers then, everyone dies.
$endgroup$
– CrossRoads
Jul 30 at 15:40
1
$begingroup$
You should be aware that an impactor can be large/fast enough to cause a mass extinction if it hit Earth without being anywhere near big enough to blast chunks out the other side of the moon. Life is much more fragile than the physical structure of the moons and planets themselves. Case in point, the crater from the impactor that probably killed the dinosaurs, while very large for a crater, is still small on a global scale, and wasn't even discovered until the 70s
$endgroup$
– Ray
Jul 30 at 19:04