Dammit, I already answered these questions in the other thread. It's frustrating when I feel my efforts are being ignored and disregarded. I don't get paid to do this.DeliriousEncore said:If for any reason, the moon were forced into a more extreme elliptical orbit to earth where its perigee was much closer to earth and its apogee was much farther, what kind of affects would we expect to see?
Also, would the moon's perigee cause more frequent or more severe earthquakes?
I did read your answers in the last thread and thank you for that. I was not ignoring those answers, but I wanted to restate my questions as the focus in this thread so that if I received any additional feedback or answers, it would actually be on this topic since everyone else in that thread was ignoring my further questions to talk about the semantics of terminology.Hornbein said:Dammit, I already answered these questions in the other thread. It's frustrating when I feel my efforts are being ignored and disregarded. I don't get paid to do this.
I think your idea is both fresh and has a lot of visual potential that would attract Hollywood. A Moon with ten or more times the apparent diameter of what we have now would be a very dramatic image, especially when accompanied by huge tidal waves, widespread volcanism, and gargantuan earthquakes. As they said in Motown days, "nowhere to run to baby, nowhere to hide."
While the Moon can't cross the Roche limit (it's too big) I believe that this is just an approximation. Once the Moon gets close enough the gravitational attraction of the Earth at the near surface of the Moon has got to be greater than the Moon's gravity there. That would have meant Earth's gravity sucking dust and rocks off of the Moon, causing meteor showers. I figure that would begin to happen when the center of the Moon is about 20,000 km from the center of the Earth so that the surfaces are 10,000 km apart. As the Moon gets even closer this increases rapidly eventually causing a stupendous deluge of meteors.
Then there is the ultimate, collision with the Earth. First there could be a near miss that would brush the atmosphere causing tremendous winds. I suppose an actual collision would boil the oceans. How apocalyptic can you get?
I will quibble that hardly anyone calls them tidal waves. They are just plain old "tides." You have seen the sort of confusion wreaked by the "tidal waves" moniker. Stick with tides. That's my advice.
The Moon's perigee is the point in its orbit where it is closest to the Earth. This distance varies due to the elliptical shape of the Moon's orbit, typically ranging from about 363,300 kilometers (225,623 miles) to 405,500 kilometers (251,966 miles).
The Moon does exert a gravitational pull on the Earth, which can influence tidal forces. However, while these tidal forces can affect the Earth's crust, they are generally not strong enough to directly cause significant earthquakes. Most earthquakes are caused by tectonic processes and stress accumulation along fault lines.
While a closer Moon would increase its gravitational influence on Earth, it is unlikely to lead to a significant increase in earthquake frequency. Earthquakes are primarily driven by tectonic activity rather than lunar gravitational effects, so the impact of a closer Moon would be minimal compared to the forces at play in Earth's geology.
There have been studies investigating correlations between the Moon's phases and earthquake occurrences, but the evidence is inconclusive. While some researchers have suggested potential links, no definitive causal relationship has been established between the Moon's position and the occurrence of earthquakes.
Earthquake activity is primarily influenced by tectonic plate movements, volcanic activity, and human activities such as mining or reservoir-induced seismicity. Factors such as stress accumulation along fault lines and the release of energy during tectonic shifts are the main drivers of earthquakes, overshadowing any potential influence from the Moon.