3 ms·
interesting, but wouldn't this be way less likely than a planetary collision? It's hard for me to imagine how a natural reactor could achieve the many many Giga
by m_mueller 8y ago
interesting, but wouldn't this be way less likely than a planetary collision? It's hard for me to imagine how a natural reactor could achieve the many many Gigatons of TNT needed to do this, considering the critical mass of natural metallic radioactive isotopes being on the order of kilograms. How could random chance set up such a huge bomb?
- Retric 8y agoEven if it could there would not be enough angular momentum to from a large stable moon. So, it's not a viable theory. PS: Calculate how fast the earth would need to rotate for this to work out.
- SiempreViernes 8y agoI'm sure that with a convoluted enough sequence of runaway fission it could be done, like if the newly formed clump ends up with reactors venting superheated gas along conveniently located fissures that provides the necessary torque. Surely this doesn't make the theory significantly less plausible than the premise of a natural reactor being somehow inert enough to become a bomb before it burns itself apart?
- Retric 8y agoThe moon is fairly close to the earths size on a log scale. Try a rough order of magnitude for how much gas at what speed that would take. It might be possible to carefully design multiple precisely timed detonations to get a second moon to show up. But, a single detonation is not going to work and your talking about a lot more complexity and energy than a few 'vents'.
- saagarjha 8y agoYeah, that's my point. It seems rather improbable.