- #1
TitaniumVCarbon
- 21
- 0
- TL;DR
- Some aspects I assume a lunar surface explosion would have that I havent found any mention of. Do these aspects exist? If so, why havent they been mentioned?
In an explosion in space, material is heated and expands. On the surface of Earth, it doesnt get too far, instead transferring its energy into shockwaves and tremors. But on the surface of the moon, if I'm right:
- Explosions with slower initial speeds (of the expanding material that makes up the blast, which is equivalent to the heat at the centre of the blast) have expanding flows of hot gas that, because they dont move fast enough to be more or less unaffected by lunar gravity, are groundhugging, and would be like a pyroclastic surge on Earth.
-With higher speed explosions, the hot gas, pushed out by the explosion, would be travelling faster and would be like 'wind'. It could be deflected by obstacles (asumming those remained intact, but the hot gas, if still hot, would have a tendency to expand and so, as it moved past an obstacle would expand to fill the void created by said obstacle. If it has cooled down to having little or no heat, you might be able to escape the wind by hiding behind some sort of barrier.). The speed of the explosion, and thus 'wind' depends on the initial temperature of the blast.
-In both cases, the wind would be strongest as it hit your location and, from the perspective of any specific location, would weaken as time passed. Also, the wind would throw up material on its own, and this material could travel independently (without being slowed down by air) and make up its own flow of material. And the explosion itself could throw out bits and pieces of the bomb, asteroid, or surrounding material and send it hurling outwards, sandblasting the surrounding area, and perhaps creating its own distinct flow of material as well. Not that it has to be groundhugging like a pyroclastic surge. (This happened to Surveyor 3 when Apollo 12's exhaust shot out particles everywhere. The probe was 180m away and Apollo 12's engine was a dimunitive one compared to some commonly used ones, so imagine what magnitude this would be if an actual surface explosion happened).
- Explosions with slower initial speeds (of the expanding material that makes up the blast, which is equivalent to the heat at the centre of the blast) have expanding flows of hot gas that, because they dont move fast enough to be more or less unaffected by lunar gravity, are groundhugging, and would be like a pyroclastic surge on Earth.
-With higher speed explosions, the hot gas, pushed out by the explosion, would be travelling faster and would be like 'wind'. It could be deflected by obstacles (asumming those remained intact, but the hot gas, if still hot, would have a tendency to expand and so, as it moved past an obstacle would expand to fill the void created by said obstacle. If it has cooled down to having little or no heat, you might be able to escape the wind by hiding behind some sort of barrier.). The speed of the explosion, and thus 'wind' depends on the initial temperature of the blast.
-In both cases, the wind would be strongest as it hit your location and, from the perspective of any specific location, would weaken as time passed. Also, the wind would throw up material on its own, and this material could travel independently (without being slowed down by air) and make up its own flow of material. And the explosion itself could throw out bits and pieces of the bomb, asteroid, or surrounding material and send it hurling outwards, sandblasting the surrounding area, and perhaps creating its own distinct flow of material as well. Not that it has to be groundhugging like a pyroclastic surge. (This happened to Surveyor 3 when Apollo 12's exhaust shot out particles everywhere. The probe was 180m away and Apollo 12's engine was a dimunitive one compared to some commonly used ones, so imagine what magnitude this would be if an actual surface explosion happened).