The speculation that the full moon and its gravitational effect on Earth could trigger earthquakes and other natural disasters is getting attention in some quarters. It is not surprising, given the fact that humans have been looking above rather than below our feet for answers since ancient times.
The coming March 19 is a full moon day, in fact, a special one dubbed as "supermoon. On this day, the Moon will be closer to Earth in its last 18 years -- it's full and close. It will approach the Earth at a distance of 221,567 miles -- a lunar perigee.
The gravitational pull of the Moon on Earth is evident from the ocean tides. Basic science tells us that the tides are caused by the difference in the gravitational force of the Moon across the Earth. Stronger tides near the full moon are nothing unusual. When the Sun, Moon and Earth are along a straight line, as in the case of a full moon, the tidal effects will be increased.
Although the Sun has a larger gravitational influence on Earth, the difference in the Sun's gravitational force between one end of the Earth and the other is not as much as that of the Moon's -- the reason tides are caused mainly by Moon's gravity.
The whole idea that the proximity of moon could affect the Earth seems to have some weight. It is true that Moon's gravity can cause land tides similar to ocean tides. But, this stress can accelerate tectonic activity to cause earthquake is beyond any known science now. We need to know the real science rather than mere coincidences or the statistical flukes.
The recent Japanese earthquake and the upcoming full moon have no correlation at all.The Moon will be at its perigee on March 19th and was actually farther than the average distance on the day the Japanese quake hit.
Scientists have studied the Moon for decades and have found no conclusive evidence to connect the Moon with the seismic activities here on Earth. Being in an elliptical orbit, the Moon's distance varies as it orbits the Earth. It will go through perigees and apogees several times a year. On some of these occasions we may face natural disasters but many other days are just fine. If we insist on finding the correlation between earthly events and celestial phenomena, we could find plenty of them, and there are numerous such incidents in the universe to link even with our everyday activities. No wonder that in the past (perhaps even now) people believed moon can affect our individual moods. Remember the phrase lunatic!
If we are determined to search the root cause of earthquakes, it may be a better idea to look for reasons below the Earth's surface as well. There are inconclusive discussions about the correlation between drilling and the possibility of earthquakes. There could also be several other factors which we don't know yet, natural or man-made, which trigger earthquakes. By all accounts, the Moon seems to be a minor player now.
The Moon's gravitational pull on Earth at lunar perigee is not hugely different from other times, which can be calculated from simple mathematical equations. Even if we consider the effect of the Sun along with that of the noon when they align together, it is not significant enough to alter the internal balance of the Earth. We can reasonably assume that the only change on March 19th would be an apparently bigger Moon and it may offer a special treat for skygazers.
The Martian mantle is too rigid and the crust too thick for plate tectonics to occur. Mars appears to be a planet where such activities started but was stifled by the rapidly cooling outer layers long back. However, Earth’s thin crust is composed of separate solid plates which float on top of the hot mantle.
I also understand that there would be gravitation distortions to time and space from many celestial masses, such as the super massive blackhole in the center of the milky way that cycles at 10million years, or all that dark matter and dark energy theyve just discovered. Everything in the universe is in motion too, so those distortions would be in motion.
Is this what is covered in astroseismology? The wiipedia entry only describes the study of the inside of stars.
I would also imagine that extremids might be important too. Whats the relation between tectonic plates and biomass?
Also the magnetosphere, the earths core, cosmic radiation etc.
I'm just a layperson making stuff up, but it seems complex. I wish there was more funding for basic science. Earthquakes suck.
Asteroseismology is the the study of Stellar Oscillations .For more information,
http://astro.phys.au.dk/KASC/seismology/seism.html
Given that scientists have yet to discover a direct one on one correlation between lunar cycles and seismic activity. Could this be a sign of complexity such as a+b+c phenom. Ive heard that supernova(?) gamma ray spikes from across the galaxy can cause the earth magnetosphere to vibrate. Arent electromagnetic forces stronger than gravitational forces at a sub planetary scale?
From a geological perspective global deformation does implicate a celestial mechanical cause, for which Moon capture would fit the bill very well. Seems to me that in explaining major earthquakes of the circum-Pacific we could well be witnessing the residual effects of that event.
To advance this however requires dismantling Plate Tectonics. As a theory, PT appeals to many but as a *geological model* (cognisant of the geological evidence) it fails abysmally.
If readers are interested, I run a website on the alternative view, which admits a contribution of the Moon to this devastation, a topical gateway to which in view of the negation in the article above is:- http://users.indigo.net.au/don/nonsense/fraud.html
The effect of the Moon is interactive with the geological condition of the Earth. It is not a unilateral system.
Always acknowledging of course that "Wrong" is a sword that cuts both ways.
"Even if we consider the effect of the Sun along with that of the Moon when they align together, it is not significant enough to alter the internal balance of the Earth."
It doesn't really make any difference as the quake took place a week before that moment when the moon was not in alignment but was, instead, at right-angles to the sun/earth axis.
That means tidal stresses were at their lowest.
Some people don't seem to realize just how quickly the moon moves. It was nowhere near this magical spot when the quake struck. Thus, even if we were to assume that the moon's tidal stresses could trigger earthquakes, it couldn't have been the moon that did it this time.
suppose a gun shot victim survives for a month before clearly dying from complications of the injury. the doctors do not shrug and exclude the gun shot because it happened a month before.
Look, I fully understand the effect that tidal forces can have on a body. It's why Io is wracked with vulcanism: It's orbit around Jupiter puts such large gravitational stresses upon it that it is constantly being churned up and spewing lava.
But that simply isn't the case here. The tidal stresses upon the earth were minimal at the time both due to the alignment of the moon, earth, and sun as well as the fact that the moon wasn't that close. And you're displaying the exact failure that I mentioned: You don't seem to realize just how quickly the moon moves. If the moon were doing this, if it truly were tidal stresses, then it should have happened either this weekend or two weekends prior when the mechanism for causing such an event was at its strongest.
By your logic, we should consider the gun because it was in the room despite it being disassembled and with no ammunition.