- NEW!
Help answer this question below.
No - the surface temperature on Mercury is 630C so you'd be dead long before cancer could develop.
I'd be dead long before I had the chance to develop any kind of cancer. It's an oxygen thing.
you'd probably burn to death before that even happen.
I believe you would melt...
Mercury has a huge range in temperatures. Its surface ranges in temperature from -270°F to 800°F. I think skin cancer would be the least of your worries.
http://www.enchantedlearning.com/subjects/astronomy/planets/mercury/
I think you'd fry first....
You'd have to give yourself adequate protection from the lack of oxygen, vacuum and the very high/low temperatures that you would experience on its day and night cycle. Even though mercury is the closest planet, Venus is the hottest (this is due to its thick greenhouse effecting clouds that retain heat and keep it averaged out all over).
But you would get a much higher flux of solar radiation as you are much much closer to the sun. Couple this with an almost nonexistant atmosphere and you don't get as much UV protection. As for high energy charged radiation, mercury has a powerful magnetic field for it's size (believe to be generated the same way as ours). It's about 0.1% as strong as the Earths so this wouldn't capture this radiation as well when compared to ours (we have a lower incidence of radiation and a stronger field). It is however strong enough to deflect the solar wind around the planet (like our planet can do, but which the moon can't).
I would say though if you overcame these things (lived in a space base and worse a spacesuit), if you hadn't adequate radiation protection on you, you would be at higher risk of contracting skin cancer.
The one thing that makes mercury attractive is it has a density close to our planet and it's believed to have a high metal content. This of course makes an attractive mining option when coupled with the fact that solar arrays would generate alot more power for their size at this distance to the sun.
You'd get skin-burned-off-from-the-bone LONG before you formed skin cancer ; )
If you were magically transported to Mercury right now, without any protection, you'd either be incinerated by the heat on the side facing the sun, or instantly and utterly frozen on the side facing away from the sun (without an atmosphere, there's nothing to lock heat on the planet, so it only has what it gets from the sun at any time and place.
People always forget you could easily freeze to death on Mercury because of that dark side...
No, you would be wearing your SpaceMan outfit with the special 'Protechto Shielding'.
how stupid are you , dumb ass !
you couldnt even land on the dam planet !
How much does the Messenger spacecraft weigh?
by Chris on November 10th, 2008
| 2 people like this
The Atoms of Elemental Mercury Are Not the Molecules of Organic Mercury (See Below)?
by mdGreg on January 4th, 2011
| 1 person likes this
Is mercury the closest planet to the sun because it is a planetary brown noser?
by Nelson - Jetpacking from bed on April 26th, 2008
| 6 people like this
What is mercurys orbital period (in earth years)
by Anonymous on May 13th, 2008
| 2 people like this
What is causing the huge scarps that are running across mercury's srface
by lazybones on November 11th, 2008
| 2 people like this
You're reading If you lived on Mercury would you get skin cancer?
Comments
Surface temp on mercury is no where near as high as 630c, maybe 630F but not C! Venus, the hottest planet in the solar system has a temp of 450C.
by slothmister on August 19th, 2007
Mercury is closer to the sun than Venus, it also has a wildly fluctuation temparature because it is very small.
by Hairwatcher on August 19th, 2007
Yes, but Venus has a thick atmoshpere and is by far the hottest planet in the solar system, Mercury's temperatures flucturate between about +400 in the sun light to about -200 in the darkness.
Go and check ANY reputable website or book and you will see I am right.
by slothmister on August 19th, 2007
Thanks - yes you are right. I eroneously quoted 630 as the temperature when it is actually the temperature fluctuation band (roughly) between the temperatures that you quote. Of course, to cut to the chase, I think we'll all die at 400C as effectively as we will at 630C so it doesn't really change my reasoning on the initial point of the argument.
by Hairwatcher on August 19th, 2007
True, we would not be able to survive in that kind of temperature, our body would just melt away! As would just about anything else man can make atm.
by slothmister on August 19th, 2007