Last surviving human structure?

h8scobes

hi i watched a documentary last nite clld life after humans and am wondering if humans just disapeared 2moro what human structure would last longest and for how long? in the doc it said mount rushmore could last thousands of years(think it was like half a million)

mgmt

Probably some reinforced concrete military installation. Going by what the Romans built, concrete will last for a long long time.

hi5

The Pyramids,how long would it take sand to erode them?

dubhthach

mgmt wrote: »

Probably some reinforced concrete military installation. Going by what the Romans built, concrete will last for a long long time.

One reason why the romans buildings survive is they don't have any reinforced steel (rebar) in them. They are pure concrete. Steel when it eventually rusts expands. This puts pressure on concrete and eventually will lead to failure.

the_syco

I'm thinking castles, that haven't been blown apart yet.

Oink

I read a really good article a while back in New Scientist, the theory was that the last (man-built) thing to crumble into dust would not be on earth. It will be some deep-space probe. I think it was Galileo.
Apparently it will still be there for a loooong time after everything else is gone.

EDIT - I don't know if that would count as a structure but it would still outlast anything else. So there.

dowlingm

Pioneer 10 so probably (the earlier missions were within the solar system so will probably be written off by collisions or solar explosion first) - although I thought metal did lose atoms in a vacuum over time so maybe not.

murrayp4

Oink wrote: »

I read a really good article a while back in New Scientist, the theory was that the last (man-built) thing to crumble into dust would not be on earth. It will be some deep-space probe. I think it was Galileo.
Apparently it will still be there for a loooong time after everything else is gone.

EDIT - I don't know if that would count as a structure but it would still outlast anything else. So there.

Would that not have been the Voyager probe?

Poster King

Places like NORAD would last a pretty long time due to being largely protected from natural weathering processes.

Plowman

This post has been deleted.

onlyrocknroll

I'd say Joan Rivers face, that'll never bio-degrade.

L1011

Plowman wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Looked like a hill before the Victorians got to it and took a wild guess at what it looked like. And that white front wall is stuck to reinforced concrete (!!!!!) so would spall and collapse within a few decades if water got in to it.

The underground NORAD stuff would flood soon enough without human intervention.

murphaph

Plowman wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

No chance, Newgrange was already "lost" once. It was rediscovered and excavated and subsequently seriously renovated. The stones areound the face for example had all fallen down. What you see today is largely a work of the 1960's.

opinion guy

MYOB wrote: »

Looked like a hill before the Victorians got to it and took a wild guess at what it looked like. And that white front wall is stuck to reinforced concrete (!!!!!) so would spall and collapse within a few decades if water got in to it.

The underground NORAD stuff would flood soon enough without human intervention.

The Victorians found Newgrange ? I don't think so.

L1011

opinion guy wrote: »

The Victorians found Newgrange ? I don't think so.

No, but it was them that made an arse out of how it looked by taking a random decision as to what would look pretty.

Newgrange did NOT look like it does now prior to the 1890s, if it ever did.

h8scobes

on the show it said that the biggest pyramids would still be there as well in 500 thousand yrs, but rly eroded

Mrmoe

I would say the Suez canal would last a very long time if that can be classed as a structure.

murphaph

Mrmoe wrote: »

I would say the Suez canal would last a very long time if that can be classed as a structure.

I'd say most canals would be "early victims" to mother nature tbh.

Carawaystick

dubhthach wrote: »

One reason why the romans buildings survive is they don't have any reinforced steel (rebar) in them. They are pure concrete. Steel when it eventually rusts expands. This puts pressure on concrete and eventually will lead to failure.

I thought most old roman structures are stone- and held with mortar made of pozzolanic cement, which is airtight and still not gone off in the centre, so if the outside of the mortar spalls, the next bit inside will cure.