Posted on 01/09/2017 9:59:14 AM PST by Red Badger
Currently, the leading theory of the creation of the Moon is that it formed from a giant impact between a very early Earth and another Mars-sized planet.
Yet new research from the Weizmann Institute of Science in Israel has put forward a theory that the Moon may have actually formed from a series of large impacts, rather than just one.
The study, published in the journal Nature Geoscience, explains why the Moon appears to be made mostly from Earth-like materials, rather than a mixture of our elements and those of another mystery planet.
Lead author Dr Raluca Rufu and her colleagues conducted some mathematical simulations of what it would look like if large planetary bodies collided with our Earth way back when it was newly formed around 4.5 billion years ago. In these tests, the impacts produced disks that shot off from Earth and the other body, but were mostly made up from Earth materials.
According to their results, it would take about 20 of these collisions to assemble the moon. Rufu told Business Insider that it is much more likely that the Moon formed from many smaller collisions, because it is a more organic process.
“The multiple impact scenario is a more ‘natural’ way of explaining the formation of the Moon,” Rufu said. “In the early stages of the Solar System, impacts were very abundant, therefore it is more natural that several common impactors formed the Moon, rather than one special one.”
Also, Rufu said that the current theory doesn’t really explain why the Moon is so similar to rocks on Earth.
“If multiple of bodies contribute to the final Moon, their chemical signatures can even out, therefore the traces of the various impacts will be masked,” she said. “Also, higher velocity impactors can excavate more Earth material, hence the moonlets will resemble the Earth’s composition.”
The team suggest in their paper that moon-forming impacts between the early Earth — known as the proto-Earth — and other large bodies floating around were very common during the early days of the Solar System. Therefore, this series of events can probably be applied to other planets and moons.
“We see evidence of past impacts on all the terrestrial planets,” said Rufu. “This paper shows that moonlets can be commonly formed, therefore the lack of moons around Venus is an interesting follow up question of how planets can sometimes lose their moons.”
Proof of this new theory may lie in the heart of the Moon itself. If multiple impacts are the key, this implies that the Moon formed over many millions of years, rather than in a single massive crash. This would mean that the Earth and Moon’s interiors could be less mixed up, and may have preserved a record of the events.
Isaac Asimov, American author and professor of biochemistry at Boston University and Science Fiction writer. Asimov was one of the most prolific writers of all time.
“We cannot help but come to the conclusion that the Moon by rights ought not to be there. The fact that it is, is one of the strokes of luck almost too good to accept… Small planets, such as Earth, with weak gravitational fields, might well lack satellites… … In general then, when a planet does have satellites, those satellites are much smaller than the planet itself. Therefore, even if the Earth has a satellite, there would be every reason to suspect… that at best it would be a tiny world, perhaps 30 miles in diameter. But that is not so. Earth not only has a satellite, but it is a giant satellite, 2160 miles in diameter. How is it then, that tiny Earth has one? Amazing.”
“The Moon, which has no atmosphere and no magnetic field, is basically a freak of nature”
The moon is a damned enigma
https://redice.tv/news/the-moon-an-unexplained-phenomenon
My favorite quote:
“It seems much easier to explain the nonexistence of the moon than its existence.”
Yet it is absolutely necessary to be there for there to be life on earth. Almost as if it were planned and designed that way. Hummmmmmmm.....
Nailed It !
“We see evidence of past impacts on all the terrestrial planets,” said Rufu. “This paper shows that moonlets can be commonly formed, therefore the lack of moons around Venus is an interesting follow up question of how planets can sometimes lose their moons.”
...
According to what I can understand about this new theory, Venus should have a moon, too.
The moon also has some weird anomalies in it’s composition, some of the atomic isotopes on it point to artificiality...
Also mars has some weird isotopes that suggest the usage of widespread nuclear weapons usage at some point in it’s history...
could the “war in the heavens” mentioned in the Bible in the “times of antiquity” be a clue to this? Some have thought so...
It actually does have a very thin atmosphere, probably comparable to the International Space Station on the outer edges of the earth’s
Was thinking same thing.
And it’s a beautiful thing in our night skies.
[ “We see evidence of past impacts on all the terrestrial planets,” said Rufu. “This paper shows that moonlets can be commonly formed, therefore the lack of moons around Venus is an interesting follow up question of how planets can sometimes lose their moons.”
...
According to what I can understand about this new theory, Venus should have a moon, too. ]
The earth - moon system is far closer to resembling the pluto-charon system than any other planetary/moon pair in the solar system...
Mercury may have been its moon?............
But if it was artificial why would you need something this BIG as a base unless it was a some type of "Noah's Ark"?
It was created by the Great Green Cheese maker.
We have a local bar called the Mercury Moon... Who knew they were so prescient.
If you're gonna generate enough power to blow a planet apart, you're gonna need a whole lotta capacitors!.....................
Or the other theory: IF the moon wasn’t there, we wouldn’t be here to discuss it. And an infinite number of dead planets existed in the Universe for an infinite time that failed to yield life because they were not perfect. This may not be the only or even the first Universe. We MAY be in a random place on an infinite timelime of infinite Universes
There’s no way to prove either theory with how little we still know. The answer may be something entirely new that is still completely unimaginable to us.
Even the concept of “infinity” is not truly imaginable to humans. We have no experience with it in the material world and even all the computers on earth combined cannot truly model it.
You can say “I dont believe in infinity since I havent seen it”. And people will say the same about God. Both theories are still a matter of FAITH and pointless to argue over. We must keep our eyes OPEN and keep asking questions
We need to take the spacecraft Bob Lazaar worked on at Area 51 and ly them to Mars and check it out up close.
And its apparent size in the sky is nearly identical to that of the Sun. That’s why total solar eclipses happen, but happen rarely. What’s up with that?
Maybe Venus' proto-moon is what escaped and hit the Earth, leading to our moon?
-PJ
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
