Yep.
Get it while you can.
Posted on 10/26/2023 5:32:29 PM PDT by Lonesome in Massachussets
Scientists believe Kamo’oalewa will remain alongside Earth for millions of years. Could a near-Earth asteroid be a piece of the moon? Astronomers from the University of Arizona believe so. In a captivating cosmic discovery, scientists uncovered evidence suggesting that a near-Earth asteroid called Kamo’oalewa might be a fragment of the moon.
The finding challenges previous assumptions about the origins of near-Earth asteroids and could have significant implications for our understanding of celestial bodies close to our planet.
(Excerpt) Read more at spacechatter.com ...
might be a fragment of the moon
I think it’s a fragment of the moon’s imagination.
Do yourself a favor and read the article. They have another video, which fascinating. (To me, anyway).
They didn’t mention how large it is, nor why it isn’t likely to impact the Earth despite many close interactions.
(actually a chunk of the Moon)
So ...... it’s cheese 🧀🧀🧀🧀?
Horseshoe orbits are pretty well understood. When I first saw the orbit, I though it looked something like a horseshoe orbit, and in fact, it was in a horseshoe orbit until around 1920, and in a couple of hundred years it will drop back into one.
Check out the wikipedia article on horseshoe orbits.
Woohoo!!!!
Pretty cool. Has anyone mapped the back side of the moon? Are there a bunch of impact craters there also?
Scientists believe, believe so, evidence suggesting, might be, could be lunar in origin, a more likely source . In other words, the title—“ This Near-Earth Asteroid Is Actually A Chunk Of The Moon,” is nonsense. They don’t now anything except a new grant proposal.
The moon is Swiss cheese, not cheddar. The cheese they brought back from the moon was altered by Stanley Kubrick to look like cheddar, and Buzz Aldrin never ate it like the official story goes. So he doesn’t know what it tastes like.
yes and yes.
Obverse and Reverse. There are far more impact craters on the back because the earth shields the near side. All the major craters on the far side have names.
There are craters but no “maria” (plural of “mare”) on the far side of the moon. The reason is that the crust is thinner on the earth-side than the far side, for whatever reason.
Not exactly nonsense, but it does state a conjecture as a fact. It is, however, a pretty solid conjecture. It is difficult for anything not gravitationally bound to the earth (like the moon and the ISS) to remain in an orbit around the sun and near the earth for very long. The orbital energy and deployment geometry have to be just right. One place where those conditions apply is near the moon, and after a meteor strike. Most of the debris from a meteor strike on the moon falls back on the moon. Some strikes earth as meteors. Some goes into orbit around the sun. And some of the debris (just the luck of the draw) winds up in funny orbits that interact with earth.
When the moon was tidally despun it landed heavy side down, i.e., facing earth. The crust is lighter than the core.
“Conjecture as a fact.” That’s a new one. Stay lonesome as you have a lot to learn. Try semantics first.
That’s the best explanation I’ve heard. Thank you.
I don’t get your point. The headlines does, in fact, state a conjecture as a fact. That’s to make the story more interesting and attract clicks. When I read the headline, I assumed (incorrectly) that the attribution was due to spectral analysis, measurements of the spectrum of reflected light, or something similarly exotic. But it was based on dynamical evidence. Objects in such an orbit are short lived in astronomical timeframes, so it must only be a few million years old. There is hardly anyplace other than the moon that it could have come from.
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.