Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: SunkenCiv

I tend to reject the notion that Venus had anything other than a perfectly boring origin. It has so nearly perfectly circular an orbit that it simply must have accreted in position.

Earth’s early rotational speed, (after the moon-forming collision), was nearly Jovian in speed. It transferred a lot of momentum to the moon, pushing it higher in its orbit. (That particular form of anti-gravity is intriguing, but it seems to only work for large bodies.)

I think this accretion disk hypothesis for the inner planets is promising. The outer planets, like the original Olympian gods, seem to have done things that should not be discussed around women and children.


18 posted on 01/19/2009 6:05:30 PM PST by NicknamedBob (If you translate Pi into base 43 notation, it will contain this statement.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies ]


To: NicknamedBob

Circularization of Venus’ orbit may be at least in part a consequence of having no satellite, and in any case doesn’t relate to its origin. Mercury OTOH has no satellite, and has the highest eccentricity of the major planets.

-re lunar origin-

When the Days Were Shorter
Alaska Science Forum (Article #742) | November 11, 1985 | Larry Gedney
Posted on 10/04/2004 10:31:59 AM PDT by SunkenCiv
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/1234919/posts


20 posted on 01/20/2009 5:25:43 PM PST by SunkenCiv (https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/____________________ Profile updated Monday, January 12, 2009)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson