lunar core mantle
Posted on 12/27/2004 2:29:35 PM PST by SunkenCiv
New calculations that indicate how the Moon's surface and interior react to the gravitational pull of the Earth and the Sun have produced further evidence that molten "slush" exists beneath the lunar surface... The first evidence of a soft region near the Moon's core was found using seismological equipment placed at different places on the surface during the Apollo missions. These found that moonquakes lost their energy when they traveled further than 1,000 kilometers below the Moon's surface. Since 1977, when these measurements ended, there has been no further evidence.
(Excerpt) Read more at newscientist.com ...
Muttly's planetisimals were almost fried once....and he is pretty sure his refractory elements had isotope ratios in them too, but after 500,000,000 years of tectonic massaging, he got better.
Hey, am I going to get in trouble for posting this ?
does *this* answer your question?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1309803/posts?page=16#16
related topics:
In the shadow of the Moon
New Scientist ^ | 30 January 1999 | editors
Posted on 08/31/2004 8:42:25 AM PDT by SunkenCiv
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/1203912/posts
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
HaHa; Well, after 500,000,000 years worth of massaging of your "planetisimals" and "isotopes" you would either be in eternal bliss, or completely massaged away... Anyway, I don't think you would really get what is a serious astronomical theory of earth-moon formation, science is obviously not your basic language, it would be "above" you...
hey, consider yourself pinged. :')
Thanks!
But when you post old articles one wonders what is the latest update on it.
I thought it was more like a malted milk ball, but apparently it's a milk dud!
I didn't find anything new (so far):
Lunar Love Numbers And The Deep Lunar Interior
J. G. Williams, D. H. Boggs, J. T. Ratcliff and J. O. Dickey
http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meetings/lpsc2002/pdf/2033.pdf
To bring the model values of the Love number k 2 up to the two observationally determined values of about 0.026 it is necessary to either decrease the middle mantle speeds from those models and Nakamura's analysis, or to make the attenuation zone a low velocity layer, or to increase core radius above presently accepted sizes. The uncertainty of the observationally determined values is still about 10% which is uncomfortably large compared to the differences from models, but there are two independent and concordant determinations and all model values are less. There is need for improved uncertainty in the determinations and the lunar interior models may need to become more complex.
Influence Of A Fluid Lunar Core On The Moon’s Orientation
J. G. Williams, D. H. Boggs, J. T. Ratcliff, C. F. Yoder and J. O. Dickey
http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meetings/lpsc2001/pdf/2028.pdf
A molten lunar core will affect the Moon's rotation through two torques. A fluid core, rotating independently from the solid mantle, has a velocity difference at the core-mantle interface. The velocity difference causes a force, dissipates energy, and leads to a net torque over the whole surface. If the core-mantle boundary is oblate, there will be a second force due to flow along a nonspherical boundary. This torque depends on the orientation of the core spin vector with respect to the mantle pole. The two torques have different directions and their influences on the rotation are distinguishable in principle.
lunar core mantle
Earth's magnetic poles on verge of flipping
World Net Daily | December 12, 2003
Posted on 12/13/2003 8:38:30 PM PST by gitmo
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1039977/posts
In the shadow of the Moon
New Scientist | 30 January 1999 | editors
Posted on 08/31/2004 8:42:25 AM PDT by SunkenCiv
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/1203912/posts
Jupiter's Spots Disappear Amid Major Climate Change
Space.com | 21 April 2004 | Robert Roy Britt
Posted on 04/21/2004 2:04:19 PM PDT by Yo-Y
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1121982/posts
Massive Object Calls Planet Discoveries into Question
Space dot com (via Yahoo) | Thu, Jan 20, 2005 | Robert Roy Britt
Posted on 01/21/2005 9:19:56 AM PST by SunkenCiv
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/1325494/posts
New evidence for the Moon's soft middle
New Scientist | 14 February 2002 | Will Knight
Posted on 12/27/2004 2:29:35 PM PST by SunkenCiv
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/1309193/posts
Scientific maverick's theory on Earth's core up for a test
SF Chronicle | Monday, November 29, 2004 | Keay Davidson
Posted on 12/05/2004 11:17:28 AM PST by SunkenCiv
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/1294934/posts
Scientists Find That Saturn's Rotation Period Is A Puzzle
University of Iowa | June 28, 2004 | Gary Galluzzo and Don Gurnett
Posted on 01/13/2005 6:00:04 PM PST by SunkenCiv
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/1320410/posts
Sun's rays to roast Earth as poles flip
The Observer (U.K.) | 11/10/2002 | Robin McKie
Posted on 11/09/2002 5:59:37 PM PST by Pokey78
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/786012/posts
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
Will Spacecraft ever Go Faster than the speed of Light?
Various - See Text | 16 FEB 2003 | Various
Posted on 02/16/2003 2:16:44 PM PST by vannrox
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/844807/posts
Measurements of theOur reanalysis has not changed the G-factor but it has apparently changed the accuracy of its determinations. We would not expect a G-factor of zero if the moon had no core because of the paramagnetism of the crust. In fact, reasonable coreless moon G-factors range up to 0.012 (Goldstein et al., 1976a,b). This positive value is significantly different from our negative moment. Thus, our measurements provide evidence that the moon has a significant induced magnetic dipole moment. This moment is most likely due to currents deep in the interior of the moon in a highly conducting mantle or on the surface of a lunar core. The size required for any such core depends on the permeability of the lunar crust which in turn depends on the iron content. The minimum core radius of 435 + 15 km would occur for a moon with no crustal free iron. If there is free iron in the lunar crust then radius of any core could be still larger... The seismic data of Latham et al. (1978) also are consistent with somewhat smaller (molten) core ( 360 km) but do not prove it. In short, all three deep lunar sounding techniques are consistent with some sort of small lunar core, but none can be interpreted as unambiguous proof of its existence. Magnetic sounding suggests a "core" of enhanced conductivity; gravity data are consistent with a core of enhanced density, and the seismic data are consistent with a molten core.
lunar induced magnetic moment
in the geomagnetic tail:
Evidence for a lunar core?
C. T. Russell,
P. J. Coleman Jr.,
and B. E. Goldstein
Space Research XVI
pp. 933-939
1976
 |
||
| · join · view topics · view or post blog · bookmark · post new topic · subscribe · | ||
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.
