Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2
seeder

The Moon Just Got 100 Million Years Younger

18 posts in this topic

The Moon Just Got 100 Million Years Younger

The moon is quite a bit younger than scientists had previously believed, new research suggests.

The leading theory of how the moon formed holds that it was created when a mysterious planet — one the size of Mars or larger — slammed into Earth about 4.56 billion years ago, just after the solar system came together. But new analyses of lunar rocks suggest that the moon, which likely coalesced from the debris blasted into space by this monster impact, is actually between 4.4 billion and 4.45 billion years old.

http://news.discovery.com/space/moon-100-million-years-younger-130923.htm

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well its all relative. 4.45 vs. 4.56

The important or relevant fact is that apparently the earth did a lot of settling down during that hundred million years, so that the moon didn't get as much heavy metal as it would have earlier. It also apparently meant that the earth had to get a new atmosphere. At least that is what I got from it all.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is what I like about science, scientists never stop doubting and researching.

Regarding the OP, 100 million years in the life time of the solar system is like 100 seconds in the life of a human really, not much difference.

Edited by Aggie
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is what I like about science, scientists never stop doubting and researching.

I couldn't agree more with you.

Regarding the OP, 100 million years in the life time of the solar system is like 100 seconds in the life of a human really, not much difference.

However one thing good scientists don't do is simply make up facts and statistics to back up their argument.

The solar system is generally believed to be around 4.6 billion years old.

100,000,000 is 2.17% of the age of the solar system.

The life expectancy of a male in the United Kingdom (I chose that because I AM a male in the United Kingdom) is 79 years.

2.17% of 79 is 1.71 years.

1.71 years in seconds is over 53,960,000 seconds.

Your "statistic" was out by a factor of over half a million.

And that's why scientists don't invent statistics, because there is always some Smart Alec that will do the calculations.

I am sorry Aggie if that seemed harsh. It was not meant as a personal attack at you. The way science is frequently misrepresented gets my goat. Even good science is often badly reported, leading to people not understanding or not trusting science. Just inventing stuff in the way you did (no matter how well meaning the sentiment was) does more harm than good.

Having said all that, the general point you (and Frank) are making is valid. in the context of four and a half billion years 100,000,000 is not a huge inaccuracy. A better (and more mathematically correct) way of portraying that figure of 2.17% in terms of every day experience would be at estimating someone as being 50 years old and then discovering that they are in fact only 49.

Edited by Waspie_Dwarf
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I'll stick with what I know, eh?...where is the cooking thread?

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I'll stick with what I know, eh?...where is the cooking thread?

We could all see at a glance without getting out the slide rules that you were off by several orders of magnitude. That doesn't matter; you had the right idea and given time you would have refined it.
3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is interesting, but not sure what this would change?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is interesting, but not sure what this would change?

The age of the moon I reckon.

:lol:

.

Edited by seeder
3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this one of the reasons we decided to "bomb" the moon a few years ago?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this one of the reasons we decided to "bomb" the moon a few years ago?

eh? That makes no sense at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this one of the reasons we decided to "bomb" the moon a few years ago?

No.... We (The USA) had to bomb the Moon because of the Nazi bases that had been built there. Haven't you seen Iron Sky?

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1034314/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The leading theory of how the moon formed holds that it was created when a mysterious planet — one the size of Mars or larger — slammed into Earth about 4.56 billion years ago, just after the solar system came together. But new analyses of lunar rocks suggest that the moon, which likely coalesced from the debris blasted into space by this monster impact...

That's from the article.

Now, I'm confused a little. A planet(the size of Mars or larger) slamming into earth, doesn't make much sense to me.

That is, what happened to that "planet" and would it not have changed Earth's orbit, not to mention "cracking" both substanstially?

Maybe it was a relatively "slow" hit. Or, being so long ago and "recombining over time" to once again becoming "spherical", could that "assassin planet" now be what we know as Mars, or Venus? If not, where did it go?

I don't know, it's just confusing to me.

Edited by pallidin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The leading theory of how the moon formed holds that it was created when a mysterious planet — one the size of Mars or larger — slammed into Earth about 4.56 billion years ago, just after the solar system came together. But new analyses of lunar rocks suggest that the moon, which likely coalesced from the debris blasted into space by this monster impact...

That's from the article.

Now, I'm confused a little. A planet(the size of Mars or larger) slamming into earth, doesn't make much sense to me.

That is, what happened to that "planet" and would it not have changed Earth's orbit, not to metion cracking both substanstially?

Maybe it was a relative "slow" hit. Or, being so long ago and "recombining over time" to once again becoming "spherical", could that "assassin planet" now be what we know as Mars, or Venus? If not, where did it go?

I don't know, it's just confusing to me.

When I read that I have to say I was put off by the word "mysterious." At the time all sorts of things were happening of a violent nature, and stray planets were one of them.

To address your questions, the planet was presumably consumed and its mass was incorporated into the Earth and Moon, with no doubt quite a bit being thrown elsewhere.

Such an event would throw most of the outer parts of the Earth plus the mass of the incoming planet, depending on the relative orbits at time of collision, into a low earth orbit where over a few million years or so it would coalesce into the moon and the earth would settle down again and resume differentiating.

For this to happen, as I understand it, the earth and the collider would need to have been formed in almost the same orbit, so that they came together relatively gently (as these things go). Other orbits for the collider would result in complete demolition or the ejection of one or the other or both from the solar system (assuming no actual collision).

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good post, Frank.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I read that I have to say I was put off by the word "mysterious." At the time all sorts of things were happening of a violent nature, and stray planets were one of them.

To address your questions, the planet was presumably consumed and its mass was incorporated into the Earth and Moon, with no doubt quite a bit being thrown elsewhere.

Such an event would throw most of the outer parts of the Earth plus the mass of the incoming planet, depending on the relative orbits at time of collision, into a low earth orbit where over a few million years or so it would coalesce into the moon and the earth would settle down again and resume differentiating.

For this to happen, as I understand it, the earth and the collider would need to have been formed in almost the same orbit, so that they came together relatively gently (as these things go). Other orbits for the collider would result in complete demolition or the ejection of one or the other or both from the solar system (assuming no actual collision).

Would this account for the asteroid belt then? Plus, from previous times, I thought we were told that the moon was way older than the Earth. It's just hard to accept all the coincidences of the Impact theory especially when an eclipse comes and you see just how perfect the size of the moon is for the Earth or just how the moon affects tidal waves...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I hope the Moon doesn't get any younger or we'll be in Velikovski woo woo land

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The leading theory of how the moon formed holds that it was created when a mysterious planet — one the size of Mars or larger — slammed into Earth about 4.56 billion years ago, just after the solar system came together. But new analyses of lunar rocks suggest that the moon, which likely coalesced from the debris blasted into space by this monster impact...

That's from the article.

Now, I'm confused a little. A planet(the size of Mars or larger) slamming into earth, doesn't make much sense to me.

That is, what happened to that "planet" and would it not have changed Earth's orbit, not to mention "cracking" both substanstially?

Maybe it was a relatively "slow" hit. Or, being so long ago and "recombining over time" to once again becoming "spherical", could that "assassin planet" now be what we know as Mars, or Venus? If not, where did it go?

I don't know, it's just confusing to me.

Also another theory that is kind of out there, which is that the moon was deliberately positioned to orbit the Earth to house alien bases for monitoring Earth, and why we have never gone back, we were told not to. It is part of the the "we are just an alien experiment" theory, as was prehistoric earth before us.

Edited by Socio

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also another theory that is kind of out there, which is that the moon was deliberately positioned to orbit the Earth to house alien bases for monitoring Earth, and why we have never gone back, we were told not to. It is part of the the "we are just an alien experiment" theory, as was prehistoric earth before us.

Rubbish theory too. Have you any idea how to move a moon? Its not as small as it looks you know, and its doing exactly what other moons - round other planets - do too! Moons are natural

And which of the 6 times man walked on the moon did he get warned off?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.