The Moon older than Earth?

[Asterix]

You havent heard that the Moon also serves as a kind of sheild for the Earth? It pulls away some asteroids from impacting Earth.

Not entirely accurate. The moon's size is relatively small, it can't affect asteroids' movement, not early enough anyway. The guardian of this kind earth has is Jupiter.

[Stellar]

Yes but I've heard that quite a bit of asteroids have hit the moon instead of hitting the Earth.

[nigelvrm]

But the earths gravity pulls some objests into itself that would normaly be a near miss. This may cancel out the moon's obsorbtion.

Edited September 5, 2004 by nigelvrm

[mypaddedroom]

Well we do not know the actuall age of earth moon or sun we don't have the exact answers, so I have no help on this topic. Neither does anyone else.

[nigelvrm]

Well we do not know the actuall age of earth moon or sun we don't have the exact answers, so I have no help on this topic. Neither does anyone else.

255854[/snapback]

I WILL be a help once I have drilled into the moons core and do carbon dating and layer analasis.

Auctually it may be easyer to look at a crater like Crater Aristarchus, it's reletivly new so it's not altered by subsequent impacts and deep enough to get below the "impact layer". Even though it IS an impact .

[sourpatchkid]

Sourpatchkid, what evidence is there to support the fact that the moon was not at some point part of the earth? Could you source that information?

about the source of that information, eh maybe you could find it on the NASA website. it was something i viewed on tv on a show called "The Creation Of The Universe" it was a PBS production. anywho, what i can tell you is this: pre- 1969 it was a plausable theory that the moon may have at one time been a part of the earth, that was blown off in a massive collision. after the moon landing they were unable to make any connection between the type of rock that the moon is composed of and an area of the earth that it would have detached from. it may still be an acceptable theory however that the moon WAS the object that hit the earth.

if the moon broke off wouldnt the earth be like this? or at least lopsided?

yes, but not forever, especially (and this is how the theory used to go) if it happened very early in the formation of the earth, it would have time to reshape

[Uncle Meat]

is the meteor that broke off the moon from earth in any way related to the dinosaur-extinction meteor?

[beowulf]

No, it happened several billion years before there was any life on the earth!

[Athlon64]

The Moon was formed when a Mars sized planet smashed into Earth over 4 billion years ago. Most of the impacting planet's iron core was incorporated into that of the Earth (which is why Earth has such a high density), and a large amount of Earth's rocky mantle was blasted into orbit as billions of fragments. Over time, gravity pulled them together into a single object....the Moon.

This is why the density of the Moon is much less than that of Earth (3.42 compared to 5.52 times that of water). The Moon's composition is essentially rocky material (which is less dense than iron), whereas Earth has a very large iron core.

Oh, and in response to the comment that Earth is mostly water.......it isn't. It is mostly iron and rock. Only the visible surface is mostly water, and this is a very tiny fraction of the entire planet.

Edited September 8, 2004 by Athlon64

[Burgundy Johnson]

No, it happened several billion years before there was any life on the earth! 

several? i hope you mean like, less than 4.

[Inspekta_X]

Ive read of this moon/sattelite theory in a few books basically from what ive read numerous contactee's were told that our moon and the moon phobos (which orbits mars) was moved from somewhere else in the univere and was positioned in our solar system, apprently higher evolved civilizations have the capacity to move planets and moons with the same forces and theory that propels their flying saucers/ships, anyways take is just what i have read about that theory, it is put forward that the moon harbours a outpost of aliens that use it for a base station for operations on earth, and that it is under the surface of the moon and also that their are great buildings and structures on the dark side of the moon which no body on earth is privied to see. However there is no proof to show that their are bases on the moon or beneth it but what i do find strange is that after america apprently landed on the moon why have we not returned? With our current evolution of technology and its current state it why dont we have a base on the moon? We have an international space station that is way behind our level of technology, we could easily establish a small outpost to study the earth and the universe further. what is it that they dont want us to see?

[saucy]

Actually, the moon has three major elements in it's make-up that can't be found on earth so it's not possible that the moon came from the earth. It' just like saying the earth and other planets came from the sun. Yeah right. Then how come the first four planets have very little of what the sun if made up of?

[BurnSide]

What?

There are no elements on the moon that can't be found on the earth.

It isn't a planet, it's a moon. ALL moons break off from their planets during the evolution of the solar system.

Oh yeah, that goes against what the bible says right. Whoops!!

[Universal Absurdity]

The asteroid theory, does not hold much water,

First, the moon is a quarter the size of the earth, an object striking earth with enough force to remove such a large amount of material would have to be going very fast, which would not allow the moon to have formed, instead the debris would have been flung from earth too fast to be caught in earth's gravity.

Second, the moon is riddled with very large impact craters, many of which defy explanation, they are not deep enough for the size of the impact for science to explain how they occured. Not to mention that earth (4 times the size of the moon) has a signifigantly smaller amount of impact craters ( i know erosion plays a part, but anything that could resemble a crater is usually studied to find out if it is- still there are less here than on the moon)

Third, theories that show how the moon formed have to be adjusted to very unlikely situations to get the desired result. Here is a prime example of the debate over the conditions needed for the impact theory.

Really, we have no idea how the moon got here, Our reluctance to set up a base on it, to me, shows that there may be more known about the moon that the public is not aware of. I'm not one to jump to conclusions, but i'm open to possibilites.

[Celumnaz]

My first opinion on how the moon got there was that it came from a planet in our solar system that, errrr... blew up I guess.

My second opinion is that it came from another place, possibly another solar system. Wether it travelled by itself, or got placed there I dunno.

[Burgundy Johnson]

Ive read of this moon/sattelite theory in a few books basically from what ive read numerous contactee's were told that our moon and the moon phobos (which orbits mars) was moved from somewhere else in the univere and was positioned in our solar system, apprently higher evolved civilizations have the capacity to move planets and moons with the same forces and theory that propels their flying saucers/ships, anyways take is just what i have read about that theory, it is put forward that the moon harbours a outpost of aliens that use it for a base station for operations on earth, and that it is under the surface of the moon and also that their are great buildings and structures on the dark side of the moon which no body on earth is privied to see. However there is no proof to show that their are bases on the moon or beneth it but what i do find strange is that after america apprently landed on the moon why have we not returned? With our current evolution of technology and its current state it why dont we have a base on the moon? We have an international space station that is way behind our level of technology, we could easily establish a small outpost to study the earth and the universe further. what is it that they dont want us to see?

thats the theory i read. he explained it better than i did.

[saucy]

One early theory of the Moon's origin is the capture theory. In this model, the Moon formed in the outer reaches of the solar system and gradually worked closer to the sun until being captured by the Earth's gravitational pull. This theory is consistent with how other planets, such as Jupiter, may have captured moons, but fails to adequately explain a number of important issues, such as angular momentum and the oxygen isotope similarities. If the Moon formed very much further away from the sun than the Earth, the oxygen isotopes found on the Moon should be very different than those found on the Earth.

There is another significant problem with the capture theory. The Moon is receding from the Earth at the rate of about 4 centimeters per year. George Darwin, son of Charles Darwin, determined that reversing the rate of the Moon's recession actually indicates that, at one time, the Moon and the Earth must have been in physical contact. The capture theory, obviously, is very difficult to reconcile with an Earth and Moon originally in the same approximate space in the solar system.

[Burgundy Johnson]

interesting.

[Athlon64]

What?

There are no elements on the moon that can't be found on the earth.

It isn't a planet, it's a moon. ALL moons break off from their planets during the evolution of the solar system.

Oh yeah, that goes against what the bible says right. Whoops!!

Whoa, let's correct a few things here.

You are correct that the Moon does not contain any elements that can't also be found on Earth. Quite where he got that idea from is anyone's guess. However, your statement that "all moons break off from their planets" is incorrect.

As far as I am aware, Earth's Moon is the only satellite in the Solar System that was formed from material from its parent planet. All of the other known moons formed either from the appreciable accretion discs that surrounded the planets during their formation (due to the gravity of the planets themselves pulling in material from the solar nebula), or else they were gravitationally captured as they passed too close to the planet.

Now, the latter is extremely difficult to achieve......unless the incoming object is subjected to some kind of braking force near the planet (over and above the force of gravity). That is most easily explained by those accretion discs that I mentioned above. The large quantities of gas and dust surrounding the large planets would have exerted significant amounts of drag on any object that approached too closely. The object would then lose kinetic energy, and if a sufficently large amount of energy were lost (possibly after several close approaches), then the planet could capture that object, and it would become a satellite.

[wcturnersr]

One thing I do not understand about the moon is why doesn't it rotate? From what I know all other moons have rotation.

[Celumnaz]

I thought it did have rotation, it's just a perfect rotation where one side is facing the earth all the time.

I'm no good with statistics, but I guess it's common for all planets 3rd from a sun with abundant water and life to have a moon that rotates with one side facing the planet at all times.

[Athlon64]

The Moon rotates in the same amount of time that it takes to orbit Earth. Therefore, it only appears to have no rotation. This is the result of tidal forces.

Interestingly, the same is true of Pluto's satellite Charon. However, the difference here is that Pluto has also been locked into this synchronous rotation by it's own moon, which means that Charon appears to stand still in Pluto's sky, and Pluto does the same in Charon's sky. They would never rise or set

Edited September 13, 2004 by Athlon64

[jahbuddha]

We don't know the age of the earth or the moon. That's baloney.

We do know that the earth is at least 2.5 (or 3.5 billion, can never remember) years old, which is when the moon split from the earth after huge asteroid crashed into earth.

-----

Actually, the moon has three major elements in it's make-up that can't be found on earth so it's not possible that the moon came from the earth.  It' just like saying the earth and other planets came from the sun.  Yeah right.  Then how come the first four planets have very little of what the sun if made up of?

Because the heavier elements sink to the bottom. In a proto solar sytem the rotating nature of the pre-stellar disk of debris would have sorted out the elements where the heavier ones are not spun out as far as the lighter elements. Same with the earth-moon , after the asteroid impact obliterating EarthI, the material remaining coallesced in a way that the lightest material was furthest from the centre of rotation and the heaviest closer to the centre, eventually forming the earth (heavier elements) and the moon (lighter elements, even some that might not be found on earth)

-----

if the moon broke off wouldnt the earth be like this? or at least lopsided?

The impact of the asteroid would have created tremendous heat which in turn would have virtually melted the earth so after time when gravity pulled all the pieces together two spherical objects were formed. the evidence of this is that the moon is made of less dense material than the earth, what you'd expect from a centrifugal process

Edit- Please use the edit button as opposed to multiple posting within a short period of time

-UA

Edited October 2, 2004 by UniversalAbsurdity

[Method]

I believe from the research I have done that the moon is a piece of the earth. When the earth was still young a giant asteroid was attracted to the earth by there contracting magnetic forces, which brought them head on. A piece of the earth formed the one, of course this is just a theory but check into it. The earth is estimated to be about 4.1 billon years old.

[Athlon64]

The Moon wasn't formed when an asteroid hit Earth. It was formed when a planet hit Earth (estimated to have been the size of Mars).

Magnetic forces had nothing to do with the event. The Mars sized planet just happened to have an orbit that intersected the orbit of Earth, and eventually the two objects collided.......catastrophically.