Im sorry but i just read the biggest explosions or whatever on the moon..... and they said an object the size of mars hit us? :lol: :lol: :?: but yeah ..im no expert ... but im pretty sure that would straight obliterate us and everything to do with our planet..... (dumbest thing ive ever heard on a common sense level) :ugeek:
- Status
First, Welcome to Space.com.
Second, this doesn't belong in Physics, so I will move it to Ask the Astronomer.
Third, yes, it seems a Mars size object hit the earth during it's formation. The earth likely had a molton surface at the time, if it had started to cool, the impact likely melted the whole planet again. The ejecta from that collision is what formed a short lived ring around the earth, some of which coalesced to form the moon.
It's a well developed theory, which a little research will allow you to learn more about.
Second, this doesn't belong in Physics, so I will move it to Ask the Astronomer.
Third, yes, it seems a Mars size object hit the earth during it's formation. The earth likely had a molton surface at the time, if it had started to cool, the impact likely melted the whole planet again. The ejecta from that collision is what formed a short lived ring around the earth, some of which coalesced to form the moon.
It's a well developed theory, which a little research will allow you to learn more about.
i dont need research for this ... its all common sense... if it hit the earth ... i dont care if its molten lava... its not guna just take somethin that big on.... its guna knock us of our block (orbit) and send this planet somewhere else ... i know its what i think but ... seriously .. thats a dumb hypothesis ( i think so anyways dont take it personal to whoever thought of it)
grass_stain":1frb2ez3 said:
That's what the greeks thought, and they were wrong about a lot of things too!
grass_stain":1frb2ez3 said:
Whatever you do, don't research quantum mechanics...!!! :lol:
I can understand why it might seem like an incredible theory, but there are good reason why scientists beleive it to be true - mostly it very difficult to explain why the Earth & the Moon are essentially made of the same 'stuff'. If they formed in different places you'd expect the chemical composition to vary, which isn't the case.
grass_stain":33ar1b4c said:
"I don't need to research this"? So you are deliberately choosing to remain ignorant about the theory you say isn't realistic, to see why it makes sense? Great attitude
"it's all common sense". To you perhaps, but since you choose not to understand the physics involved, your opinion really doesn't carry much weight.
This is not just someone's personal opinion, it's a theory proposed 40 years ago that has been investigated and analyzed by hundreds of scientists who do bother to take the time to understand the physics. It has been verified by the composition of the earth and the moon, the angular momentum of the earth moon system, and has had detailed models analyze how the impact affected our protoplanet and why it didn't go careening off through the solar system, as well as how the original materials were distributed in the aftermath.
Just because seems dumb to you (who has chosen to not even examine the theory you criticize without even reading, never mind understanding), does not mean it doesn't make sense to the real scientists in the world. :roll: :lol:
Wayne
grass_stain":1ivxvvv1 said:
The reason that didn't happen is that it is thought that the object struck the Earth in a glancing, oblique blow, not head-on. The impact actually speeded up the rotation of the primordial Earth. There is nothing "dumb" about this hypothesis; it is the best explanation yet of how our satellite, the moon, came to be so large in relation to it's primary, something no other world in the solar system can claim. It also explains how, unlike every other object in the solar system that we've ben able to examine, the moon's mineral makeup and density almost exactly matches that of the Earth's mantle, which suggests that it came from the Earth's mantle, instead of some other part of the solar system. There is lots of supporting evidence of this theory, too much to go into here. And no other theory proposed explains the moon's origin as well as this one.
grass_stain":1vvb7vrc said:
Here you go, nice explanation with computer simulation straight from the History Channel so you know it's got to be true! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibV4MdN5 ... re=related
This was aparently a similar event that happened a few thousand years ago around a star about 100 ly away that the Spitzer Space Telescope found evedence of.
http://www.spitzer.caltech.edu/Media/re ... ease.shtml
The theory is also supported by the analysis of lunar material sampled during the Apollo landing missions...
As far as where on Earth the object hit, I've heard the Pacific basin is the most probable impact site.
As far as where on Earth the object hit, I've heard the Pacific basin is the most probable impact site.
Actually, the pacific basin part of the theory was dismissed a few decades ago. In fact, there were most likely no continents back then while the earth was still forming. The earth had only accumulated about 90% of it's mass since it was less than 50 million years after the solar system began to form.
Also, the energy released (even from a glancing blow) would likely have liquified both Earth and the impactor, so it's not really meaningful to talk about where it would've hit. The Pacific didn't exist. The entire *crust* has been remade since then.
Wow, does anyone think that this event would have had any effect on earths biological beginning/ evolution? Did it just put it back by a millenia or two or did it aid the building blocks of life? Apologies if stuipid question, but unlike first post, I recognise my own ignorance in some matters and have an open mind. I'm not a creationist but the narrow band of environmental variables needed to sustain (human?) life on earth does seem statistically improbable, or is that a myth? How would this event add/ detract to the statistical probability of life on earth?
It probably had no major effect. At that time the earth was still growing from impacts at a prodigous rate, so it's extremely unlikely that any life (if it even had begun that early) would have survived the impact rate. Life probably started at least a few hundred million years later just from the background impact rate, never mind the "Big One"
ok so pluto isnt a planet any longer but isnt charon larger in respect to pluto than the moon is in respect to the earth?
Yes it is, in fact the barycenter (the center of mass around which both objects orbit) is between Pluto and Charon, while for the earth moon system the barycenter is below the earth's suface (though not at the center of the earth).
I've always felt that Pluto-Charon should be described as a double dwarf planet.
I've always felt that Pluto-Charon should be described as a double dwarf planet.
But if this event contributed to the creation/ created the moon- gravitational pulls? Tides? Chaos theory, butterfly effect?
so is it possible that the movement of the barycenter as the moon orbits is what actually causes the tides?
Does the Theia collision have anything to do with the "iron catastrophe" and the formation of the Earth's core as it exists today? I know that the iron catastrophe was hypothesized independent of the 'giant impact hypothesis.' However, it seems reasonable that the collision would ensure the conditions of an iron catastrophe (molten Earth at the same time as 95%?98%? of Earth's heavy elements already here) and could help explain why neither Venus nor Mars has quite the same structure. It's just that I don't see the two ideas synergized.
Also, was the Moon formed in an orbit 17,000 miles out causing 1000 ft tides with the Earth having 6 hours days? Do I understand right? The tides would then transfer rotational energy to the Moon's orbital velocity causing the Earth's rotation to slow as the Moon's orbital distance increased? This occurs because the Earth's rotation is completes sooner than the Moon's orbit and the tides caused by the Moon's gravity would keep getting ahead of where the Moon is. And the seemingly minor gravitational effect of the Lunar tidal bulge would pull the Moon along to a higher orbit while slowing the rotational velocity of the Earth? The result so far would be a 24 hour day and a Moon orbiting 385,000 km out.
Also, was the Moon formed in an orbit 17,000 miles out causing 1000 ft tides with the Earth having 6 hours days? Do I understand right? The tides would then transfer rotational energy to the Moon's orbital velocity causing the Earth's rotation to slow as the Moon's orbital distance increased? This occurs because the Earth's rotation is completes sooner than the Moon's orbit and the tides caused by the Moon's gravity would keep getting ahead of where the Moon is. And the seemingly minor gravitational effect of the Lunar tidal bulge would pull the Moon along to a higher orbit while slowing the rotational velocity of the Earth? The result so far would be a 24 hour day and a Moon orbiting 385,000 km out.
knownunknown":22u0x7be said:
Now you're just throwing words out there to see if they stick.
Certainly this event, since it created the moon, did cause the tides (much larger than we currently experience) so it may have contributed to however life began on earth. Or not. Who knows....since we don't know for sure how life began.
hemojr":jvuqhn8d said:
Well, in a sense yes, since apparently, much of the impactor's core would up in earth, so is part of our core. And the earth's core is larger than it otherwise would have been. However, the "iron catastrophe" (I've never understood that name. What was so catastrophic???) occurred about a half a billion years later, so it is only indirectly related, IMHO.
I must be old. I remember stories in grade school postulating a collision with a Mars size object creating our moon, Planet X was the culprit, and the Sumerians wrote about the collision. I remember hearing the collision ocurred in the last 4 million years sometime reducing the human population to 300 or so woldwide. Who knows??
A Mars sized object would not completely destroy the Earth. Not only that but Thia did not hit head on but at an angle. It would take something about the same size of the Earth like Venus head on to completely destroy it.
The tides are the effect of the Moon gravity on the tide.
The tides are the effect of the Moon gravity on the tide.
MeteorWayne":2avuh7iz said:
I did plead ignorance in my first comment. re. chaos theory, I just meant in the sense of small or distant events having significant effects. I dont claim to be an expert in any science but that doesn't dim my wonder of the universe :roll:
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
-
A video made by me about space and the loneliness in the universe- Started by drakotol
- Replies: 54
-
NASA's Voyager 1 spacecraft finally phones home after 5 months of no contact
- Started by Admin
- Replies: 11
-
Russian cosmonauts make quick work of space station spacewalk
- Started by Admin
- Replies: 0
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram