Question Earth Moon Origin

[Harry Costas]

I have posted this before.


[Submitted on 15 Aug 2024]

Lunar Swirls Unveil the Origin of the Moon Magnetic Field​

Boxin Zuo, Xiangyun Hu, Lizhe Wang, Yi Cai, Mason Andrew Kass

The origins of the lunar magnetic anomalies and swirls have long puzzled this http URL prevailing theory posits that an ancient lunar dynamo core field magnetized extralunar meteoritic materials, leading to the current remnant magnetic anomalies that shield against solar wind ions, thereby contributing to the formation of lunar swirls. Our research reveals that these lunar swirls are the result of ancient electrical currents that traversed the Moon's surface, generating powerful magnetizing fields impacting both native lunar rocks and extralunar projectile materials. We have reconstructed 3-D distribution maps of these ancient subsurface currents and developed coupling models of magnetic and electric fields that take into account the subsurface density in the prominent lunar maria and basins. Our simulations suggest these ancient currents could have reached density up to 13 A/m2, with surface magnetizing field as strong as 469 {\mu}T. We propose that these intense electrical current discharges in the crust originate from ancient interior dynamo activity.

 

[Harry Costas]

Merry Xmas
To one and all

 

[Harry Costas]

Many scientists support the Collision theory.
Some support the same Origin.

The evidence is not decisive .

The Moon has been dated the same as the Earth.

Whether they collided or not, does not matter. Their Origin is the same.

 

[Catastrophe]

I believe the most widely accepted theory for the origin of the Moon is still that it formed from the debris of a collision between Earth and a Mars-sized planetoid called Theia.

 

[Harry Costas]

A theory based on the MOB.
Evidence is evidence.
Without concrete evidence it is meaningless.

Maybe I'm wrong

 

[Jim Franklin]

To add to the mix. A recent paper publish in Nature, “Tidally driven remelting around 4.35 billion years ago indicates the Moon is old” by Francis Nimmo, Thorsten Kleine and Alessandro Morbidelli, 18 December 2024 now gives far more certianty to the idea the Moon was not formed from a giant impact as has been the prevailing theory for at least 4 decades.

There were many aspects of the Moon that did not fit with the theory, which resulted in some wild speculation that modelling has now proved to be incorrect, leaving us with the basic Giant Impact Hyposthesis as invisaged by Reginald Daly in 1946 and then resurected in the 1970 by Hartmann and Davis following the Apollo landings. They originally thought a giant asteroid could explain it, but this was later modified to a Mars sized body that was soon named Theia.

However, that theory still left many gaping holes in the observations from lunar missions, both manned and unmanned, and observations from Earth - including modelling that struggled to explain all the Moons eccentricities.

The latest research inplies that the Moon is at least as old as Earth, and that our current age estimates for it are at least 200 million years too young

SciTechDaily have a good write up on this story HERE

 

[whoknows]

"Pluto won Charon over with a 10 hour kiss"​

"We were definitely surprised by the 'kiss' part of kiss-and-capture. There hasn't really been a kind of impact before where the two bodies only temporarily merge before re-separating!"

(https://www.space.com/pluto-charon-kiss-capture)

---------

If this can be envisaged wrt Pluto and Charon, why not wrt our Earth and Moon?

 

[Jim Franklin]

"Pluto won Charon over with a 10 hour kiss"​

"We were definitely surprised by the 'kiss' part of kiss-and-capture. There hasn't really been a kind of impact before where the two bodies only temporarily merge before re-separating!"

(https://www.space.com/pluto-charon-kiss-capture)

---------

If this can be envisaged wrt Pluto and Charon, why not wrt our Earth and Moon?

I can see several major flaws in this hypothesis, namely, Nyx, Styx, Kerberos and Hydra. Had Pluto and Charon been seperate bodies at their formation that later cojoined after a near collision, gravitational forces would have ejected these fragmentary Moons from the system, and we would be left with Pluto and Charon alone in space.

Given the slow orbital velocities in this region of space, two large bodies coming together from the void is rare over the course of the life of the solar system, even in the early days. We know it can happen, it is the only way Triton could have ended up in its current orbit of Neptune, but for Pluto to then capture another 4 objects that are in dynamically stable orbits just seems far fetched as they have clearly beein in these stable orbits for a very long time.

What the story of the Earth/Moon and the Pluto/Charon system tell us is that there is a lot we can speculate on, but for every one thing we speculate about, there are 10 things we need to consider as a minimum, and 9 of these will likely shoot our theory down in flames. We need to find more examples of parent bodies have a companion that is a significant fraction of the physical size and mass of the dominatant body.

Charon is about 12.5% the mass of Pluto, (Pluto is only 8 times the mass of Charon) a significantly larger proportion than our Moon which is only around 1.23% the mass of Earth (Earth is 81.3 times the mass of the Moon). How such systems form is a mystery, there are a number of Moons in the solar system significantly larger than the Moon, but as a proportion of their parent planet, they are but dots in the night sky.