Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #549548
| Path | csiph.com!goblin3!goblin.stu.neva.ru!news.netfront.net!not-for-mail |
|---|---|
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
| Newsgroups | sci.astro, sci.physics |
| Subject | Re: Moon was produced by head-on collision? |
| Date | Sun, 31 Jan 2016 09:44:27 -0800 |
| Organization | Netfront http://www.netfront.net/ |
| Lines | 27 |
| Message-ID | <56AE47FB.A56@ix.netcom.com> (permalink) |
| References | <dPqdnSyaPpEcxjDLnZ2dnUU7-b3OydjZ@giganews.com> |
| Reply-To | starmaker@ix.netcom.com |
| NNTP-Posting-Host | 162.239.141.5 |
| Mime-Version | 1.0 |
| Content-Type | text/plain; charset=us-ascii |
| Content-Transfer-Encoding | 7bit |
| X-Trace | adenine.netfront.net 1454262271 49845 162.239.141.5 (31 Jan 2016 17:44:31 GMT) |
| X-Complaints-To | news@netfront.net |
| NNTP-Posting-Date | Sun, 31 Jan 2016 17:44:31 +0000 (UTC) |
| X-Mailer | Mozilla 3.04Gold (WinNT; U) |
| Xref | csiph.com sci.astro:57650 sci.physics:549548 |
Cross-posted to 2 groups.
Show key headers only | View raw
Yousuf Khan wrote: > > Moon was produced by head-on collision | Astronomy.com > http://www.astronomy.com/news/2016/01/moon-was-produced-by-head-on-collision > > The Theia Theory used to talk about a glancing blow between the early > Earth and a Mars-sized Theia, perhaps at 45 degrees. New data suggests > that Theia might have actually hit head-on with the Earth. That's > because the percentage of Oxygen 16/17/18 isotopes between the Earth and > Moon are nearly identical, indicating that they came from the same source. > > My question is, if the isotopic evidence which was used to create the > Theia Hypothesis in the first place, due to a previously perceived > difference in isotopic abundances, so now that that isotopic evidence > has disappeared, why keep the Theia Hypothesis? There were other > theories prior to that, which were discarded due to the isotopic evidence. > > Yousuf Khan The truth is...the origin of our solar system is...unknown. So, how everthing got put together is unknown...including the moon. --- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: news@netfront.net ---
Back to sci.physics | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Moon was produced by head-on collision? Yousuf Khan <bbbl67@spammenot.yahoo.com> - 2016-01-30 19:55 -0500
Re: Moon was produced by head-on collision? Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-01-30 22:17 -0600
Re: Moon was produced by head-on collision? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-01-31 09:44 -0800
Re: Moon was produced by head-on collision? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-01-31 23:10 -0800
Re: Moon was produced by head-on collision? Yousuf Khan <bbbl67@spammenot.yahoo.com> - 2016-02-01 03:13 -0500
Re: Moon was produced by head-on collision? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-02-01 10:36 -0800
Re: Moon was produced by head-on collision? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-02-03 04:51 -0800
Re: Moon was produced by head-on collision? benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-02-03 13:38 -0500
Re: Moon was produced by head-on collision? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-02-03 10:55 -0800
Re: Moon was produced by head-on collision? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-02-04 05:19 -0800
Re: Moon was produced by head-on collision? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-02-04 12:31 -0800
Re: Moon was produced by head-on collision? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-02-05 03:26 -0800
Re: Moon was produced by head-on collision? willner@cfa.harvard.edu (Steve Willner) - 2016-02-01 22:27 +0000
Re: Moon was produced by head-on collision? Yousuf Khan <bbbl67@spammenot.yahoo.com> - 2016-02-01 19:44 -0500
Re: Moon was produced by head-on collision? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-02-01 23:12 -0800
Re: Moon was produced by head-on collision? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-02-02 15:59 -0800
Re: Moon was produced by head-on collision? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-02-02 22:14 -0800
Re: Moon was produced by head-on collision? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-02-03 14:23 -0800
Re: Moon was produced by head-on collision? Martin Brown <|||newspam|||@nezumi.demon.co.uk> - 2016-02-04 11:40 +0000
Re: Moon was produced by head-on collision? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-02-04 11:35 -0800
Re: Moon was produced by head-on collision? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-02-05 03:18 +0000
Re: Moon was produced by head-on collision? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-02-04 20:42 -0800
Re: Moon was produced by head-on collision? Martin Brown <|||newspam|||@nezumi.demon.co.uk> - 2016-02-05 08:46 +0000
Re: Moon was produced by head-on collision? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-02-05 15:26 +0000
Re: Moon was produced by head-on collision? R Kym Horsell <kym@kymhorsell.com> - 2016-02-05 15:39 +0000
Re: Moon was produced by head-on collision? willner@cfa.harvard.edu (Steve Willner) - 2016-02-05 21:48 +0000
Re: Moon was produced by head-on collision? "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2016-02-05 13:56 -0800
Re: Moon was produced by head-on collision? pnalsing@gmail.com - 2016-02-05 20:07 -0800
Re: Moon was produced by head-on collision? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-02-06 04:47 -0800
Re: Moon was produced by head-on collision? benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-02-06 12:29 -0500
Re: Moon was produced by head-on collision? R Kym Horsell <kym@kymhorsell.com> - 2016-02-05 22:31 +0000
Re: Moon was produced by head-on collision? Martin Brown <|||newspam|||@nezumi.demon.co.uk> - 2016-02-05 22:50 +0000
Re: Moon was produced by head-on collision? willner@cfa.harvard.edu (Steve Willner) - 2016-02-11 19:44 +0000
Re: Moon was produced by head-on collision? Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-02-06 12:41 -0600
Re: Moon was produced by head-on collision? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-02-06 01:20 -0800
Re: Moon was produced by head-on collision? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-02-06 18:37 +0000
Re: Moon was produced by head-on collision? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-02-06 12:53 -0800
Re: Moon was produced by head-on collision? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-02-07 01:28 +0000
Re: Moon was produced by head-on collision? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-02-07 13:54 -0800
Re: Moon was produced by head-on collision? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-02-07 15:11 -0800
Re: Moon was produced by head-on collision? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-02-07 16:16 -0800
Re: Moon was produced by head-on collision? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-02-08 21:36 -0800
Re: Moon was produced by head-on collision? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-02-09 11:37 -0800
Re: Moon was produced by head-on collision? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-02-04 12:39 -0800
Re: Moon was produced by head-on collision? willner@cfa.harvard.edu (Steve Willner) - 2016-02-03 22:16 +0000
Re: Moon was produced by head-on collision? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-02-03 22:22 -0800
Re: Moon was produced by head-on collision? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-02-03 22:38 -0800
Re: Moon was produced by head-on collision? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-02-04 11:46 -0800
Re: Moon was produced by head-on collision? "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2016-02-03 10:11 -0800
Re: Moon was produced by head-on collision? "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2016-02-03 14:39 -0800
Re: Moon was produced by head-on collision? "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-02-03 20:09 -0800
Re: Moon was produced by head-on collision? "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2016-02-04 14:40 -0800
csiph-web