Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #550545
| Message-ID | <56B3AAB2.1FCB@ix.netcom.com> (permalink) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-04 11:46 -0800 |
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
| Newsgroups | sci.astro, sci.physics |
| Subject | Re: Moon was produced by head-on collision? |
| References | (1 earlier) <n8om4s$gp6$1@dont-email.me> <rLOdnXy-3tZHZjLLnZ2dnUU7-fGdnZ2d@giganews.com> <n8tu8f$que$1@dont-email.me> <56B2EE3A.584E@ix.netcom.com> <56B2F1D5.5BD8@ix.netcom.com> |
Cross-posted to 2 groups.
The Starmaker wrote: > > The Starmaker wrote: > > > > Steve Willner wrote: > > > > > > As I wrote earlier, I'm not an expert on this, and a quick web search > > > didn't turn up anything definitive. The search did show that the > > > isotope data have been disputed going back at least as far as 2012. > > > It's also important to remember that there are other kinds of data > > > including elemental composition of both bodies. > > > > > > In article <rLOdnXy-3tZHZjLLnZ2dnUU7-fGdnZ2d@giganews.com>, > > > Yousuf Khan <bbbl67@spammenot.yahoo.com> writes: > > > > Other ones that would still be viable are the Fission hypothesis, where > > > > the Moon was once a part of the Earth, but due to an imbalance it > > > > pinched itself off of the Earth. This would certainly maintain identical > > > > isotope levels between the Earth and Moon. > > > > > > If the early Earth was spinning fast enough to cause it to fission, > > > how could it ever have formed in the first place? For this > > > hypothesis to be viable, someone would have to produce a real > > > calculation. > > > > > > > Another one is the Condensation Hypothesis, which suggested that the > > > > Earth and Moon formed from the same section of the original solar system > > > > nebula. So basically the two worlds evolved together as a twin planet > > > > system. This would also pretty much maintain identical isotope levels. > > > > > > Also identical element composition, it would seem. Isn't the Moon > > > much-depleted in iron? That's a natural consequence of the impact > > > hypothesis but seems hard to explain if two bodies formed near each > > > other. > > > > > > I don't think the full answer is known yet, but the impact hypothesis > > > has a lot to like. > > > > It is possible that the moon had an impact with surrounding planets... > > that there was a collision between mars, earth, other planets...and the > > moon, > > but the moon is not a product of earth or any other planet. > > > > The impact of planets against other bodies was the result and design of > > triangle singularity > > and the big bang. > > > > The moon was just rolling along just like everybody else. > > > > Maybe you guys don't get it. > > > > Maybe I need to explain it in a different way....from a different angle > > or point of view. > > > > > > If you reverse the universe > > to the beginning... > > when it all comes to a point.. > > what shape is the point? round, square or triangle?? > > How about... > > have you heard the expression 'killing two birds with one stone'? > > Now, imagine every planet in the universe represents a bird... > > kill them all with one stone. > > In other words...you create a universe with one stone. > > Now, if you still don't get it... > > look for a stone > then look for two birds. > > Now, try to kill both birds with one stone. What yous don't seem to understand... that the triangle singularity begining point was very precisely arranged in order of a triangle. If you get a bunch of people to stand motionless, together in the shape of a triangle... then tell them..everyone on the outside of the triangle to walk away from the triangle, so on with everyone else... i don't know..tell them to walk away for 3 minutes.. what you will have is people scattered everywhere. But it was ordered..and there will not be a triangle.. and everyone will be in it's place of 3 minutes. This is the origin of the universe. It's very simple.
Back to sci.physics | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
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
csiph-web