Jump to content
tkdguy

More space news!

Recommended Posts

On ‎6‎/‎29‎/‎2019 at 10:01 AM, L. Marcus said:

The BBC is showing a new documentary series -- The Planets, presented by professor Brian Cox. Beautiful and awe-inspiring. Just saw the episode on Saturn.

Thanks for the heads-up. I'll look for it on BBC America.

 

Dean Shomshak

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/30/2019 at 2:03 PM, IndianaJoe3 said:

 

It's the only planet in the universe known to harbor life. I think that counts for something.

 

I was about to say the same thing.

 

There *should* be life on other planets given the known universe is 90+ billion light years in diameter, but this is the only one we know about.

 

If we're really it for life in the entire universe - that would be a terrible waste of space.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/30/2019 at 3:03 PM, IndianaJoe3 said:

 

It's the only planet in the universe known to harbor life. I think that counts for something.

 

Known to the people who live on it. Who haven't even set foot on other planets. Life elsewhere in the universe might consider that a rather provincial perspective. ;)

 

But I stand by my statement: as a celestial body the Earth is unimpressive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Lord Liaden said:

 

Known to the people who live on it. Who haven't even set foot on other planets. Life elsewhere in the universe might consider that a rather provincial perspective. ;)

 

But I stand by my statement: as a celestial body the Earth is unimpressive.

 

 

Name me one other planet with gummy bears.

 

I dare you.

 

 

;)

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Lord Liaden said:

 

Known to the people who live on it. Who haven't even set foot on other planets. Life elsewhere in the universe might consider that a rather provincial perspective. ;)

 

But I stand by my statement: as a celestial body the Earth is unimpressive.

we have landed people on the moon
and have sent out at least 2 address adverts inviting any who could read our address for naked hot tubbing party

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Beast said:

we have landed people on the moon
and have sent out at least 2 address adverts inviting any who could read our address for naked hot tubbing party

 

It's a moon, not a planet. And if methane-breathers found our invites, for them a tub of steaming water would be a fair approximation of Hell. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To commemorate the 50th anniversary of the Apollo moon landing, the July, 2019 issue of Scientific American has several articles on matters lunar. My favorite was an article proposing an alternate form of the giant impact model for creating the Moon. Instead of a Mars-sized impactor striking a glancing blow and the Moon forming from the resulting disk of debris, the authors propose a larger impactor hit the proto-Earth head-on, vaporizing the mantles of both to form a huge cloud of rock vapor -- puffed-out mantle merging with spinning disk -- they dub a synestia. The Moon condenses within the cooling, shrinking cloud. They argue this model more plausibly explains why the Moon is deficient in low boiling point elements such sodium and potassium (to say nothing of volatiles such as water), but otherwise its isitopic composition is identical to Earth: The vaporized rock from the two bodies would be thoroughly mixed in the synestia phase, while the Moon would have formed before the synestia cooled enough for the volatiles to condense very much. I can't judge the scientific pros and cons, but it's a spectacular visual, and could make a cool scenario for a SF adventure set in a forming planetary system.

 

Dean Shomshak

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To commemorate the 50th anniversary of the Apollo moon landing, the July, 2019 issue of Scientific American has several articles on matters lunar. My favorite was an article proposing an alternate form of the giant impact model for creating the Moon. Instead of a Mars-sized impactor striking a glancing blow and the Moon forming from the resulting disk of debris, the authors propose a larger impactor hit the proto-Earth head-on, vaporizing the mantles of both to form a huge cloud of rock vapor -- puffed-out mantle merging with spinning disk -- they dub a synestia. The Moon condenses within the cooling, shrinking cloud. They argue this model more plausibly explains why the Moon is deficient in low boiling point elements such sodium and potassium (to say nothing of volatiles such as water), but otherwise its isitopic composition is identical to Earth: The vaporized rock from the two bodies would be thoroughly mixed in the synestia phase, while the Moon would have formed before the synestia cooled enough for the volatiles to condense very much. I can't judge the scientific pros and cons, but it's a spectacular visual, and could make a cool scenario for a SF adventure set in a forming planetary system.

 

Dean Shomshak

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/9/2019 at 9:39 AM, DShomshak said:

To commemorate the 50th anniversary of the Apollo moon landing, the July, 2019 issue of Scientific American has several articles on matters lunar. My favorite was an article proposing an alternate form of the giant impact model for creating the Moon. Instead of a Mars-sized impactor striking a glancing blow and the Moon forming from the resulting disk of debris, the authors propose a larger impactor hit the proto-Earth head-on, vaporizing the mantles of both to form a huge cloud of rock vapor -- puffed-out mantle merging with spinning disk -- they dub a synestia. The Moon condenses within the cooling, shrinking cloud. They argue this model more plausibly explains why the Moon is deficient in low boiling point elements such sodium and potassium (to say nothing of volatiles such as water), but otherwise its isitopic composition is identical to Earth: The vaporized rock from the two bodies would be thoroughly mixed in the synestia phase, while the Moon would have formed before the synestia cooled enough for the volatiles to condense very much. I can't judge the scientific pros and cons, but it's a spectacular visual, and could make a cool scenario for a SF adventure set in a forming planetary system.

 

Dean Shomshak

I don't think this is a new concept. Though they may have some new views on how it went. When I last read this theory it was a roughly "moon sized" object crashed into the earth causing an ejecta cloud of moon like size to shoot off the other side...etc.

 

Heck I think "worlds in colision" was the first try of this idea....?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/2/2019 at 3:58 PM, Lord Liaden said:

But I stand by my statement: as a celestial body the Earth is unimpressive.

 

I have a sneaking suspicion that the Earth is relatively unique in its shallow seas and tidally locked large satellite.  It may not be much to look at but it's a hidden gem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

... though to be fair, our knowledge of Earth-size planets is very limited (most of the known exoplanets are Neptune- or Jupiter-class).  TESS probably is the best chance in the near future to improve on that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/12/2019 at 11:48 AM, pinecone said:

I don't think this is a new concept. Though they may have some new views on how it went. When I last read this theory it was a roughly "moon sized" object crashed into the earth causing an ejecta cloud of moon like size to shoot off the other side...etc.

 

Heck I think "worlds in colision" was the first try of this idea....?

 

Not really. Velikovsky's crackpot notion was that Jupiter spit out a giant comet that ping-ponged around the inner Solar System. The close passes by Earth caused the miracles in the Old Testament, such as stopping and re-starting the Earth's rotation for the Battle of Jericho and causing the rain of manna. Then the comet settled down to become the planet Venus. All of this violates basic laws of physics, chemistry and a bunch of other science, but whoa, Velikovsky is a psychoanalyst recovering the collective memory the human race suppressed because of the trauma of the events, his evidence is obviously much more reliable than dumb ol' laboratory experiments. <eyeroll>

 

As I mentioned in my post, the authors are not the first to propose a giant impact origin for the Moon. They propose a new mode of impact.

 

Dean Shomshak

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...