It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Daedalus3
Well the general theory is that the collision did not just 'dent' the Earth with a crater etc. of 'x' kms..
As a result of the impact the Earth was quite certainly 'destroyed' and then gravitational forces put things back together again; put two things together rather..
Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by mikesingh
The collision did not create a hole. It was big, really, really big. It created enough heat to melt the entire planet. The development of our planet essentially went back to GO. Gravity pulled the Earth back into its spherical shape leaving a disc of stuff (yes, a ring) that coalesced into the moon.
Originally posted by shearder
...
Thanks Z for pointing out my shortcomings so eloquently rather a fool for a day than a lifetime they say i guess... and there is no sarcasm intended.
Originally posted by Daedalus3
So if Russia, India and the US (all with eventual plans for manned missions to the moon) are looking at the same area, it would be stupid not to pool in resources to some level at least.
I see a truly international effort (unfortunately w/o China as of now) to go (back for some) to the moon, and in the same lunar vicinity
Originally posted by mikesingh
The collision did not create a hole. It was big, really, really big. It created enough heat to melt the entire planet. The development of our planet essentially went back to GO. Gravity pulled the Earth back into its spherical shape leaving a disc of stuff (yes, a ring) that coalesced into the moon.
Enough heat to melt a planet? And cover a 'hole/depression' at least 500km deep???? Wow!! So how much heat in Celsius would that be?
Second point: If there was a collision, where is the object that hit the Earth? Is its debris part of the Moon? Where's the remainder? If it was an object as big as Mars, then the remainder portion, much bigger than the size of our Moon, would have been captured by the Sun's gravitational pull. The velocity due to its impact with the Earth would have been reduced to such a degree that its orbit would have been very close to the Sun. So is it Mercury? Venus?
Darn! Have I opened another can of harebrained theories - That Mercury is the possible culprit?
Originally posted by ArMaP
Here are some measurements made with Isis 3.
...
As for the direction of the light, I think it's almost the same, but a little higher than the one on the Clementine image, it shows slightly smaller shadows.
Originally posted by sentinel2107
Meanwhile, here's another article from The Hindu:
Chandrayaan-1: imaging moon in 64 colours
As far as I've been reading, the composition of the upper and accesible portions of the Lunar crust show a similarity to certain geological aspects of the Earth's crust. Basically, the lighter stuff 'floats' to the surface...given enough time, as a planet or planetoid cools down from the incredible heat generated form a collision or an impact, while they are partially molten, they will begin to cool.