Moon Mysteries.

[riffraff]

there was a thing called the cold war y'kna.

Its the only real reason we went in the first place. And went back a canny few times, so its not like aliens told us to fuck off and never come back

Since then, there just hasn't been the political motivation. Imagine if someone said in these times of austerity we were cutting the NHS, but spending billions to go back to the moon. No one would go for it.

Did we? What if we only went the once, had the shit scared out of us and didnt think the world was ready for the facts? Pretending to go a few more times would earn a bit of time before the shit hit the fan.

 

[moshpit]

Fuck off with your boring logic and common sense man.

Logon or register to see this image

Aye, 5 degrees from the Earth's orbit round the sun, but a whopping 23.5 degrees from the Earth's equatorial plane. Now the question is, was the accretion disc, from which the moon was made from supposed to be following Earth's equator or the path of Earth around the sun? I would've said the spinning of the Earth has more of a gravitational affect than the pull of the Sun. Kinda how Uranus is tilted 90degrees on it's side and the rings have coalesced according to the rotational axis of the planet rather than celestial plane.

Logon or register to see this image

Anyway, enough of the science. The Moon's an ancient spaceship emitting frequencies outside the visible spectrum, subjugating us at behest of their reptilian based overlords.



That's a thread in itself that marra.

Before the universe? Before the big bang? Before the decay of time? Before matter? Just pure energy, no form or substance, everything and nothing, just thought. And before that? Fuck knows?



Not that easy marra, otherwise the theory of a giant impact wouldn't be a theory it would be proven with all observable data. It isn't, the questions the inadequacy of this theory was posted a while back but just for you mate.... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giant_impact_hypothesis

Difficulties
This lunar origin hypothesis has some difficulties that have yet to be fully resolved. For example, the giant impact hypothesis implies that a surface magma ocean would have formed following the impact. Yet there is no evidence that the Earth ever had such a magma ocean and it is likely there exists material that has never been processed by a magma ocean.[28]

Composition
There are a number of compositional inconsistencies that need to be addressed.

• The ratios of the Moon's volatile elements are not explained by the giant impact hypothesis. If the giant impact hypothesis is correct, they must be due to some other cause.[28]
• The presence of volatiles such as water trapped in lunar basalts is more difficult to explain if the Moon was caused by an impact that would entail a catastrophic heating event.[29]
• The iron oxide (FeO) content (13%) of the Moon, which is intermediate between Mars (18%) and the terrestrial mantle (8%), rules out most of the source of the proto-lunar material from the Earth's mantle.[30]
• If the bulk of the proto-lunar material had come from the impactor, the Moon should be enriched in siderophilic elements, when, in fact, it is deficient in those.[31]
• The Moon's oxygen isotopic ratios are essentially identical to those of Earth.[6] Oxygen isotopic ratios, which may be measured very precisely, yield a unique and distinct signature for each solar system body.[32] If Theia had been a separate proto-planet, it probably would have had a different oxygen isotopic signature than Earth, as would the ejected mixed material.[33]
• The Moon's titanium isotope ratio (50Ti/47Ti) appears so close to the Earth's (within 4 ppm), that little if any of the colliding body's mass could likely have been part of the Moon.[34][35]

Lack of a Venusian moon
If Earth's moon was formed by such an impact, it is possible that other inner planets also may have been subjected to comparable impacts. A moon that formed around Venus by this process would have been unlikely to escape, so if such an event had occurred there, a possible explanation of why the planet does not have such a moon might be that a second collision occurred that countered the angular momentum from the first impact.[36] Another is that the strong tidal forces from the Sun would tend to destabilize the orbits of moons around close-in planets. For this reason, if Venus's slow rotation rate began early in its history, any satellites larger than a few kilometres in size would likely have spiralled into the planet.[37]

Simulations of the chaotic period of terrestrial planet formation suggest that impacts, such as those hypothesized to have formed the Moon, were common. For typical terrestrial planets with a mass of 0.5–1 Earth masses, such an impact typically results in a single moon containing 4% of the host planet's mass. The inclination of this moon's orbit is random, but this tilt affects the subsequent dynamic evolution of the system. For example, some orbits may cause the moon to spiral back into the planet. Likewise, the proximity of the planet to the star also will affect the orbital evolution. The net effect is that it is more likely for impact-generated moons to survive when they orbit more distant terrestrial planets and to be aligned with the planetary orbit.[38]

This is why Wikipedia CAN be dangerous. The Venusian moon is pure conjecture full of statements that begin with 'if'. It a planet sized body did hit Venus then Venus wouldn't reassemble Venus today and it would have a moon. Obviously it hasn't so it didn't!

The lunar origin hypothesis is definitely not fully answered, however the opening line on the Wiki link about magma oceans is just laughable. The whole surface of the Earth was essentially a magma ocean during that time but no matter -its all been subducted and recycled many times since. the important thing to remember is that there are many things we don't fully understand for example, why does Venus rotate anti-clockwise and why does it revolve so incredibly slowly. This doesn't mean we throw the baby out with the bath water and disregard the model of planetary formation.

We aren't entirely sure what the appendix is for but we wouldn't say Darwin got it wrong (well, unless you live South of the Mason-Dixon line ). We just continue to look for the answers...

As for the Moon's tilt - it's all to do with the chaotic, dynamic environment that the Earth/Moon system lived through. Just as Uranus was knocked on its side by an impact, the Moon was pounded mercilessly after its formation. You only need to look up at the huge Aitken crater on the South side to see that. I think you're assuming that everything just settles into a neat and tidy rhythm and stays there, like i've said it would be more surprising if all of the planetary obliquities and rotational axes matched up nicely. Remember too, the Earth's current obliquity is 23 degrees TODAY

 

[Big Duke Six]

This is why Wikipedia CAN be dangerous. The Venusian moon is pure conjecture full of statements that begin with 'if'. It a planet sized body did hit Venus then Venus wouldn't reassemble Venus today and it would have a moon. Obviously it hasn't so it didn't!

The lunar origin hypothesis is definitely not fully answered, however the opening line on the Wiki link about magma oceans is just laughable. The whole surface of the Earth was essentially a magma ocean during that time but no matter -its all been subducted and recycled many times since. the important thing to remember is that there are many things we don't fully understand for example, why does Venus rotate anti-clockwise and why does it revolve so incredibly slowly. This doesn't mean we throw the baby out with the bath water and disregard the model of planetary formation.

We aren't entirely sure what the appendix is for but we wouldn't say Darwin got it wrong (well, unless you live South of the Mason-Dixon line ). We just continue to look for the answers...

As for the Moon's tilt - it's all to do with the chaotic, dynamic environment that the Earth/Moon system lived through. Just as Uranus was knocked on its side by an impact, the Moon was pounded mercilessly after its formation. You only need to look up at the huge Aitken crater on the South side to see that. I think you're assuming that everything just settles into a neat and tidy rhythm and stays there, like i've said it would be more surprising if all of the planetary obliquities and rotational axes matched up nicely. Remember too, the Earth's current obliquity is 23 degrees TODAY

Fuck off!

 

[Stubbs ftm]

Death star

 

[tunstall birdman]

This is why Wikipedia CAN be dangerous. The Venusian moon is pure conjecture full of statements that begin with 'if'. It a planet sized body did hit Venus then Venus wouldn't reassemble Venus today and it would have a moon. Obviously it hasn't so it didn't!

The lunar origin hypothesis is definitely not fully answered, however the opening line on the Wiki link about magma oceans is just laughable. The whole surface of the Earth was essentially a magma ocean during that time but no matter -its all been subducted and recycled many times since. the important thing to remember is that there are many things we don't fully understand for example, why does Venus rotate anti-clockwise and why does it revolve so incredibly slowly. This doesn't mean we throw the baby out with the bath water and disregard the model of planetary formation.

We aren't entirely sure what the appendix is for but we wouldn't say Darwin got it wrong (well, unless you live South of the Mason-Dixon line ). We just continue to look for the answers...

As for the Moon's tilt - it's all to do with the chaotic, dynamic environment that the Earth/Moon system lived through. Just as Uranus was knocked on its side by an impact, the Moon was pounded mercilessly after its formation. You only need to look up at the huge Aitken crater on the South side to see that. I think you're assuming that everything just settles into a neat and tidy rhythm and stays there, like i've said it would be more surprising if all of the planetary obliquities and rotational axes matched up nicely. Remember too, the Earth's current obliquity is 23 degrees TODAY

You know you shit man. From one Hippy to another..Peace brother!

Logon or register to see this image

 

[Thrall]

What it keeps coming back to for me is the fact we've never been back for 40 years. No other country has tried to go, even the U.S. and Russia massively scaled back their space technology research. Imagine if they had carried on at the same pace after the moon landing. We'd have a base there now, probably on Mars as well. It doesn't add up.

Probably because there's fuck all there.

 

[Heeeed the Ball]

Probably because there's fuck all there.

Aye right, do you think you a re some type of supreme being...............very arrogant mate

 

[Thrall]

Aye right, do you think you a re some type of supreme being...............very arrogant mate

Not arrogant at all. Are you calling other space institutions arrogant for not going back?

We have samples of the surface so unless we plan to drill what's the point in going back? With the power of telescopes these days I presume the surface can be analysed in great detail from earth?

 

[moshpit]

Fuck off!

Gladly. Right up your mother's c. u.nt.

 

[Zidane]

Who knows what is true. Absolutely everything about this whole alien/UFO stuff may well be 100% made up.

But think about this. Technology has only really started to get going in last 200 years and yet we can already now see which Sun's on the other side of the Universe have planet's in the goldilocks zone.

In addition civilizations have come and gone on our planet over thousands of years so on other planets it's quite conceivable that the first developed faster than we did for whatever reason.

The universe is 4.5 billion years old so even a civilization that developed only 1% faster than us, they've got a 45 million year head start on us! (or something big like that anyway)

It's really not that difficult to believe that someone, somewhere else in the Universe spotted earth was in a goldilocks zone a long long time ago.

Then there is the formula that covers how many possible life evolving planet's there could be based on the number of planets in visible universe.

Like I say at the start, it could all be complete tosh, but mathematically it's also very possible we have been visited many many times past and present.

I've spent my whole life hoping that I'll at least get to know the truth on UFOs in my lifetime

 

[DaveH]

What it keeps coming back to for me is the fact we've never been back for 40 years. No other country has tried to go, even the U.S. and Russia massively scaled back their space technology research. Imagine if they had carried on at the same pace after the moon landing. We'd have a base there now, probably on Mars as well. It doesn't add up.

Going to the moon is a very expensive thing. It currently costs around $20,000 per kilogram launched into space [1], plus there are a huge number of technical challenges to having a base there, mainly water and food. Going to the moon for a short stint like the Apollo missions is one thing, building a base is another. The Rosetta mission cost 1.4 billion euros or $1.7 billion. That was a probe about the size of a mini with a washing machine sized lander. The cost of building a base would quickly run into trillions of dollars. No one nation could do it on its own. The cold war screwed Russia financially, ESAs spending power has been fairly small in the grand scheme of things and the American's could not afford that themselves. Where would the money have come from?

Look at how long it has taken to build the ISS and how expensive that has been. That is not as far and does not suffer from the extra expense that you need to escape the moons gravity to return.

The only driver to building a base on the moon would be for science purposes. While there is clearly science we can do on the moon, is there enough to justify the huge costs? Probably not. What might be useful is to use the moon as a prototype for building a mars base, and that is one reason we are looking at going back now.

When you consider as said above, things like the cold war, a lack of competition in the space race, financial troubles recently and in the 80s, it really does not surprise me that we have not been back.




[1] http://www.nasa.gov/centers/marshall/news/background/facts/astp.html_prt.htm

 

[ProfessionalMackem]

This is why Wikipedia CAN be dangerous. The Venusian moon is pure conjecture full of statements that begin with 'if'. It a planet sized body did hit Venus then Venus wouldn't reassemble Venus today and it would have a moon. Obviously it hasn't so it didn't!

The lunar origin hypothesis is definitely not fully answered, however the opening line on the Wiki link about magma oceans is just laughable. The whole surface of the Earth was essentially a magma ocean during that time but no matter -its all been subducted and recycled many times since. the important thing to remember is that there are many things we don't fully understand for example, why does Venus rotate anti-clockwise and why does it revolve so incredibly slowly. This doesn't mean we throw the baby out with the bath water and disregard the model of planetary formation.

We aren't entirely sure what the appendix is for but we wouldn't say Darwin got it wrong (well, unless you live South of the Mason-Dixon line ). We just continue to look for the answers...

As for the Moon's tilt - it's all to do with the chaotic, dynamic environment that the Earth/Moon system lived through. Just as Uranus was knocked on its side by an impact, the Moon was pounded mercilessly after its formation. You only need to look up at the huge Aitken crater on the South side to see that. I think you're assuming that everything just settles into a neat and tidy rhythm and stays there, like i've said it would be more surprising if all of the planetary obliquities and rotational axes matched up nicely. Remember too, the Earth's current obliquity is 23 degrees TODAY

There's that number 23 again.

Darwin's theory of Evolution isn't complete either. For 99.99% of species it works, but for us homosapiens, it's incomplete. For example, where are all the fossils of apes with craniums comparable to ours? We go from 4 legs to 2 legs and a chimp brain to a human brain in the blink of an eye (geologically speaking). Our evolution has been tampered with by an external source, no doubt in my mind. God or aliens, you chose.

In order for us to predict the nature of reality, we have to reconcile what we see in the observable universe to that of our theories. It's the cornerstone of science. So while I agree with you up to a point about the chaotic and dynamic nature of the early Earth/Moon complex, I have to disagree with the rest, we should be able to know/predict everything during this period, including the movements of our nearest planetary neighbour when it was formed.

Not arrogant at all. Are you calling other space institutions arrogant for not going back?

We have samples of the surface so unless we plan to drill what's the point in going back? With the power of telescopes these days I presume the surface can be analysed in great detail from earth?

:faceplantsmiley:

Who knows what is true. Absolutely everything about this whole alien/UFO stuff may well be 100% made up.

But think about this. Technology has only really started to get going in last 200 years and yet we can already now see which Sun's on the other side of the Universe have planet's in the goldilocks zone.

In addition civilizations have come and gone on our planet over thousands of years so on other planets it's quite conceivable that the first developed faster than we did for whatever reason.

The universe is 4.5 billion years old so even a civilization that developed only 1% faster than us, they've got a 45 million year head start on us! (or something big like that anyway)

It's really not that difficult to believe that someone, somewhere else in the Universe spotted earth was in a goldilocks zone a long long time ago.

Then there is the formula that covers how many possible life evolving planet's there could be based on the number of planets in visible universe.

Like I say at the start, it could all be complete tosh, but mathematically it's also very possible we have been visited many many times past and present.

I've spent my whole life hoping that I'll at least get to know the truth on UFOs in my lifetime

That's what I'm talking about! Class post that.

Going to the moon is a very expensive thing. It currently costs around $20,000 per kilogram launched into space [1], plus there are a huge number of technical challenges to having a base there, mainly water and food. Going to the moon for a short stint like the Apollo missions is one thing, building a base is another. The Rosetta mission cost 1.4 billion euros or $1.7 billion. That was a probe about the size of a mini with a washing machine sized lander. The cost of building a base would quickly run into trillions of dollars. No one nation could do it on its own. The cold war screwed Russia financially, ESAs spending power has been fairly small in the grand scheme of things and the American's could not afford that themselves. Where would the money have come from?

Look at how long it has taken to build the ISS and how expensive that has been. That is not as far and does not suffer from the extra expense that you need to escape the moons gravity to return.

The only driver to building a base on the moon would be for science purposes. While there is clearly science we can do on the moon, is there enough to justify the huge costs? Probably not. What might be useful is to use the moon as a prototype for building a mars base, and that is one reason we are looking at going back now.

When you consider as said above, things like the cold war, a lack of competition in the space race, financial troubles recently and in the 80s, it really does not surprise me that we have not been back.

[1] http://www.nasa.gov/centers/marshall/news/background/facts/astp.html_prt.htm

So the advancement and evolution of our species is all down to money? Sad state of affairs that.

If we all use your logic in our lives then we would be all lazy fat bastards who don't get out of bed 24/7 "what's the point? We're only going to die anyway" attitude.

 

[ReidysLeftLug]

@ProfessionalMackem, have you watched this? Intriguing to say the least, and has made me acquire the book by Allan Sturm - ULO's.

 

[ProfessionalMackem]

@ProfessionalMackem, have you watched this? Intriguing to say the least, and has made me acquire the book by Allan Sturm - ULO's.

No mate, I haven't. I'll have a ganzee later on after work though, cheers. Is it a documentary or drama? Give us a brief outline. I quite like the Syfy channel.

 

[ReidysLeftLug]

No mate, I haven't. I'll have a ganzee later on after work though, cheers. Is it a documentary or drama? Give us a brief outline. I quite like the Syfy channel.

It is a documentary, goes over unidentified lunar objects and some others, one of the most intriguing things I found about it are the images captured from the Russia satellite Phobos (1 or 2?) before it was knocked out of orbit. I think you'll enjoy it.

@ProfessionalMackem here's some short reading on the Phobos satellite

http://www.ufocasebook.com/phobos2.html

 

[moshpit]

There's that number 23 again.

Darwin's theory of Evolution isn't complete either. For 99.99% of species it works, but for us homosapiens, it's incomplete. For example, where are all the fossils of apes with craniums comparable to ours? We go from 4 legs to 2 legs and a chimp brain to a human brain in the blink of an eye (geologically speaking). Our evolution has been tampered with by an external source, no doubt in my mind. God or aliens, you chose.

In order for us to predict the nature of reality, we have to reconcile what we see in the observable universe to that of our theories. It's the cornerstone of science. So while I agree with you up to a point about the chaotic and dynamic nature of the early Earth/Moon complex, I have to disagree with the rest, we should be able to know/predict everything during this period, including the movements of our nearest planetary neighbour when it was formed.

Why should we know everything about something that happened nearly 5 billion years ago? That's a strange statement I have to say. The quest for science is to ask questions and seek answers. There are some things however where we can only ever postulate or theorise - we can never know absolutely about chance collisions between planetary size objects. At least at this point in our intellectual evolution.

Perhaps when we ever reach a stage in human history to witness such events we'll know a lot more.

 

[johnna]

there is no moon !

 

[Dappa]

Darwin's theory of Evolution isn't complete either. For 99.99% of species it works, but for us homosapiens, it's incomplete. For example, where are all the fossils of apes with craniums comparable to ours? We go from 4 legs to 2 legs and a chimp brain to a human brain in the blink of an eye (geologically speaking). Our evolution has been tampered with by an external source, no doubt in my mind. God or aliens, you chose.

Are you saying an alien raped an ape and out we popped!!!!! I love that idea

 

[johnna]

Are you saying an alien raped an ape and out we popped!!!!! I love that idea

 

[Heeeed the Ball]

we were invented and created to work as salves digging gold in Africa.........................fact