Soviets on the Moon, 1965

More Comments >

Angilion Male, 40-49, Europe 9554 Posts	Sunday, April 15, 2012 1:48:22 PM That's why we always see the same side of the moon. Because they formed and cooled together, the side of the moon that always faces us is actually more dense. More dense = greater gravitional pull. I don`t think so. Tidal locking looks like a better explanation to me. That can happen with any object orbiting another, even if one forms completely seperately and is later captured.

Angilion Male, 40-49, Europe 9554 Posts	Sunday, April 15, 2012 1:40:22 PM I think the most recent theory on moon formation is that if formed at the same time as the Earth. As I understand it, as the Earth was forming(before it cooled), there was a cataclysmic event that caused a large chunk of the still cooling Earth to be ejected into space. It's generally thought to be a collision with another protoplanet, probably with a mass roughly the same as that of Mars today. A reasonable approximation can be made for the amount of kinetic energy of the object and some parameters can be set for probable speed and mass. The very early solar system would have been a very violent place, with lots of collisions - there`s no reason why each planet would form neatly by itself with nothing else forming anywhere nearby or on an intersecting orbit.

simpletools Male, 40-49, Canada 50 Posts	Sunday, April 15, 2012 10:59:25 AM I think the most recent theory on moon formation is that if formed at the same time as the Earth. As I understand it, as the Earth was forming(before it cooled), there was a cataclysmic event that caused a large chunk of the still cooling Earth to be ejected into space. That mass formed into the moon. That's why we always see the same side of the moon. Because they formed and cooled together, the side of the moon that always faces us is actually more dense. More dense = greater gravitional pull. There`s a bit of a wobble effect because the balance isn`t perfect but we pretty much see the same 48% of the moon all the time.

Crabes Male, 30-39, Canada 930 Posts	Sunday, April 15, 2012 8:45:20 AM someone is snorting to much dust here

Angilion Male, 40-49, Europe 9554 Posts	Sunday, April 15, 2012 1:48:00 AM Angillion: The rocks collected from the moon are Basalts billions of years old. Basalts are created from vulcanism. Dust compaction would form sandstone like rocks. I've felt a few samples of moon rocks and can assure you that they were not sandstones. Are you even aware that you`re now arguing that the entire moon is made up of a layer of dust about an inch thick and nothing else? Nobody, absolutely nobody, is arguing or has ever argued that the moon is made up of recently compacted dust. Your claim that it`s the consensus amongst scientists has no connection to reality. You are talking crap to such an extent that the only two possibilities are that you are delusional and hallucinating (if you believe you have seen scientists saying what you claim to have seen them saying) or a liar (if you don`t).

More Comments >