When Moons Collide They Form One

Greg Tito

PR for Dungeons & Dragons
Sep 29, 2005
12,070
0
0
When Moons Collide They Form One



Astronomers believe that Earth once had two moons and they collided to form the satellite we see today.

The moon has long been a source of fascination for druids, night elves and just about everyone else. Ancient humans attributed god-like - or goddess-like - qualities to the silver orb and modern man walking upon its surface still evokes patriotic feelings. The dark side of the moon has mystified both Pink Floyd and astronomers alike because once they saw pictures of it 1959, its high mountain peaks were very different from the low plains of volcanic rock that make up the hemisphere that faces the Earth. Scientists now believe that disparity derives from the fact that Earth once had two satellites and the pair of moons crashed together to form what we see in the sky today.

The study published in the August 4th issue of the scientific journal Nature by a collaboration between Erik Asphaug from the University of California, Santa Cruz and Martin Jutzi at the University of Bern in Switzerland reports that computer simulations reveal that the Moon would not only survive such an impact but it would account for the different makeup of both hemispheres.

But how would two moons suddenly collide in orbit without falling to Earth? Well, the answer to that question involves a concept called Trojan points. Imagine a equilateral triangle with the Earth and the Moon at two points. The third point a Trojan point and it is possible for a body to orbit the Earth in that position without crashing into either of its neighbors. For a while.

"It is entirely plausible for a Trojan moon to have formed in the giant impact [that created the Moon to begin with], and for it to go unstable after 10 million to 100 million years and leave its imprint on the moon," said Asphaug. He said to think of the impact as "a ball of Gruyere colliding into a ball of cheddar."

The second moon would have had to have been much smaller, about 750 miles in diameter and a mass about 4 percent of the Moon. Because the orbit decayed over time, the second moon would impact traveling relatively slowly - 4,500 to 6,700 miles per hour - and the result would essentially cram the rock and minerals of the second moon onto the Moon's surface like smashing two pieces of soap together to form one bar.

The theory of a second moon does has some detractors, even from Asphaug's own colleagues at UCSC. Francis Nimmo thinks that just gravity is powerful enough [http://www.space.com/9512-side-moon-explained.html] to create the highlands of the dark side of the moon. "As further spacecraft data and, hopefully, lunar samples are obtained, which of these two hypotheses is more nearly correct will become clear," Nimmo said in reply to Asphaug's research.

Sounds like an astronomy gang fight is in order. Someone close the observatory for the night and sharpen your telescopes. The only way to see which theory reigns supreme is to settle this like men. Two astronomers enter, one astronomer leaves! Two astronomers enter, one astronomer leaves!

Source: Space.com [http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v476/n7358/full/nature10289.html]



Permalink
 

Kargathia

New member
Jul 16, 2009
1,657
0
0
Reading the article myself I marvelled at how astronomers view the world - those two moons supposedly crashed into each other at a "very slow" speed of 25 kilometers per second, or a good 5000 miles per hour.

Judging by the wording that wouldn't be enough for a planetary speeding ticket.
 

Richardplex

New member
Jun 22, 2011
1,731
0
0
Kargathia said:
Reading the article myself I marvelled at how astronomers view the world - those two moons supposedly crashed into each other at a "very slow" speed of 25 kilometers per second, or a good 5000 miles per hour.
Makes you wonder why people can get done for 'speeding' at such lethargic speeds such as 100 kilometers per hour, doesn't it?
 

The Rogue Wolf

Stealthy Carnivore
Legacy
Nov 25, 2007
16,852
9,527
118
Stalking the Digital Tundra
Gender
✅
Anyone else hungry for cheese, now?

Also, I wonder how much differently both the Earth and human history would have come out if we'd had two moons instead of one. Tides would likely act much more differently, for one thing, and who knows what sort of early mythologies we would have come up with to explain two circles in the sky instead of just one?
 

Spygon

New member
May 16, 2009
1,105
0
0
Is this new news i am sure Scientists have been saying this for years or did i fall through a gap in time again.
 

unacomn

New member
Mar 3, 2008
974
0
0
It's a cover up. The second Moon was a giant space canon destroyed by Optimus Primal to save the planet from obliteration.
 

Jabberwock xeno

New member
Oct 30, 2009
2,461
0
0
I thought the current theory was that a mars sized object collided with earth, and the debris gathered into the moon?

Either way, we now know wthat the moon has a history of colliding with stuff... It's only a matter of time...

[HEADING=1]DAWN OF THE FIRST DAY...[/HEADING]
 

Dusty Fred

New member
Aug 3, 2011
157
0
0
Jabberwock xeno said:
I thought the current theory was that a mars sized object collided with earth, and the debris gathered into the moon?
Not only that, but this collision was used to explain why the Earth's axis of rotation is 23 degrees from vertical - it was knocked sideways by the collision. If this theory is discarded then they'll have to find other reasons for the seasons.

I'm not going to argue with them though, they're cleverer lads than I.
 

Greg Tito

PR for Dungeons & Dragons
Sep 29, 2005
12,070
0
0
Jabberwock xeno said:
I thought the current theory was that a mars sized object collided with earth, and the debris gathered into the moon?
That's part of this theory. They also believed that same collision could have created a smaller moon which eventually crashed into the bigger one.

Greg
 

Eekaida

New member
Jan 13, 2010
216
0
0
ok, if the earth was once a moon, what was it orbiting? Earth orbits the sun becuase its a planet, but a moon needs to orbit something that isn't a sun. What were these moons orbiting?
 

coolerthanice21

New member
Feb 23, 2010
35
0
0
Eekaida said:
ok, if the earth was once a moon, what was it orbiting? Earth orbits the sun becuase its a planet, but a moon needs to orbit something that isn't a sun. What were these moons orbiting?
They're theorizing that Earth once had two moons, not that Earth was a moon.
 

supermariner

New member
Aug 27, 2010
808
0
0
According to QI the Earth still has two moons.
And i consider everything Stephen Fry says to be true regardless of context or likelihood
 

Stabby Joe

New member
Jul 30, 2008
1,545
0
0
AND NOW SOME SCIENCE!

supermariner said:
According to QI the Earth still has two moons.
And i consider everything Stephen Fry says to be true regardless of context or likelihood
There's actually more (which they also mentioned on later shows).

While none of them are on the same scale, both physically and scientifically as the Moon, they are in fact large bodies that orbit Earth, by definition a satellite, which the Moon is also.

There full names are:

- 3753 Cruithne
- 2002 AA
- 2003 YN
- 2004 GU
- 2010 SO16

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth#Moon
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quasi-satellite

Of course that doesn't sound very poetic. "When the 2010 SO16 hits my eye like a big pizza pie, that's... erm... complex astronomy."
 
Sep 9, 2010
1,597
0
0
I saw the picture an immedately started listening to "The Great Gig in the Sky"

OT:Now, It seems possible, but I think there are better theories than "We had two moons once." Whatever. I'll wait until science proves it one way or another.
 

NovaCascade

New member
Oct 2, 2010
89
0
0
Kargathia said:
Reading the article myself I marvelled at how astronomers view the world - those two moons supposedly crashed into each other at a "very slow" speed of 25 kilometers per second, or a good 5000 miles per hour.

Judging by the wording that wouldn't be enough for a planetary speeding ticket.
I studied geology for a while at university. Whenever we talked about anything "recent" it usually meant in the last million years. I know exactly what you mean, its all about perspective