Electric Moon

Historic planetary instability and catastrophe. Evidence for electrical scarring on planets and moons. Electrical events in today's solar system. Electric Earth.

Moderators: MGmirkin, bboyer

Re: Electric Moon

Unread postby comingfrom » Tue Apr 05, 2016 5:31 pm

Thanks Gary. There are a lot of interesting images at that link.

And now you bumped this thread up, reminded me of a paper I just recently read on the Moon's ionosphere.
Miles Mathis again, but if it weren't for him, I wouldn't even have known that the moon has an ionosphere.
He links to NASA's report; Mystery of the Lunar Ionosphere.

Posts: 533
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2015 9:11 pm

Re: Electric Moon

Unread postby GaryN » Sun Oct 16, 2016 11:22 am

A facelift for the Moon every 81,000 years

The Moon is bombarded by so much space rock that its surface gets a complete facelift every 81,000 years, according to a study released Wednesday based on NASA data.
By comparing images of the same area at regular intervals, a team of scientists led by Emerson Speyerer from Arizona State University in Tempe were able to tally the number of new craters and extrapolate to the entire surface of the Moon.

"We detected 222 new impact craters and found 33 percent more craters with a diameter of at least 10 metres than predicted" by earlier models, the researchers concluded.

The scientists also found thousands of subtler disturbances on the surface, which they described as "scars" from smaller, secondary impacts that –- over thousands of years –- churned up the top layer of the Moon without creating craters.

Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2016-10-facelift-m ... s.html#jCp

Without functioning seismometers on the Lunar surface, it is not possible to say these new craters are from impacts. The seismometers from the Apollo missions were turned off in 1977, and it was reported that the Moon was seismically silent, even with the gain of the instruments at high levels. Only by crashing parts of spacecraft into the Moon were seismic events recorded, and the "ringing like a bell" effects observed. I'd say the new or perhaps just expanded craters were electrical in nature, removing material from the surface by a 'suction', not impact, which is why the moon was so seismically silent.
In 1995, Adrian Berry, science writer for the Daily Telegraph and columnist for Astronomy Now, who wrote "Experiments left behind by the Apollo astronauts showed that seismically the Moon is absolutely quiet. There are no 'moonquakes' to disturb the ground", but I don't know where he got his info.
I wonder if they could turn the seismometers back on after all these years? The planned Chang-e 4 mission to the Moon may carry a seismometer, but I don't think that is official.
What reveals itself to me ceases to be mysterious for me alone: if I unveil it to anyone else, he hears mere words which betray the living sense: Profanation, but never revelation.
~ Egyptian Proverbs
User avatar
Posts: 2469
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:18 pm
Location: Sooke, BC, Canada

Re: Electric Moon

Unread postby flyingcloud » Fri Dec 16, 2016 7:05 am

Dust 'floats' above lunar surface—electrostatic dust transport reshapes surfaces of airless planetary bodies

http://phys.org/news/2016-12-lunar-surf ... rless.html

One of the key science findings is that the emission and re-absorption of photo/secondary electrons at the walls of micro-cavities formed between neighboring dust particles can generate unexpectedly large electrical charges and intense particle-particle repulsive forces. This can cause dust particles to move and lift off the surface, or "levitate." And not just single-sized dust particles—large aggregates can be lofted as well.

We expect dust particles to mobilize and transport electrostatically over the entire lunar surface, as well as the surface of any other airless planetary body," Wang said. "If so, electrostatic dust activity may be also responsible for the degradation of retroreflectors on the lunar surface."

The laboratory observations also showed dusty surfaces becoming smooth as a consequence of dust mobilization. These electrostatic dust processes could help to explain the formation of the "dust ponds" on asteroid Eros and comet 67P, and the unexpectedly smooth surface on Saturn's icy satellite Atlas.
Posts: 478
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2008 2:07 am
Location: Honey Brook

Re: Electric Moon

Unread postby Robertus Maximus » Sat Jan 07, 2017 6:22 am

Electric Discharge Machining at the Moon's Poles?

See: https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2017/solar-storms-charge-lunar-soil
Robertus Maximus
Posts: 101
Joined: Mon Sep 02, 2013 6:16 am
Location: Liverpool, UK

Re: Electric Moon

Unread postby flyingcloud » Sat Jan 07, 2017 9:38 am

may possibly produce "sparks" that could vaporize and melt the soil, perhaps as much as meteoroid impacts

good step in the right direction
Posts: 478
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2008 2:07 am
Location: Honey Brook

The Charged Moon

Unread postby D_Archer » Mon Jan 16, 2017 2:40 am

'Levitating' Moon Dust Explained in New NASA Study >

What's more, this electrostatic dust mobilization may help explain the formation of "dust ponds" on asteroid Eros and Comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko, as well as the smooth surface on Saturn's icy moon Atlas"

""This new 'patched charge model' resolved a fundamental mechanism of dust charging and transport, which has been puzzling scientists for decades," Xu Wang"


NASA study finds solar storms could spark soils at moon's poles >
"Powerful solar storms can charge up the soil in frigid, permanently shadowed regions near the lunar poles, and may possibly produce "sparks" that could vaporize and melt the soil, perhaps as much as meteoroid impacts"

"on the moon, these particles—ions and electrons—slam directly into the surface. They accumulate in two layers beneath the surface; the bulky ions can't penetrate deeply because they are more likely to hit atoms in the regolith, so they form a layer closer to the surface while the tiny electrons slip through and form a deeper layer. The ions have positive charge while the electrons carry negative charge"

"In August 2014, however, Jordan's team published simulation results predicting that strong solar storms would cause the regolith in the moon's permanently shadowed regions (PSRs) to accumulate charge in these two layers until explosively released, like a miniature lightning strike."
-comment: ie an electric discharge

"Laboratory on experiments to see how breakdown affects the regolith and to look for any tell-tale signatures that could distinguish it from the effects of meteoroid impacts."
-comment, the rules for distinguishing are already well established (thunderbolts video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ThZZPCMXNU), very good that NASA is studying this.

Very interesting developments, NASA is not shying away from electrical interpretations.

If the moon is being charged, all other celestial bodies without an atmosphere could be (are) charged the same way, interaction with the solar wind.

Interesting note: the second article has a picture of the moon with permanently shadowed regions in blue, they follow the craters....of course you might say...but what comes first... the shadow or the electrical interaction...

- Shoot Forth Thunder -
User avatar
Posts: 1013
Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 4:01 am
Location: The Netherlands

Re: The Charged Moon

Unread postby Giffyguy » Mon Jan 16, 2017 9:48 am

It seems like NASA would love to claim credit for discovering this.

Since many other people discovered this first, and published peer-reviewed articles detailing this behavior - how do the EU scientists go about claiming formal credit for such discoveries?

(Do we actually know who first discovered electric dust transport?)
User avatar
Posts: 29
Joined: Sun Apr 26, 2015 8:16 am

Re: The Charged Moon

Unread postby Maol » Mon Jan 16, 2017 11:40 am

Do we actually know who first discovered electric dust transport?

The first person who used a feather duster?
Posts: 203
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2011 1:40 pm

Re: The Charged Moon

Unread postby Solar » Mon Jan 16, 2017 6:16 pm

I've not seen anything indicating that “EU scientists go about claiming formal credit for such discoveries”. They don’t. The situation is more so that the vast amount of existing established literature has long ago assessed electrostatic dust transport on airless celestial bodies. Such as:

Horizon Glow and the Motion of Lunar Dust

Effects of Levitated Dust on Astronomical Observations from the Lunar Surface

Electrostatic Charging of Lunar Dust

Dynamic Fountain Model For Lunar Dust

Electrostatic Effects on the Lunar surface

Etc; etc. With that in mind its unusual that a probe called LANDEE was needed in order to (yet again) make the assessment that "We expect dust particles to mobilize and transport electrostatically over the entire lunar surface, as well as the surface of any other airless planetary body" when the fact of the matter is that the overall assessment (with explanations) has been languishing in the archives for literally decades. This actually affords *anyone*, EU or otherwise, to have made the same statement of expectation before need of a probe – and they would've been correct.

What is interesting is the contrast between the very public face of astrophysics (news articles) and the physics lurking behind the scenes. For example, the following article on Comet 67P has quite a dull sheen to it insofar as descriptions and probable causes: COMET SINKHOLES GENERATE JETS. The difference between that article and the references below is remarkable.

Because: on the other side of the coin, a bit of research into the various instruments on any given probe and the papers concerning the findings brings in info like this:

- T. A. Nordheim, G. H. Jones, J. S. Halekas, E. Roussos, and A. J. Coates. Surface charging and electrostatic dust acceleration at the nucleus of comet 67P during periods of low activity.Planetary and Space Sciences, 119:24–35, December 2015.

- A. R. Poppe, M. I. Zimmerman, J. S. Halekas, and W. M. Farrell. The electrostatic plasma environment of a small airless body under non-aligned plasma flow and UV conditions. Planetary and Space Sciences, 119:111–120, December 2015.

- M. R. Collier, H. Kent Hills, T. J. Stubbs, J. S. Halekas, G. T. Delory, J. Espley, W. M. Farrell, J. W. Freeman, and R. Vondrak. Lunar surface electric potential changes associated with traversals through the Earth’s foreshock. Planetary and Space Sciences, 59:1727–1743, November 2011

- J. S. Halekas, S. D. Bale, D. L. Mitchell, and R. P. Lin. Correction to ”Electrons and magnetic fields in the lunar plasma wake”. Journal of Geophysical Research (Space Physics), 116:A07228, July 2011.

- M. O. Fillingim, L. M. Peticolas, R. J. Lillis, D. A. Brain, J. S. Halekas, D. Lummerzheim, and S. W. Bougher. Localized ionization patches in the nighttime ionosphere of Mars and their electrodynamic consequences. Icarus, 206:112–119, March 2010.

- W. M. Farrell, T. J. Stubbs, J. S. Halekas, R. M. Killen, G. T. Delory, M. R. Collier, and R. R. Vondrak. Anticipated electrical environment within permanently shadowed lunar craters. Journal of Geophysical Research (Planets), 115:E03004, March 2010.

- J. S. Halekas, G. T. Delory, R. P. Lin, T. J. Stubbs, and W. M. Farrell. Lunar Prospector measurements of secondary electron emission from lunar regolith. Planetary and Space Sciences, 57:78–82, January 2009.

- W. M. Farrell, T. J. Stubbs, G. T. Delory, R. R. Vondrak, M. R. Collier, J. S. Halekas, and R. P. Lin. Concerning the dissipation of electrically charged objects in the shadowed lunar polar regions. Geophysical Research Letters, 35:L19104, October 2008.

- J. S. Halekas, G. T. Delory, R. P. Lin, T. J. Stubbs, and W. M. Farrell. Lunar Prospector observations of the electrostatic potential of the lunar surface and its response to incident currents. Journal of Geophysical Research (Space Physics), 113:A09102, September 2008.

- W. M. Farrell, T. J. Stubbs, R. R. Vondrak, G. T. Delory, and J. S. Halekas. Complex electric fields near the lunar terminator: The near-surface wake and accelerated dust. Geophysical Research Letters, 34:L14201, July 2007

Needless to say that those are merely the tip of the proverbial iceberg. I’m a bit confused as to why this probe was even necessary.
"Our laws of force tend to be applied in the Newtonian sense in that for every action there is an equal reaction, and yet, in the real world, where many-body gravitational effects or electrodynamic actions prevail, we do not have every action paired with an equal reaction." — Harold Aspden
User avatar
Posts: 1206
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 3:05 am


Return to Electric Universe - Planetary Science

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests