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: Luna like Earth

Unread postby moses » Sat Oct 23, 2010 6:09 pm

What do you reckon to be the genesis of our moon then ?
s


Well this is planetary science and this question calls for conjecture. However we can say that the Moon has undergone interplanetary electrical interaction due to the craters and the magnetic anomalies. So the surface shape tells us nothing about the genesis of the Moon. And, so too the surface rocks may have come from Earth or another planet, or built up over millions of years of cosmic dust. Drilling on the Moon may well show that there are sediments and layering. Of course mostly one would expect that material left the Moon, just like Mars.

There may be untold Moon-size bodies out there in space. We would not know. If they were electrically neutral with their environment no X-rays would be produced and they would not have been detected. Even if the Moon surface rocks are similar to Earth rocks, this tells us nothing about the genesis of the Moon.
Mo
moses
 
Posts: 1062
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 3:18 pm
Location: Adelaide

Re: Luna like Earth

Unread postby solrey » Sat Oct 23, 2010 10:04 pm

Smells more like comet exhaust. EU theory says that nearly all rocky bodies lacking a protective magnetosphere/atmosphere should produce similar electro-chemical reaction by-products. In a crater formed by EDM there should be a thin hydrated layer of frozen dust and sand over a brittle porous top layer, like slag, with hydrocarbons and combustion gases filling the pores, covering fractured metal/mineral rich fused rock which becomes less fractured and denser with depth. Hitting it with the impactor should have produced more electro-chemical reactions. Essentially it should smell like a comet and taste like an asteroid. ;)

Water on the Moon and Much, Much More: Latest LCROSS Results

Then came the ‘much more.’ Between the LCROSS instruments, the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter’s observations – and in particular the LAMP instrument (Lyman Alpha Mapping Project) – the most abundant volatile in terms of total mass was carbon monoxide, then was water, the hydrogen sulfide. Then was carbon dioxide, sulfur dioxide, methane, formaldehyde, perhaps ethylene, ammonia, and even mercury and silver.

“So there’s a variety of different species, and what is interesting is that a number of those species are common to water,” Colaprete said. “So for example the ammonia and methane are at concentrations relative to the total water mass we saw, similar to what you would see in a comet.”

Colaprete said the fact that they see carbon monoxide as more abundant than water and that hydrogen sulfide exists as a significant fraction of the total water, suggests a considerable amount of processing within the crater itself.

There is likely chemistry occurring on the grains in the dark crater,” he explained. “That is interesting because how do you get chemistry going on at 40 to 50 degrees Kelvin with no sunlight? What is the energy — is it cosmic rays, solar wind protons working their way in, is it other electrical potentials associated with the dark and light regions? We don’t know. So this is, again, a circumstance where we have some data that doesn’t make entirely a lot of sense, but it does match certain findings elsewhere, meaning it does look cometary in some extent, and does look like what we see in cold grain processes in interstellar space.


LCROSS Results Released

"Also, the diversity and abundance of certain materials called volatiles in the plume, suggest a variety of sources, like comets and asteroids, and an active water cycle within the lunar shadows."


Seems to match EU expectations, imho. 8-)

cheers
“Today's scientists have substituted mathematics for experiments, and they wander off through equation after equation, and eventually build a structure which has no relation to reality"
Nikola Tesla
User avatar
solrey
 
Posts: 631
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2009 12:54 pm

Re: Luna like Earth

Unread postby jjohnson » Sat Oct 23, 2010 10:52 pm

Perhaps moons are captured comets and asteroids. Look at the range of sizes for all the moons in the solar system, and than at the range of all the known asteroids and comets (whose cores have been at least imaged, anyway).

Some larger bodies are the size of our moon, in order of magnitude, like, say, Titan. Some moons are like rather small asteroids, like, say, Phobos and Deimos. Look at their general morphology, small and irregular up to larger and more spherical. Look at the scarring on planets and moons with little to no atmosphere and they look much the same. Rocky bodies seem to follow the same general trends. Rocky bodies with atmospheres are a little different. I'd bet that Pluto and Charon will look a lot more like Mercury or Luna than like little Phobos or an asteroid.

Solrey, you've brought up an interesting set of leads!

Jim
jjohnson
 
Posts: 1147
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2009 11:24 am
Location: Thurston County WA

Re: Luna like Earth

Unread postby moses » Sat Oct 23, 2010 11:44 pm

Smells more like comet exhaust. EU theory says that nearly all rocky bodies lacking a protective magnetosphere/atmosphere should produce similar electro-chemical reaction by-products. In a crater formed by EDM there should be a thin hydrated layer of frozen dust and sand over a brittle porous top layer, like slag, with hydrocarbons and combustion gases filling the pores, covering fractured metal/mineral rich fused rock which becomes less fractured and denser with depth. Hitting it with the impactor should have produced more electro-chemical reactions. Essentially it should smell like a comet and taste like an asteroid.
solrey


Would not the percentage of electrically produced material be low compared with just ordinarily ejected material ? Whereas cometary coma material would be all electrically produced. Then again the really fine material might be more measurable, and this could be a high percentage electrically produced.
Mo
moses
 
Posts: 1062
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 3:18 pm
Location: Adelaide

Re: Luna like Earth

Unread postby solrey » Sun Oct 24, 2010 1:04 am

Moses, perhaps I wasn't clear. The entire geology of the crater is due to the EDM that formed it. The gases trapped in the porous slag layer and the metal and mineral ions that were drawn into the electric field when the crater was formed was the base chemistry for other reactions that the impact produced. I've been talking about it for over a year on this thread which I'll comment on later once I sort through all the information.

Chemical analysis should lie within the range for comets.
[..]
Most, if not all, of the gases detected will be the by-products of electro-chemical/thermatic reaction chains.
[..]
The point I was making is that the same processes are observed on multiple objects in the solar system.
[..]
What are two things that all of these rocky bodies of similar composition and chemistry have in common? Direct exposure to solar plasma and time varying electromagnetic fields. The main differences among them are in how much and how rapidly their electromagnetic environment changes.


cheers
“Today's scientists have substituted mathematics for experiments, and they wander off through equation after equation, and eventually build a structure which has no relation to reality"
Nikola Tesla
User avatar
solrey
 
Posts: 631
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2009 12:54 pm

Re: Luna like Earth

Unread postby seasmith » Sat Nov 13, 2010 6:46 pm

& Some more Clues:

“ “Objects hitting the moon can be categorized in different “impactor populations,” where each population has its own set of characteristics. Head also used the LOLA maps to determine the time when the impactor population changed. "Using the crater counts from the different impact basins and examining the populations making up the superposed craters, we can look back in time to discover when this transition in impactor populations occurred. The LRO LOLA impact crater database shows that the transition occurred about the time of the Orientale impact basin, about 3.8 billion years ago. The implication is that this change in populations occurred around the same time as the large impact basins stopped forming, and raises the question of whether or not these factors might be related. The answers to these questions have implications for the earliest history of all the planets in the inner solar system, including Earth," says Head.

In the other two Science papers, researchers describe how data from the Diviner Lunar Radiometer Experiment instrument on LRO are showing that the geologic processes that forged the lunar surface were complex as well. The data have revealed previously unseen compositional differences in the crustal highlands, and have confirmed the presence of anomalously silica-rich material in five distinct regions. “ “


Anorthosite [ A lower density silicaceous rock, with a very controversial body of opinion concerning it’s history on our planet]
and basaltic Maria.

“ “"The fact that we see this composition in multiple geologic settings suggests that there may have been multiple processes producing these rocks."

[ Likewise for their production on Earth. ]


"Processes" defined by age of occurrence and/or nature of formative event.


However, even in the South Pole Aitken Basin (SPA), the largest, oldest, and deepest impact crater on the moon -- deep enough to have penetrated through the crust and into the mantle -- there is no evidence of mantle material.”


So, the inflicted wounds were not that deep, or, there was not significant earth-mantle type material available.

http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/LRO/n ... youth.html
~{one may reasonably disregard the BUP group opine in the first paragraph}


I think we have to consider the likelihood of multiple types of formative events, ie: cometary, astroidal and electric impacts.
As to timing, it’s possible to conjecture from the relative mafic contents of the two main types of crater debris described, that the earlier events encountered a more plastic surface and the later, a lighter, more defined crust. Perhaps similar to a putative early Earthen hide.

s
seasmith
 
Posts: 2742
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 6:59 pm

New craters on the Moon?

Unread postby Nereid » Sat Nov 20, 2010 8:36 am

In the last few decades the Moon has been studied - photographed shall we say - by instruments on lots of remote and manned spacecraft.

Nearly all the images from such instruments allow us to see smaller features than the best we can do from down here on the surface of the Earth.

Does anyone know if any new craters (or other features) have been imaged, ones not seen in earlier images?

According to EU theory, how often will new craters be created on the Moon?
Nereid
 
Posts: 744
Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2010 11:21 am

Re: New craters on the Moon?

Unread postby JohnMT » Sat Nov 20, 2010 9:11 am

Apparently the last impact crater occurred sometime during the last 38 years.

Ref:
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/LRO/m ... rater.html

According to EU theory, how often will new craters be created on the Moon?


From my perspective and understanding, any future cratering on the moon is currently an unknown.

Do you have any predictions?
JohnMT
 
Posts: 99
Joined: Fri Dec 12, 2008 5:52 am

Re: New craters on the Moon?

Unread postby solrey » Sat Nov 20, 2010 11:10 am

Hi Nereid. It seems you're trying to start an honest dialogue and I appreciate that.

I believe they found some holes or pits that weren't known before.

The moon is frequently impacted by meteoroids and it's been impacted throughout it's existence over the course of however many billions of years. EU theory does not say that all craters are from electrical discharge machining, there are plenty of impact craters and to think otherwise would be quite unrealistic. What we're saying is there are numerous features on planets and moons that match what would be expected if they were the result of EDM, but are difficult to explain by impact cratering or geological activity. These EDM events would have happened sometime in the distant past.

There is no way to tell how often these events happen or if and when they might happen again. There is electric potential on the moon which creates what NASA describes as a diaphanous wind, like an ionic breeze, across the terminator. Moon fountains and dust hovering above the horizon are likely due to this electrostatic potential. Not enough electric activity to blast out craters, but enough to shuffle surface dust around a bit. It's thought that permanently shadowed craters develop electrostatic potential, thus an electric field, between the crater floor and the exosphere above the rim. As a matter of fact, the LCROSS mission detected sputtering from the crater floor and evidence of a local exosphere above Cabeus crater prior to impact.

From Anthony Colaprete, PI for the LCROSS mission:
"Perhaps what we're actually seeing is energetic particles reacting with the cold frost down in that dark crater creating sputterings, species coming up out of the dark craters and creating a little localized atmosphere, an exosphere above the crater itself. This is a brand new finding something that we're really looking into now and trying to finish the analysis on."
[..]
“There is likely chemistry occurring on the grains in the dark crater,” he explained. “That is interesting because how do you get chemistry going on at 40 to 50 degrees Kelvin with no sunlight? What is the energy — is it cosmic rays, solar wind protons working their way in, is it other electrical potentials associated with the dark and light regions? We don’t know. So this is, again, a circumstance where we have some data that doesn’t make entirely a lot of sense, but it does match certain findings elsewhere, meaning it does look cometary in some extent, and does look like what we see in cold grain processes in interstellar space.


We've been discussing sputtering and cold chemistry on the moon, and other rocky bodies, due to electric fields and/or charged particles since before the LCROSS mission.

A lot of our ideas aren't as far out as you think.

cheers
“Today's scientists have substituted mathematics for experiments, and they wander off through equation after equation, and eventually build a structure which has no relation to reality"
Nikola Tesla
User avatar
solrey
 
Posts: 631
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2009 12:54 pm

Re: New craters on the Moon?

Unread postby Nereid » Sat Nov 20, 2010 7:12 pm

solrey wrote:Hi Nereid. It seems you're trying to start an honest dialogue and I appreciate that.

I believe they found some holes or pits that weren't known before.

The moon is frequently impacted by meteoroids and it's been impacted throughout it's existence over the course of however many billions of years. EU theory does not say that all craters are from electrical discharge machining, there are plenty of impact craters and to think otherwise would be quite unrealistic. What we're saying is there are numerous features on planets and moons that match what would be expected if they were the result of EDM, but are difficult to explain by impact cratering or geological activity. These EDM events would have happened sometime in the distant past.

There is no way to tell how often these events happen or if and when they might happen again. There is electric potential on the moon which creates what NASA describes as a diaphanous wind, like an ionic breeze, across the terminator. Moon fountains and dust hovering above the horizon are likely due to this electrostatic potential. Not enough electric activity to blast out craters, but enough to shuffle surface dust around a bit. It's thought that permanently shadowed craters develop electrostatic potential, thus an electric field, between the crater floor and the exosphere above the rim. As a matter of fact, the LCROSS mission detected sputtering from the crater floor and evidence of a local exosphere above Cabeus crater prior to impact.

From Anthony Colaprete, PI for the LCROSS mission:
"Perhaps what we're actually seeing is energetic particles reacting with the cold frost down in that dark crater creating sputterings, species coming up out of the dark craters and creating a little localized atmosphere, an exosphere above the crater itself. This is a brand new finding something that we're really looking into now and trying to finish the analysis on."
[..]
“There is likely chemistry occurring on the grains in the dark crater,” he explained. “That is interesting because how do you get chemistry going on at 40 to 50 degrees Kelvin with no sunlight? What is the energy — is it cosmic rays, solar wind protons working their way in, is it other electrical potentials associated with the dark and light regions? We don’t know. So this is, again, a circumstance where we have some data that doesn’t make entirely a lot of sense, but it does match certain findings elsewhere, meaning it does look cometary in some extent, and does look like what we see in cold grain processes in interstellar space.


We've been discussing sputtering and cold chemistry on the moon, and other rocky bodies, due to electric fields and/or charged particles since before the LCROSS mission.

A lot of our ideas aren't as far out as you think.

cheers

Thanks solrey.

According to EU theory, how can craters - on the Moon - created by EDM be distinguished from those created by impacts of meteroids, if all one has is images taken by instruments which detect, from afar, electromagnetic radiation (i.e. remote sensing)?

When was the Moon formed, per EU theory?
Nereid
 
Posts: 744
Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2010 11:21 am

Re: New craters on the Moon?

Unread postby Jarvamundo » Sat Nov 20, 2010 8:36 pm

Nereid wrote:According to EU theory, how can craters - on the Moon - created by EDM be distinguished from those created by impacts of meteroids, if all one has is images taken by instruments which detect, from afar, electromagnetic radiation (i.e. remote sensing)?


This is something EU theorists and experimenters have contributed to in great detail.
http://thunderbolts.info/tpod/00subjectx.htm#Craters

Much like all forums, alot of your questions have been asked before, TPODs in subject-archive are a great start and reference.
User avatar
Jarvamundo
 
Posts: 612
Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2010 5:26 pm
Location: Australia

Re: New craters on the Moon?

Unread postby Nereid » Sun Nov 21, 2010 12:56 pm

Jarvamundo wrote:
Nereid wrote:According to EU theory, how can craters - on the Moon - created by EDM be distinguished from those created by impacts of meteroids, if all one has is images taken by instruments which detect, from afar, electromagnetic radiation (i.e. remote sensing)?


This is something EU theorists and experimenters have contributed to in great detail.
http://thunderbolts.info/tpod/00subjectx.htm#Craters

Much like all forums, alot of your questions have been asked before, TPODs in subject-archive are a great start and reference.

Thanks for that Jarvamundo, I'll read that material.

What about my other question, when was the Moon formed, per EU theory?
Nereid
 
Posts: 744
Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2010 11:21 am

Re: New craters on the Moon?

Unread postby mharratsc » Sun Nov 21, 2010 2:31 pm

What difference does it make? No one can prove it one way or the other, so... entirely philosophical question, isn't it? o.O
Mike H.

"I have no fear to shout out my ignorance and let the Wise correct me, for every instance of such narrows the gulf between them and me." -- Michael A. Harrington
mharratsc
 
Posts: 1405
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2009 7:37 am

Re: New craters on the Moon?

Unread postby Nereid » Sun Nov 21, 2010 3:55 pm

mharratsc wrote:What difference does it make? No one can prove it one way or the other, so... entirely philosophical question, isn't it? o.O

I guess you are referring to my question (when was the Moon formed, per EU theory?); if not, then what follows is irrelevant.

There are many differences the 'age of the Moon' could make, with respect to any theory or set of hypotheses concerning the Moon, the solar system, the Earth, the stable isotopes/elements found in Moon rocks, etc, etc, etc.

For example (and note that this is a made-up example), if the Moon is essentially infinite in age (according to one set of ideas), and if - in that same set of ideas - the proton is unstable (whether within a nucleus or isolated), with a half-life of 1025 years, then the very existence of the Moon would seem to be in conflict with the instability of the proton.

In other words, the estimated age of the Moon may be able to be used to test - scientifically - various ideas.

Also, I don't really understand this part of your post: "No one can prove it one way or the other".

Do you think it is possible to prove, one way or the other, any idea in science? I thought that "proof" applies only to mathematics, doesn't it?
Nereid
 
Posts: 744
Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2010 11:21 am

Re: New craters on the Moon?

Unread postby Jarvamundo » Sun Nov 21, 2010 5:12 pm

Nereid wrote:
Jarvamundo wrote:
Nereid wrote:According to EU theory, how can craters - on the Moon - created by EDM be distinguished from those created by impacts of meteroids, if all one has is images taken by instruments which detect, from afar, electromagnetic radiation (i.e. remote sensing)?


This is something EU theorists and experimenters have contributed to in great detail.
http://thunderbolts.info/tpod/00subjectx.htm#Craters

Much like all forums, alot of your questions have been asked before, TPODs in subject-archive are a great start and reference.

Thanks for that Jarvamundo, I'll read that material.

What about my other question, when was the Moon formed, per EU theory?


Wal suggests it is was captured. I believe there is currently another thread discussing these very ideas ;)

Again, study the tpods and holoscience.com.

There is a search engine at thunderbolts.info (not forum) where you can search all or any of the sites etc (right side)

mharratsc wrote:What difference does it make? No one can prove it one way or the other, so... entirely philosophical question, isn't it? o.O


I also agree with this. EU tends to study what can be answered from the available evidence, whilst maintaining humility of admitting what simply is beyond the current evidence.

As far as knowing the 'perfect story of creation of everything'.... that's something for a mathematically beautiful theories out there, which usually involves the 'long time ago, billions of light years in the past' yadda yadda... but thats a whole other story, we need more graph paper.
User avatar
Jarvamundo
 
Posts: 612
Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2010 5:26 pm
Location: Australia

PreviousNext

Return to Electric Universe - Planetary Science

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests