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: bboyer, MGmirkin

Posts: 75
Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2011 1:29 pm
Location: Netherlands (Nederland, Holland)

Re: The Big Splat?

Unread post by Shrike » Thu Aug 11, 2011 11:26 am

Well it just shows how much they think of the viewing public.
First the gravity plays hardly any role according to them as the collision velocity was relatively slow.
Then when the impact occurred gravity plays an huge role according to them as the second moon gets flattened out over half of the first moon in just 2 hours.

As for not finding any resources on it any more. It is probably all removed because theory was so flawed it is ridiculous that it was published at first at all :lol:

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

Re: The Big Splat?

Unread post by jjohnson » Fri Aug 12, 2011 12:40 pm

The video is still available on Red Ice Creations here. Scroll down past the article to their YouTube video of the story and the simulation. The trailing smaller moon looks to be in the exact same trajectory as the leading moon, and not way back in a stable Trojan point as was discussed. A passive scenario is unlikely to allow acceleration of a body without some external perturbation, or a different orbital arrangement as I discussed above. Nonetheless, Moon 2 seems to have the pedal to the metal and is overtaking the primary moon ahead of it. ??

Posts: 165
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2010 11:41 pm

Re: The Big Splat?

Unread post by +EyeOn-W-ANeed2Know » Sun Aug 14, 2011 2:23 pm

I guess Moon2 just had that "eye of the Tiger" determination. ;)

Thanks Jim, but even with those images of the animation, I still can't figure it out in relation to my 2nd point of contention.
I just cannot see how the subsurface shock-wave from the 2 sphereoids colliding would drive the KREEP (Potassium, Rare Earth Elements & Phosporus) and the OOS (Orthopyroxene, Olivine, and Mg‐Al spinel) to an area at 90° from the direction from the initial impact...and only on one "face".

I noticed the author of that article concluded the event might have been "much like what happened to the asteroid Vesta". I saw the Vesta pics on a different page of the newspaper.
I wondered how the mainstreamers would explain the connected 6 crater chain...
or the roughly hexagonal impression of the chain's largest crater.
Looks carved by electric discharge to me. ;)

Posts: 2815
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 6:59 pm

Re: The Big Splat?

Unread post by seasmith » Sun Aug 14, 2011 6:25 pm

jj wrote:
A passive scenario is unlikely to allow acceleration of a body without some external perturbation, or a different orbital arrangement as I
or spin, it's relative motion as well as trajectory

Posts: 2815
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 6:59 pm

Re: The Big Splat?

Unread post by seasmith » Wed Aug 17, 2011 2:50 pm

new analysis of a lunar rock brought back by the 1972 Apollo 16 mission suggests that the moon could be tens of millions of years younger than previously thought. Another possibility, scientists say, is that current models of how the moon cooled in its early years may be totally wrong.
Using three separate dating techniques that measure the ratios of lead, neodymium, and samarium isotopes, the researchers estimate that the rock had crystallized about 4.36 billion years ago, plus or minus 3 million years, they report online today in Nature. These analyses are the first to produce consistent ages from multiple dating techniques on the same moon rock, the scientists contend. "This is the first really reliable age for this suite of rocks," Borg says.
So, the researchers claim, the extraordinarily young age for the lunar sample means that either the moon solidified significantly later than most previous estimates or current models of how the moon's crust formed are incorrect.
(their emphasis)

http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2 ... 64a8eddd48

Posts: 14
Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2008 6:12 am

What's with those moon swirlies?

Unread post by kmerrell » Fri Sep 09, 2011 7:42 am

This from Wired.com:
Known about since the Renaissance, lunar swirls came under increased scrutiny after orbiting satellites in the 1960s noticed that they tended to be associated with magnetic fields. Unlike the Earth’s large global magnetic field, these lunar magnetic fields are small local phenomena that are strewn more or less randomly on its surface. Wherever researchers find lunar swirls, they find these magnetic fields.
Gee, all you'd need to bring this mystery to ground would be to accept the possibility of magnetism's companion, electricity.

http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2011/ ... es+2%29%29

Posts: 328
Joined: Tue May 27, 2008 9:01 am

Re: What's with those moon swirlies?

Unread post by ElecGeekMom » Fri Sep 09, 2011 8:36 am

Check out the comments - one commenter said they were Birkeland currents. :D

User avatar
Posts: 668
Joined: Wed Nov 19, 2008 7:54 am

Re: What's with those moon swirlies?

Unread post by tayga » Fri Sep 09, 2011 2:42 pm

generating heat that turned the surrounding area magnetic
These guys are just making stuff up now. Whatever happened to plain old science?

Both paramagnetism and ferromagnetism decrease with temperature and disappear altogether at particular transition temperatures. Bulk magnetism is a consequence of ordering in materials. Adding heat increases disorder.

It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn't matter how smart you are. If it doesn't agree with experiment, it's wrong.

- Richard P. Feynman

Normal science does not aim at novelties of fact or theory and, when successful, finds none.
- Thomas Kuhn

User avatar
The Great Dog
Posts: 255
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 4:58 pm

Re: What's with those moon swirlies?

Unread post by The Great Dog » Fri Sep 09, 2011 7:58 pm

This Picture of the Day discusses them:

Lunar Magnetic Anomalies

There are no other dogs but The Great Dog

Posts: 15
Joined: Thu Dec 10, 2009 12:34 pm

Re: What's with those moon swirlies?

Unread post by slug » Sun Sep 11, 2011 5:38 pm

Some nice borderline "crater chains"/rilles in the bottom left of both first and third photo of the wired article. Clues for what caused the moons features hiding in plain sight of mainstream observers!

Adolfo Giurfa
Posts: 23
Joined: Mon Jun 08, 2009 10:30 am

Re: Electric Moon

Unread post by Adolfo Giurfa » Mon Sep 12, 2011 6:18 am

The Moon is ground, relative to earth, it sucks in energy from the earth and that is related to its orbit´s eccentricity:

User avatar
Posts: 2539
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 2:01 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: What's with those moon swirlies?

Unread post by webolife » Mon Sep 12, 2011 5:28 pm

And rim craters all around...
Truth extends beyond the border of self-limiting science. Free discourse among opposing viewpoints draws the open-minded away from the darkness of inevitable bias and nearer to the light of universal reality.

User avatar
Posts: 596
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2009 8:59 am

Ancient lunar dynamo may explain magnetized moon rocks

Unread post by MrAmsterdam » Thu Nov 10, 2011 11:04 am


Ancient lunar dynamo may explain magnetized moon rocks

The presence of magnetized rocks on the surface of the moon, which has no global magnetic field, has been a mystery since the days of the Apollo program. Now a team of scientists has proposed a novel mechanism that could have generated a magnetic field on the moon early in its history.

The "geodynamo" that generates Earth's magnetic field is powered by heat from the inner core, which drives complex fluid motions in the molten iron of the outer core. But the moon is too small to support that type of dynamo, according to Christina Dwyer, a graduate student in Earth and planetary sciences at the University of California, Santa Cruz. In the November 10 issue of Nature, Dwyer and her coauthors--planetary scientists Francis Nimmo at UC Santa Cruz and David Stevenson at the California Institute of Technology--describe how an ancient lunar dynamo could have arisen from stirring of the moon's liquid core driven by the motion of the solid mantle above it.

"This is a very different way of powering a dynamo that involves physical stirring, like stirring a bowl with a giant spoon," Dwyer said.

Dwyer and her coauthors calculated the effects of differential motion between the moon's core and mantle. Early in its history, the moon orbited the Earth at a much closer distance than it does today, and it continues to gradually recede from the Earth. At close distances, tidal interactions between the Earth and the moon caused the moon's mantle to rotate slightly differently than the core. This differential motion of the mantle relative to the core stirred the liquid core, creating fluid motions that, in theory, could give rise to a magnetic dynamo.
"The moon "spoon-dynamo" is temporarily switched off, please come and visit another time."
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 -1934

User avatar
Posts: 244
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 5:17 am


Unread post by tolenio » Fri Nov 11, 2011 12:37 pm

ScienceAtNASA on Nov 10, 2011
MYSTERY OF THE LUNAR IONOSPHERE: How can a world without air have an ionosphere? Somehow the Moon has done it. Lunar researchers have been struggling with this mystery for years, and they may have finally found a solution.

Wouldn't this lunar ionosphere be similar to electric comets?

"The Pharisees and the scholars have taken the keys of knowledge and have hidden them. They have not entered nor have they allowed those who want to enter to do so. As for you, be as sly as snakes and as simple as doves." Gospel of Thomas http://www.gnosis.org/naghamm/gthlamb.html

Posts: 2815
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 6:59 pm


Unread post by seasmith » Mon Nov 14, 2011 6:40 pm

Wouldn't this lunar ionosphere be similar to electric comets?
Any positive ion structure might be considered as "grain",
so sure.
Now when there accumulates a quantity sufficient to constitute a layer, and it is separated from an internal kernel by a relatively dielectric layer, then it would probably qualify as an 'ionosphere.
UV rays from the sun hit the grains and ionize them. According to their calculations, this process produces enough charge (positive grains surrounded by negative electrons) to create the observed ionosphere.
http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/sc ... onosphere/


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests