Was The Moon Artifically Created?
- Sy Borg
- Site Admin
- Posts: 14997
- Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm
Re: Was The Moon Artifically Created?
I wonder if those who think someone made the Moon understand just how immense it is? To create something in space so huge that its spherises under gravity would require unimaginable technology, not to mention amounts of energy and resources.
- Jing or Jang
- Posts: 42
- Joined: May 16th, 2020, 7:08 am
Re: Was The Moon Artifically Created?
There are only maybe 14 minutes each year of an eclipse and approximately 526,000 minutes each year when the moon is not eclipsed ... so what is this "precision" you speak of?Theboombody wrote: ↑February 26th, 2014, 2:09 pm Natural Things - trees, goats, rivers
Man-made (or extraterrestrial-made) things - chairs, jet engines,... the moon?
Now this sounds like nonsense, that the moon isn't a product of nature. But look at a solar eclipse. Ever notice how astoundingly precise the position of the sun, moon, and earth must be for the moon to cover the sun so perfectly so that only the corona is showing? What are the odds of that? I wonder if any of Jupiter's 67 moons ever eclipses the sun so precisely. Most eclipses on other planets are probably going to have the object blocking the sun be too small or too large for just the corona to show.
I can't fathom such precision being so random. If you take a spectrogram of two different objects, and they match exactly, that's not random. Neither is the exactness of the size of the moon blocking the sun random. It can't be. Someone or something intelligent put that moon up there on purpose with intent. Was it an alien being? A supernatural being? A bunch of human beings? I don't know. I don't know who would do it or why, but I just can't see it as being random. The odds of it being random are too small. I think the odds of Egyptians building the moon on Earth, shooting it into space, and leaving no trace of evidence behind is much greater than the odds of the moon's exact placement during eclipses being totally random.
- Jing or Jang
- Posts: 42
- Joined: May 16th, 2020, 7:08 am
Re: Was The Moon Artifically Created?
It is a fair assumption that there have been more lost & destroyed planets and stars and meteors than you and I can count on our fingers and toes. The ones that we observe today are the only ones that survived so speculating on "350 times nearer" or "500 times smaller" is fruitless and irrelevant because there probably have been moons "350 times nearer" and "500 times smaller" but they have failed. And the reason they failed is very likely because they were 350 times nearer and/or 500 times smaller.Theboombody wrote: ↑February 26th, 2014, 7:54 pm..... Think of all the other places the moon could have formed. It could have formed 350 times nearer. It could have been 500 times smaller. Regardless of what numbers you throw in there, I think seeing a photo of a solar eclipse says more than the numbers alone can illustrate. I see intent. ....
- Pattern-chaser
- Premium Member
- Posts: 8268
- Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
- Location: England
Re: Was The Moon Artifically Created?
"Who cares, wins"
- Sy Borg
- Site Admin
- Posts: 14997
- Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm
Re: Was The Moon Artifically Created?
However, recently a Japanese study found a steady stream of carbon ions being emitted from the Moon. Yet huge collisions produce very high temperatures, enough to boil away chemicals known as "volatiles", which tend to vaporise at much lower temperatures. So that will cast doubt on the Theia hypothesis.
- Terrapin Station
- Posts: 6227
- Joined: August 23rd, 2016, 3:00 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Bertrand Russell and WVO Quine
- Location: NYC Man
Re: Was The Moon Artifically Created?
Since supposedly all of the matter in the universe was at extremely high temperatures at various times in the past--starting with the big bang, and then continuing with solar evolution, including supernovae, etc. there's something wrong with saying that carbon ions can't obtain posterior to matter being at a high temperature (or at least there's something wrong elsewhere in the standard picture).Greta wrote: ↑June 2nd, 2020, 5:57 pm However, recently a Japanese study found a steady stream of carbon ions being emitted from the Moon. Yet huge collisions produce very high temperatures, enough to boil away chemicals known as "volatiles", which tend to vaporise at much lower temperatures. So that will cast doubt on the Theia hypothesis.
- Sy Borg
- Site Admin
- Posts: 14997
- Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm
Re: Was The Moon Artifically Created?
I don't know enough to say. Here is a report on it: https://www.sciencetimes.com/articles/2 ... urface.htmTerrapin Station wrote: ↑June 3rd, 2020, 9:11 amSince supposedly all of the matter in the universe was at extremely high temperatures at various times in the past--starting with the big bang, and then continuing with solar evolution, including supernovae, etc. there's something wrong with saying that carbon ions can't obtain posterior to matter being at a high temperature (or at least there's something wrong elsewhere in the standard picture).Greta wrote: ↑June 2nd, 2020, 5:57 pm However, recently a Japanese study found a steady stream of carbon ions being emitted from the Moon. Yet huge collisions produce very high temperatures, enough to boil away chemicals known as "volatiles", which tend to vaporise at much lower temperatures. So that will cast doubt on the Theia hypothesis.
Looking at the article, the author refers to "volatile carbon", so I'm guessing that it's only the ions, rather than compounds, that are expected to dissipate under high temperatures. "Volatile organic compounds (VOC) means any compound of carbon, excluding carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, carbonic acid, metallic carbides or carbonates and ammonium carbonate, which participates in atmospheric photochemical reactions, except those designated by EPA as having negligible photochemical reactivity". (Google)
If anyone else actually knows, by all means join in.
-
- Posts: 10339
- Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm
Re: Was The Moon Artifically Created?
In chemistry "volatility" is the ease with which a substance vapourizes. So highly volatile substances tend to exist as vapours (gases) for a wide range of temperatures and as liquids or solids for a relatively low range.Greta wrote:Looking at the article, the author refers to "volatile carbon"...
So the idea is that a body that was at a very high temperature in the past would be unlikely to contain volatile substances that pre-date that high temperature stage, because those substances would have vapourized and escaped to space, if the body's gravity isn't strong enough to hold on to them.
Obviously temperatures that obtained before any of this are irrelevant. Go back far enough and the whole Universe was too hot for any chemical substances at all to exist. That doesn't mean that they don't exist now. It just means that their existence as those chemical substances (as opposed to the building blocks of those chemical substances) doesn't pre-date that hot stage.
---
It's certainly interesting that the "Theia hypothesis" is in doubt. Another objection to it (expressed by a poster on here before) is based on the dynamics of the collision. That objection proposes that it would be dynamically impossible for material ejected by a collision to enter a stable orbit. This objection can be shown to be false using simulations. I've written some simple ones myself, out of curiosity.
- Sy Borg
- Site Admin
- Posts: 14997
- Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm
Re: Was The Moon Artifically Created?
Yes, my understanding is that simulations have shown that much debris falls into orbit after collisions. The objects might be broken but the gravity well is still there, albeit less stable for a while. Still, if Theia is in doubt, that may be confusing. Then again, maybe the Earth and Moon are just a plain old binary like Pluto and Charon? Could they have formed from the same material from the protoplanetary disc and fallen into an orbit a long time ago?
It seems that pairs of relative peer objects are common in the universe. Certainly it's the case with stars. When our telescopy has advanced to the point of observing Earthlike planets without help from gravitational lensing, we will find out how common planetary binaries are.
-
- Posts: 10339
- Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm
Re: Was The Moon Artifically Created?
Yes, carbon is an interesting element in that it can not only form very different types of molecular carbon, depending on the shapes in which carbon atoms plug together to make molecules, but be part of a huge variety of other types of molecules, containing other elements, too.Greta wrote:I'd not heard of volatile carbon before, just plain old carbon. Whatever, that's the carbon that vaporises at high temps.
In the case of the volatile compounds made using carbon that we call "organic", the volatility is very useful to any creature with a sense of smell. (Or rather, the sense of smell evolved because of the existence of these volatile compounds.)
- Dr Jonathan Osterman PhD
- Posts: 230
- Joined: December 14th, 2023, 6:07 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: The BUDDHA
- Location: Zürich, Switzerland
- Contact:
Re: Was The Moon Artifically Created?
There has been enough scientific evidence accumulated in support of the Moon having been manufactured by Aliens as their space Mother-ship, parked in Earth's orbit.Theboombody wrote: ↑February 26th, 2014, 2:09 pm Natural Things - trees, goats, rivers
Man-made (or extraterrestrial-made) things - chairs, jet engines,... the moon?
Now this sounds like nonsense, that the moon isn't a product of nature. But look at a solar eclipse. Ever notice how astoundingly precise the position of the sun, moon, and earth must be for the moon to cover the sun so perfectly so that only the corona is showing? What are the odds of that? I wonder if any of Jupiter's 67 moons ever eclipses the sun so precisely. Most eclipses on other planets are probably going to have the object blocking the sun be too small or too large for just the corona to show.
I can't fathom such precision being so random. If you take a spectrogram of two different objects, and they match exactly, that's not random. Neither is the exactness of the size of the moon blocking the sun random. It can't be. Someone or something intelligent put that moon up there on purpose with intent. Was it an alien being? A supernatural being? A bunch of human beings? I don't know. I don't know who would do it or why, but I just can't see it as being random. The odds of it being random are too small. I think the odds of Egyptians building the moon on Earth, shooting it into space, and leaving no trace of evidence behind is much greater than the odds of the moon's exact placement during eclipses being totally random.
Where do you think all these UFOs go back to for the night ?
Dr. Bernardo Kastrup — “Materialism is baloney!!!”
Youtube. com/watch?v=FcPyTgLILqA
Dr. Jonathan Österman, Ph.D., ETH Zürich, Switzerland
2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month
Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023
Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023