IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
The lunar fossil bulge
Guest_AlexBlackwell_*
post Aug 2 2006, 10:11 PM
Post #1





Guests






This abstract by Garrick-Bethell and Zuber, which was presented earlier this year at the 37th LPSC, should be included in your overnight reading.

This post has been edited by AlexBlackwell: Aug 3 2006, 08:01 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Guest_AlexBlackwell_*
post Aug 3 2006, 06:56 PM
Post #2





Guests






Did everyone do their homework? biggrin.gif

The Garrick-Bethell et al. paper ("Evidence for a Past High-Eccentricity Lunar Orbit") and the accompanying Perspectives piece by Kimmo Innanen ("Solving Laplace's Lunar Puzzle") are being published in the August 4, 2006, issue of Science.

See also:

Moon's Strange Bulge Finally Explained
By Sara Goudarzi
Staff Writer, Space.com
posted: 03 August 2006
02:10 pm ET
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Guest_AlexBlackwell_*
post Aug 8 2006, 01:29 AM
Post #3





Guests






Some related press articles:

Solved! Mysterious Moon bulge explained by eccentric orbit
by Marie Theresa Bray
Cosmos Online
Friday, 4 August 2006

Scientists Chip Away at Mysteries of the Moon
By KENNETH CHANG
The New York Times
August 8, 2006
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Guest_Myran_*
post Aug 9 2006, 07:14 PM
Post #4





Guests






Thank you for the heads up, and that explanation do indeed sound plausible.
To me it seems that this theory also go hand in hand with the impact scenario for the Moons formation. Since the eccentric orbit would be a more likely result from such one impact.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Guest_AlexBlackwell_*
post Aug 9 2006, 10:03 PM
Post #5





Guests






QUOTE (Myran @ Aug 9 2006, 09:14 AM) *
Thank you for the heads up, and that explanation do indeed sound plausible.
To me it seems that this theory also go hand in hand with the impact scenario for the Moons formation. Since the eccentric orbit would be a more likely result from such one impact.

Great minds think alike, I guess. biggrin.gif

Here's an excerpt (references omitted) from Kimmo Innanen's accompanying Perspectives piece ("Solving Laplace's Lunar Puzzle") in the same issue:

QUOTE
In the work of Garrick-Bethell et al., the central issue is the Moon's own nonspherical shape, which, together with its orbit, lead the authors to an interesting conclusion about its past history: Its orbit around Earth in the distant past must have been much closer and also more eccentric than it is now. In fact, their optimum solutions locate the young Moon at a time 100 to 200 million years after its formation, when it was at a distance of some 24 to 27 Earth radii. At this time it would have passed through the 3:2 spin-orbit resonance, reminiscent of the present-day behavior of the planet Mercury, which rotates three times about its own axis for every two revolutions about the Sun. They show that the distance and eccentricity at this time would have been optimal for the bulge to "freeze" into the solidifying Moon, a fossil bulge we observe to this day. These results appear to dovetail in a reasonable way with the most viable contemporary theory of the Moon's own origin through a giant impact of a Mars-like object with Earth, from which debris the primordial Moon formed at some 4 Earth radii.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
RNeuhaus
post Aug 10 2006, 04:26 PM
Post #6


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1636
Joined: 9-May 05
From: Lima, Peru
Member No.: 385



About the Moon bugle, I would like to know what part of Moon has bugle. As I have observed my Moon Near Side Map and have found that the North and South regions has higher altitude average than in the middle latitudes. The Mars (Marias) are in the lower level of surface. I haven't seen the Moon Far Side. I suppose that the lowest point of Moon is at the Atkinson Crater which is the biggest impact crater of the solar system.

Rodolfo
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Guest_AlexBlackwell_*
post Sep 1 2006, 11:29 PM
Post #7





Guests






QUOTE (AlexBlackwell @ Aug 3 2006, 08:56 AM) *
The Garrick-Bethell et al. paper ("Evidence for a Past High-Eccentricity Lunar Orbit") and the accompanying Perspectives piece by Kimmo Innanen ("Solving Laplace's Lunar Puzzle") are being published in the August 4, 2006, issue of Science.

For those without access to Science, one of the paper's co-authors, Maria Zuber, is offering a reprint (168 Kb PDF) via her publications page.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
stevesliva
post Aug 4 2011, 02:28 AM
Post #8


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1168
Joined: 14-October 05
From: Seattle
Member No.: 530



Bump to an old old thread because it has some older theories about the lunar farside. I was curious what past thinking was after today's news.

New theory published today in Nature:
http://www.nature.com/news/2011/110803/ful...s.2011.456.html

Somehow Gawker got a better image, though:
http://gawker.com/5827556/we-used-to-have-...oon-murdered-it
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 23rd October 2014 - 05:14 AM
RULES AND GUIDELINES
Please read the Forum Rules and Guidelines before posting.

IMAGE COPYRIGHT
Images posted on UnmannedSpaceflight.com may be copyrighted. Do not reproduce without permission. Read here for further information on space images and copyright.

OPINIONS AND MODERATION
Opinions expressed on UnmannedSpaceflight.com are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of UnmannedSpaceflight.com or The Planetary Society. The all-volunteer UnmannedSpaceflight.com moderation team is wholly independent of The Planetary Society. The Planetary Society has no influence over decisions made by the UnmannedSpaceflight.com moderators.
SUPPORT THE FORUM
Unmannedspaceflight.com is a project of the Planetary Society and is funded by donations from visitors and members. Help keep this forum up and running by contributing here.