All Things Space

China has successfully landed a rover on the moon. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/...the-Moon-as-space-programme-gathers-pace.html


Kayne West had something to say about it

kayne_zpsf49860ce.jpg
 
scrap style said:
I wonder what China thinks about the moon now that they've seen the alien base there. Surely the aliens won't allow them to turn it into a Death Star. And if the Chinese do try to make that happen, what happens on earth? War?
Click to expand...

the chinese hope to be reincarnated as star children


Monolith-Earth-Moon.jpg
 
While China's landing on the moon shows they have the technology, I don't know what scientific significance it will have. Maybe it will demonstrate how it could be used on other bodies in the solar system. The more we can do with unmanned equipment, the better we can explore distant bodies. It's way too cumbersome to send humans on long voyages. We are too fragile and need too many resources on the voyage.
 
ralphc1 said:
While China's landing on the moon shows they have the technology, I don't know what scientific significance it will have. Maybe it will demonstrate how it could be used on other bodies in the solar system. The more we can do with unmanned equipment, the better we can explore distant bodies. It's way too cumbersome to send humans on long voyages. We are too fragile and need too many resources on the voyage.
Click to expand...

If I recall correctly they're looking for helium.
 
ralphc1 said:
While China's landing on the moon shows they have the technology, I don't know what scientific significance it will have. Maybe it will demonstrate how it could be used on other bodies in the solar system. The more we can do with unmanned equipment, the better we can explore distant bodies. It's way too cumbersome to send humans on long voyages. We are too fragile and need too many resources on the voyage.
Click to expand...

technology they got from russia...
 
It has been deduced that an asteroid struck the Earth at the end of the Cretaceous era because of the layer of Iridium that is found at the Cretaceous /Tertiary boundary. Supposedly the Earth doesn't have much Iridium but asteroids have a lot of it. Isn't the Earth an accretion of asteroids? Shouldn't it have similar composition to the asteroids? Is the Earth's Iridium locked in it's core?
 
ralphc1 said:
It has been deduced that an asteroid struck the Earth at the end of the Cretaceous era because of the layer of Iridium that is found at the Cretaceous /Tertiary boundary. Supposedly the Earth doesn't have much Iridium but asteroids have a lot of it. Isn't the Earth an accretion of asteroids? Shouldn't it have similar composition to the asteroids? Is the Earth's Iridium locked in it's core?
Click to expand...

The Earth is formed from dust and gas that clumped together.
The Earth has an iron core. Consensius is that when the Earth was still molten an iron asteroid hit the Earth and it sunk to the core. It's also believed that's how the Moon was formed, when the iron asteroid hit the Earth it spewed dust out into space. Some of that dust stayed in the Earth's gravitational pull, that dust formed a ring around the Earth. Eventually the dust clumped up and formed the moon, just like how the Earth formed from dust clumping leftover from the creation of the sun.
 
jefferz said:
The Earth is formed from dust and gas that clumped together.
The Earth has an iron core. Consensius is that when the Earth was still molten an iron asteroid hit the Earth and it sunk to the core. It's also believed that's how the Moon was formed, when the iron asteroid hit the Earth it spewed dust out into space. Some of that dust stayed in the Earth's gravitational pull, that dust formed a ring around the Earth. Eventually the dust clumped up and formed the moon, just like how the Earth formed from dust clumping leftover from the creation of the sun.
Click to expand...

I understand that everything in the Solar system was formed from the same dust clumping. From what I've seen, scientists think that the heavier elements were more prevalent closer to the sun and the lighter elements farther from the sun. This is why the inner planets are far more dense than the outer gas giants. An iron core provides much of this density. As the heavier elements clump together, the gravitational pressure creates heat as well as the heat from collisions. Heavier elements sink to the center of the planets. I see that Iridium is a heavy element so it would settle to the core of a molten planet so it wouldn't be found in the crust. I guess I answered my own question. It isn't that Iridium is rare on Earth, just rare in the crust.

The currently accepted theory on the formation of the Earth/Moon system is that a smaller earth and another similar sized body collided, not quite dead center forming a larger molten earth and imparting the spin to the Earth/Moon system as the Moon formed from the ejected material. The Earth/Moon system is a rarity as our moon is much larger in relation to the planet it orbits than any we have found. The Moon stabilizes the rotation of the Earth and the spin from the collision may have increased the magneto effect that provides the magnetic field that shields the Earth from the Sun's radiation. The 24 hour period of rotation evens out the temperatures around the planet. The large tides the Moon raises probably helped life transition from the sea to the land.
 
ralphc1 said:
It has been deduced that an asteroid struck the Earth at the end of the Cretaceous era because of the layer of Iridium that is found at the Cretaceous /Tertiary boundary. Supposedly the Earth doesn't have much Iridium but asteroids have a lot of it. Isn't the Earth an accretion of asteroids? Shouldn't it have similar composition to the asteroids? Is the Earth's Iridium locked in it's core?
Click to expand...

likely not...that theory is just that...a theory. Based on what we have, but the chances it's the case are low as all hell.
 
I took an astronomy class this fall, was the best class I have ever taken. I wish we put more money towards space programs, there's so much to learn not only about the planets in our solar systems but the moons.

It's insane the things astronomers have figured out with math and accurately predicted without actually seeing it.
 
ralphc1 said:
So where did the planets come from in your mind?
Click to expand...

The solar system as far as we know has been relatively stable for all of recorded human memory...which is a small amount of time. It may have been the case that our solar system has been in unstable states in the very recent past as well, even within the time humans have been around.

I'd say if the solar system has been and/or stays stable for billions of years the current ideas about planet formation are very good...I'm guessing in the time the solar system has been around it's captured and lost a few major, even planetary size pieces...kuiper belt is peculiar.

On second thought though, the accretion disk idea seems to make perfect sense in a vacuum, which is probably as far as it should be taken given what we know.
 
andnowweknow said:
The solar system as far as we know has been relatively stable for all of recorded human memory...which is a small amount of time. It may have been the case that our solar system has been in unstable states in the very recent past as well, even within the time humans have been around.

I'd say if the solar system has been and/or stays stable for billions of years the current ideas about planet formation are very good...I'm guessing in the time the solar system has been around it's captured and lost a few major, even planetary size pieces...kuiper belt is peculiar.

On second thought though, the accretion disk idea seems to make perfect sense in a vacuum, which is probably as far as it should be taken given what we know.
Click to expand...

Is there anything you don't have authoritative certain knowledge about

You even know how all the planets formed

Iridium in the geological record means nothing , throw that theory out too
 
MPH said:
Is there anything you don't have authoritative certain knowledge about

You even know how all the planets formed

Iridium in the geological record means nothing , throw that theory out too
Click to expand...

You got a real chip on your shoulder champ. In the future I'll preface my statements and opinions on here with "IMO" and illiterate "I don't have a PhD in this arena but here are some thoughts" so I don't offend your delicate sensibility.

Opinions are a good thing on a forum. Try forming an original one sometime...we've all read scholastic textbooks. No need to chastize someone for going beyond those pages.

Furthermore, I agreed with current theories and current theories are not based on catastrophism but rather observed linear development because in recorded history that is what we have observed...a stable local solar system.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,280,182
Messages
58,264,302
Members
175,987
Latest member
Dakota DeSousa

Share this page

Back
Top