The Moon’s Mystery: Scientists Debate How it Formed
How was our planet’s satellite formed? Scientists are still searching for the answer.
by Robert Irion
It has taken centuries for scientists to settle on a creation story for our moon, the most popular of which is depicted on the July cover of National Geographic magazine. But as I learned at a recent lunch with Erik Asphaug, a planetary scientist at Arizona State University, the debate is still far from finished.
Before the giant impact model gained traction nearly four decades ago, three other models were in contention. One said the moon condensed from the same whirling cloud of dust that created Earth. But this “binary” model couldn’t explain why the moon, far from being a smaller twin of Earth, is much less dense than our planet, with no iron core.
A second model held that the young molten Earth spun so rapidly that it split apart, flinging a giant blob of magma into space. But Earth’s spin today and the moon’s orbit don’t fit the pattern predicted by the “fission” model.
In the third model, Earth’s gravity lassoed the moon as it wandered through from some distant part of the solar system. This “capture” scenario was appealing until the Apollo astronauts brought their moon rocks back home. The minerals in them turned out to be similar to those in Earth’s mantle—not exotic at all.
The giant impact model avoided all these problems. When it came along in the 1970s, the model fit an emerging view of how the solar system as a whole had formed…
(read more: National Geo)
illustration by Dana Berry

The Moon’s Mystery: Scientists Debate How it Formed

How was our planet’s satellite formed? Scientists are still searching for the answer.

by Robert Irion

It has taken centuries for scientists to settle on a creation story for our moon, the most popular of which is depicted on the July cover of National Geographic magazine. But as I learned at a recent lunch with Erik Asphaug, a planetary scientist at Arizona State University, the debate is still far from finished.

Before the giant impact model gained traction nearly four decades ago, three other models were in contention. One said the moon condensed from the same whirling cloud of dust that created Earth. But this “binary” model couldn’t explain why the moon, far from being a smaller twin of Earth, is much less dense than our planet, with no iron core.

A second model held that the young molten Earth spun so rapidly that it split apart, flinging a giant blob of magma into space. But Earth’s spin today and the moon’s orbit don’t fit the pattern predicted by the “fission” model.

In the third model, Earth’s gravity lassoed the moon as it wandered through from some distant part of the solar system. This “capture” scenario was appealing until the Apollo astronauts brought their moon rocks back home. The minerals in them turned out to be similar to those in Earth’s mantle—not exotic at all.

The giant impact model avoided all these problems. When it came along in the 1970s, the model fit an emerging view of how the solar system as a whole had formed…

(read more: National Geo)

illustration by Dana Berry

  1. artekulares reblogged this from rhamphotheca
  2. icewindandthisisinteresting reblogged this from we-are-star-stuff
  3. ameriboi reblogged this from rhamphotheca
  4. theewanderingkind reblogged this from wisdomless1
  5. milli-tricks reblogged this from rhamphotheca
  6. peterpositron reblogged this from sagansense
  7. vanesa reblogged this from rhamphotheca
  8. theoriginalpancake reblogged this from nouveauqueer
  9. leonerdnimoy reblogged this from sagansense
  10. theurbanemoor reblogged this from rhamphotheca
  11. deathdefyinglifeleaps reblogged this from sagansense
  12. bythetaillights reblogged this from rhamphotheca
  13. nouveauqueer reblogged this from we-are-star-stuff
  14. hellbread reblogged this from laboratoryequipment
  15. isyre reblogged this from laboratoryequipment
  16. exactlywhatiwanted reblogged this from laboratoryequipment
  17. gunnk420 reblogged this from laboratoryequipment
  18. thegraceonlyyoucanbestow reblogged this from laboratoryequipment
  19. themonstrouscollapse reblogged this from vaegrant
  20. vaegrant reblogged this from rhamphotheca
  21. octobig reblogged this from we-are-star-stuff
  22. wisdomless1 reblogged this from laboratoryequipment
  23. jacknotzak reblogged this from laboratoryequipment
  24. forever-lost-in-the-darkness reblogged this from laboratoryequipment
  25. swagician reblogged this from dejectedflameofreality
  26. autobots-roll-out reblogged this from laboratoryequipment
  27. dejectedflameofreality reblogged this from laboratoryequipment
  28. thecatscat reblogged this from laboratoryequipment