Earth's fate of total extiction has more prove. 2 moons & moons were part of earth.

[MM.Thaksin]

http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/askasci/ast99/ast99052.htm

http://cseligman.com/text/ssevolve/moonorigin.htm

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2390413,00.asp

http://www.newsday.com/news/earth-s-two-moons-it-s-not-lunacy-but-new-theory-1.3072853

[imghttp://cdn.newsday.com/polopoly_fs/1.3072453.1312404174!/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/display_600/image.jpg[/img]

Moon was a part of earth, and broke off from earth when another space body like large meteoroid hit earth. And now they found out that not one but may be 2 or more pieces of earth broke off to be moons, and later at least 2 of the moons merged up into 1. There were other smaller bits of earth that flu off during that impact - chunks of earth that are larger than Singapore.

What happened to them? Lost in space!

 

[MM.Thaksin]

Re: Earth's fate of total extiction has more prove. 2 moons & moons were part of eart

The only prospect for human is to become fossils for some other earth inhabitants to find.

 

[psy83]

Re: Earth's fate of total extiction has more prove. 2 moons & moons were part of eart

1) the moon was part of the Earth and broke away early in the Earth's history due to an impact with a large meteor or asteroid.

2) the moon formed at the same time as the Earth and in the same way -- gravitational collapse of a proto-stellar gas cloud.

3) the moon formed separately and was captured by the Earth's gravitational field; we suspect this is what happened with Mar's two moons.


I think its either 2 or 3 or both 2 and 3

 

[GOD IS MY DOG]

Re: Earth's fate of total extiction has more prove. 2 moons & moons were part of eart

the rocks on the moon are older than Earth...........

imagine how old are the ''sand'' that broke down from rocks...............



the moon is far far far older than earth...............so how can break off from earth ?

 

[vamjok]

Re: Earth's fate of total extiction has more prove. 2 moons & moons were part of eart

the rocks on the moon are older than Earth...........

imagine how old are the ''sand'' that broke down from rocks...............



the moon is far far far older than earth...............so how can break off from earth ?

where you get this info from. RUBBISH

what was stated here was known as the collision theory for the formation of the moon, which has composition very closely resembled our Earth crust. THIS is not normal if you know your astrophysics

this theory has very strong evidence due to the uniform distribution of the composition of moon and the our of norm huge hole; which resulted us having pacific ocean.

 

[Avenger]

Re: Earth's fate of total extiction has more prove. 2 moons & moons were part of eart

US never landed on moon... it was scam to claim to be ahead of Soviets ...
Do we really have rocks form moon?

 

[GOD IS MY DOG]

Re: Earth's fate of total extiction has more prove. 2 moons & moons were part of eart

US never landed on moon... it was scam to claim to be ahead of Soviets ...
Do we really have rocks form moon?

now we're talking......................

 

[GOD IS MY DOG]

Re: Earth's fate of total extiction has more prove. 2 moons & moons were part of eart

where you get this info from. RUBBISH

what was stated here was known as the collision theory for the formation of the moon, which has composition very closely resembled our Earth crust. THIS is not normal if you know your astrophysics

this theory has very strong evidence due to the uniform distribution of the composition of moon and the our of norm huge hole; which resulted us having pacific ocean.

don't you know ? the moon is artificial................with towers and spires couple of miles high................

tons of photos of them...............

 

[vamjok]

Re: Earth's fate of total extiction has more prove. 2 moons & moons were part of eart

US never landed on moon... it was scam to claim to be ahead of Soviets ...
Do we really have rocks form moon?

shake head.

go read up on spectroscopy if you really interested. comments like this will make anyone that undergoes basic science education in university laugh

 

[Unrepented]

Re: Earth's fate of total extiction has more prove. 2 moons & moons were part of eart

1. Why are all planets almost round in shape? Answer found is because of gravity.

2. What is gravity? Dont quite understand when some articles say everything has gravity.

3. If everything has gravity, then will all objects become round after floating in a vacum/in space? Why are meteorites not round?

Can anyone help thrown some light on the subject of gravity? Thanks in advance.

 

[vamjok]

Re: Earth's fate of total extiction has more prove. 2 moons & moons were part of eart

first and foremost no one understand this force gravity as of now. the real nature of it puzzled those who had studied physics till now.

as long something as mass, it can bend the spacetime around it. the bending of spacetime create a field which results in gravity. this is the best and simplest understanding we can come up with as of now. there are lots of youtube video on it. seeing it is better than reading

the object has to be big and massive enough to cause it to attract to other matters around the space. if not those stuff floating around are more likely to be under the influence of others. thus those that are larger are in general spherical in shape, those smaller one are likely to retain the shape it has when it cooled during the initial phase of the formation of the galaxy. anyway the smaller bodies are more likely to be absorbed by the nearby larger one

 

[annexa]

Re: Earth's fate of total extiction has more prove. 2 moons & moons were part of eart

I can infer from this that humans have super mini gravity and it is call aura?

first and foremost no one understand this force gravity as of now. the real nature of it puzzled those who had studied physics till now.

as long something as mass, it can bend the spacetime around it. the bending of spacetime create a field which results in gravity. this is the best and simplest understanding we can come up with as of now. there are lots of youtube video on it. seeing it is better than reading

the object has to be big and massive enough to cause it to attract to other matters around the space. if not those stuff floating around are more likely to be under the influence of others. thus those that are larger are in general spherical in shape, those smaller one are likely to retain the shape it has when it cooled during the initial phase of the formation of the galaxy. anyway the smaller bodies are more likely to be absorbed by the nearby larger one