The basic version of the origin of the moon
At the beginning of this week, astrophysicists from the Institute of Geophysics of Paris denied the theory of the origin of the moon, which is still considered the most likely. According to this hypothesis, about 4.5 billion years ago, is still a young Earth collided with Theia the protoplanets, resulting in the Moon formed.
Computer simulations conducted by experts, have questioned this version, and along with many other of our ideas about the origin nearest to the Earth space bodies.
The editors of «MIR 24» chose the basic version of the origin of the satellite and, together with experts weighed «pros» and «cons» of popular hypotheses.
Version # 1: one giant clash
The model of the shock formation of the moon remained the dominant science in the last three decades. Astrophysicists have adopted it almost unanimously after December 1972, lunar module spacecraft «Apollo 17» the last landing on the satellite brought back to Earth more than 110 kg of lunar rocks.
Analysis of the chemical and isotopic composition of the soil has led scientists to believe that at an early stage of formation of the Solar system, the Earth could face a large celestial body – the protoplanets, the dimensions of which were commensurate with today’s Mars, which is about 10.7% of the mass of the Earth.
«For both celestial bodies, this event was catastrophic, and the material that was ejected as a result of this collision, many thousands of partially remained in the orbit of the Earth, which in evolutionary compression and formed the earth satellite,» – says doctor of physical and mathematical Sciences, senior researcher of the space research Institute Alexander Rodin.
The names of the heavenly bodies traditionally are Greek, mythological. Therefore, the hypothetical protoplanet has received the name in honor of one of the sisters-titanid theis, which, according to the beliefs of the ancient Greeks, was the mother of Selene (the moon). The connection between the Earth and the satellite was so strong that eventually the Moon started to call on the Blue planet tides.
This, in turn, formed on the wet firmament of the conditions for the emergence of the first elements of biological life (nucleotides) of the simplest of nitrogenous compounds, mixtures of phosphate and carbohydrates. So under the influence of lunar activity and sunlight on the earth’s surface formed the first «laboratory» for the formation of a future life.
In favor of the theory of Megadrive is the fact that the core of the earth satellite is too small to be a planet that formed simultaneously with the Earth (the radius of the core of the moon is about 240 kilometers). In addition the composition of the Moon where odnorodnoi our planet. Everything seems to be inclined scientists to the view that the reason for the birth of the moon protoclassic Theia.
Suspicions of the justice of such a beautiful hypothesis emerged from the astronomers of the Paris Institute of Geophysics. Confused chemical compositions of earth’s mantle and lunar soil. There was something wrong. After the Paris astronomers have launched a multi-year experiment that just ended.
In the course of this experiment, they spent 1.7 billion computer simulations of the collision of the Earth and theis and found that the mass of a hypothetical celestial body collided with Earth, could not be more than 15% of the mass of our planet.
Otherwise, the mantle would contain many times more of Nickel and cobalt, and from lunar soil have long been would evaporate light isotopes of radioactive elements that are present in it right now, for example, the isotope helium-3.
Version # 2: the theory of multiple bombings
«Recent French research confirms the assumption that the collision was not one – there were loads of them – explains Dr. Rodin, in the Future as a material for the formation of satellites has accumulated millions of years in earth orbit, and the body-bombers was much less than the hypothetical Theia».
However, according to the scientist, the epoch of the revolution this discovery made. The last decade, the Moon remains not only the most studied, but also the most studied object in the Solar system. Annually, scientists have received new data that contradict one or another of the existing hypotheses.
«Computer simulations help us only to simulate certain conditions. About the same working meteorologists, determining the weather for the near future. But we are well aware that even the forecast for tomorrow and he may be wrong. What can we say about such global events as the origin of living beings, the formation of the moon or of the Earth,» – said the scientist.
Agree with him, and doctor of physico-mathematical Sciences, head of the research Department lunar and planetary Institute. P. K. Sternberg, Moscow state University Vladimir Shevchenko.
According to him, French astrophysicists for several years ahead of the Russian scientist, Director of the Institute of Geochemistry named after V. I. Vernadsky Eric Galimov, who analyzed the hypothesis protoplanet teye and one of the first in the world of science has been able convincingly to refute it. True, theoretically. Now, his theory received experimental confirmation.
Version # 3: the «sister» hypothesis
The hypothesis, which is inclined by many Russian scientists, is: the moon and the Earth formed relatively simultaneously from a single gas and dust cloud. This happened about 4.5 billion years ago, which is confirmed by the data of radioisotope Dating of meteorite samples, the so-called chondrites.
«The germ» of the Earth has attracted the maximum number of particles in the area of their availability and of the remaining fragments in orbit formed a smaller, but similar in the chemical composition of the satellite.
«This theory removes the questionable issues regarding the geochemical characteristics of the lunar soil, – explains Vladimir Shevchenko. — If Marauder took place, the Moon would have to contain the same substance from which the Earth was at the time and would be much more similar to Earth than it is now», concludes Professor.
However, this beautiful hypothesis of General cloud-the progenitor of much explains. For example, why the moon’s orbit lies in the plane of the earth’s equator and why her iron-Nickel core is formed so tiny compared to ours.
Version # 4: planet is a prisoner, or «ball and chain» hypothesis
One of the most curious hypotheses with the least number of evidence – the hypothesis that the Moon was originally formed as an independent planet in the Solar system. In the result of a deviation of a celestial body from orbit (the so-called perturbations) planet, so to speak, «off course» and went on an elliptical orbit intersecting with the Earth.
When one approaches the Moon came to the earth’s gravity and became its satellite.
American astronomers under the leadership of Thomas Jackson C, this theory was interested not because of academic reasons. The fact that legends of the ancient African people of Dogon tell of times when the night sky was not yet of the second sun, of the moon.
Despite the fact that the theory did not fit into the «Big three» academic hypotheses about the origin of the satellite, it was seriously discussed by the group of scientists under the leadership of Sergei Pavlovich Korolev in designing automatic flushing station.
Scientists had to «blindly» decide how was formed the Moon. Their insights depended on the success of pilularia station. After all, if the Moon rotates around the Earth for billions of years, without a dense atmosphere on its surface had to accumulate a huge layer falling from space dust.
If so, the station is designed for landing on Lunar firmament, just would have drowned.
The assumption that the Moon was captured by Earth recently, scientists obviously liked more. In this case, its surface was to be still solid. Therefore, the apparatus for planting I decided to count exactly on this scenario.
However, contradictions to this theory more than the other versions of the origin of the satellite. For example, why do isotopes of oxygen in moon and Earth there is such identity?
Or why the Moon rotates in the same direction as the Earth, whereas the moon captured by Jupiter – IO, Europa, Ganymede and Callisto spinning in retrograde, that is opposite from the Jupiter direction.
Whatever it was, even regarding «folding» and «attractive» hypothesis did not provide an accurate description of how on the earth the sky appeared, the Orb of night. However, such discrepancies are observed in the description of any other physical phenomena of such magnitude, said Alexander Rodin.
Each new discovery even in earthly terms, may at any time to question any «established» science hypothesis. Even the origin of the Earth — not that of her companion.