the moons size coincidence?

Do any moons of the other planets have the right size to produce a similair
effect from that planets perspective?

Garry

garry parker wrote:
Do any moons of the other planets have the right size to produce a similair
effect from that planets perspective?

I dont think that has been worked out yet but it would be odd if they
don't. It's relatively simple maths to do. From the distance of Jupiter
the moon wouldn't need to be very large. And it has so many to choose
from.

Then there are all the other coincidentae. Just what would happen if
the moon had a magnetic core?
Does the fact that it doesn't spin have anything to do with that?
How far from the sun would it reposition itself if it had a magnetic
field?
How would that affect earth?

Then there is the fact it is cold by night 2 weeks a month. Does it
have ice?
Would a diurnal rotation warm it enough to melt it?
If it could spin would it be able to support an atmosphere?
Would that affect its magnetism?

Where would the earth be without it? How does the age of the universe
and the time involved in the moon and earth finding each other affect
the time that all the other chances would need to come together to
produce such a vibrant ball of life?

Is evolution possible under such circumstances.

OOPS troll...

... sorry.

"Weatherlawyer" wrote in message
oups.com...

garry parker wrote:
Do any moons of the other planets have the right size to produce a
similair
effect from that planets perspective?

I dont think that has been worked out yet but it would be odd if they
don't. It's relatively simple maths to do. From the distance of Jupiter
the moon wouldn't need to be very large. And it has so many to choose
from.

Then there are all the other coincidentae. Just what would happen if
the moon had a magnetic core?
Does the fact that it doesn't spin have anything to do with that?
How far from the sun would it reposition itself if it had a magnetic
field?
How would that affect earth?

Then there is the fact it is cold by night 2 weeks a month. Does it
have ice?
Would a diurnal rotation warm it enough to melt it?
If it could spin would it be able to support an atmosphere?
Would that affect its magnetism?

Where would the earth be without it? How does the age of the universe
and the time involved in the moon and earth finding each other affect
the time that all the other chances would need to come together to
produce such a vibrant ball of life?

Is evolution possible under such circumstances.

OOPS troll...

.. sorry.
I know that it is best to stay on the "topic" of this newsgroup, but this
topic lends itself to the spiritual aspects thereof. A comment or so, here
or there, is acceptable, don't you think? I remember when there were a good
number of regular posters here, who said mostly nothing but silliness, and
although they are probably not greatly missed, I think it's ok to laugh
about glowing toilet seats now and then. It has been said that the greater
the intelligence, the the greater the need to be totally non- serious at
times. Yours,
Bill Kelly.
Yours,
Bill Kelly.

Wonderfully said!


A relativley new 'member'

--

Leo's up - somewhere,
Jeffrey


Beneath South Carolina skies and clouds and clouds and clouds
-------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------- ----------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------
"Bill Kelly" wrote in message
...

"Weatherlawyer" wrote in message
oups.com...

garry parker wrote:
Do any moons of the other planets have the right size to produce a
similair
effect from that planets perspective?

I dont think that has been worked out yet but it would be odd if they
don't. It's relatively simple maths to do. From the distance of Jupiter
the moon wouldn't need to be very large. And it has so many to choose
from.

Then there are all the other coincidentae. Just what would happen if
the moon had a magnetic core?
Does the fact that it doesn't spin have anything to do with that?
How far from the sun would it reposition itself if it had a magnetic
field?
How would that affect earth?

Then there is the fact it is cold by night 2 weeks a month. Does it
have ice?
Would a diurnal rotation warm it enough to melt it?
If it could spin would it be able to support an atmosphere?
Would that affect its magnetism?

Where would the earth be without it? How does the age of the universe
and the time involved in the moon and earth finding each other affect
the time that all the other chances would need to come together to
produce such a vibrant ball of life?

Is evolution possible under such circumstances.

OOPS troll...

.. sorry.
I know that it is best to stay on the "topic" of this newsgroup, but this
topic lends itself to the spiritual aspects thereof. A comment or so, here
or there, is acceptable, don't you think? I remember when there were a
good number of regular posters here, who said mostly nothing but
silliness, and although they are probably not greatly missed, I think it's
ok to laugh about glowing toilet seats now and then. It has been said that
the greater the intelligence, the the greater the need to be totally non-
serious at times. Yours,
Bill Kelly.
Yours,
Bill Kelly.

Jeffrey Hopkins wrote:

Wonderfully said!

What exactly did he say?

I wasn't accusing anyone of trolling but just pointing out that the
thread was a potential drifter. Anyone interested in my interests can
get more with a Google search

A relativley new 'member'

Genuine ex-virgin I fear. Hence the lack of top postage. Or is that not
a breach of nettiquette on here?

I know an awful lot about the moon and I haven't mentioned the half of
it. I haven't come here to post flame bait though and these days I tend
to ignore trolls. I merely wanted to set someone -who was already on
the right track, well on their way.

This is what I have accomplished, I feel. The subject of astronomy is
peppered with prattfalls for people who can be quite abusive if you are
not a fellow believer in the scientific religion. It would be a shame
to be lead astray by pointless whimsey.

I appreciated very much your input. I knew there wasn't any kind of
insinuation about someone being a true troll. You were just being polite.
And yes my bottom posting is condsidered the best way to reply on some of
the newsgroups I have been to. There are even some pages written on the
bottom vs. top posting debate. I don't really consider that it matters a
great deal. But sometimes some may read only the reply at the top,
especially on long threads, and not truly understand what is being said, and
give a badly informed reply. In that case I suppose it is better to bottom
post. I have watched and infrequently posted here, off and on over the past
couple of years. I am more of a would be amateur at astromomy, mostly due to
very washed out skies, and somewhat due to lack of funds, but I prefer
looking in on this newsgroup to the other astronomy groups. This one has
less garbage, more politeness, and is kinder to newbies. I'm afraid that may
say something about the American vs British or Euopean mentalities. I have a
friend who also says that the posters who respond to his groups from Europe
seem to be friendlier, and have a better sense of humor. There is so much
cynicism, and a generally defensive posture here these days, as I suspect
there is also in very many other parts of the world. Anyway, God bless, and
thanks for the input on the creation aspect of this subject. Yours,
Bill kelly.
"Weatherlawyer" wrote in message
oups.com...

Jeffrey Hopkins wrote:

Wonderfully said!

What exactly did he say?

I wasn't accusing anyone of trolling but just pointing out that the
thread was a potential drifter. Anyone interested in my interests can
get more with a Google search

A relativley new 'member'

Genuine ex-virgin I fear. Hence the lack of top postage. Or is that not
a breach of nettiquette on here?

I know an awful lot about the moon and I haven't mentioned the half of
it. I haven't come here to post flame bait though and these days I tend
to ignore trolls. I merely wanted to set someone -who was already on
the right track, well on their way.

This is what I have accomplished, I feel. The subject of astronomy is
peppered with prattfalls for people who can be quite abusive if you are
not a fellow believer in the scientific religion. It would be a shame
to be lead astray by pointless whimsey.

"Weatherlawyer" wrote in message
oups.com...

garry parker wrote:
Do any moons of the other planets have the right size to produce a
similair
effect from that planets perspective?


Does the fact that it doesn't spin have anything to do with that?

If it could spin would it be able to support an atmosphere?


Ah, but the moon does spin. The period of its rotation is equal to its
orbital period, that is why the same side of the moon faces us.

Rob

Robbie Mayhem wrote:
"Weatherlawyer" wrote in message
oups.com...

garry parker wrote:
Do any moons of the other planets have the right size to produce a
similair
effect from that planets perspective?


Does the fact that it doesn't spin have anything to do with that?

If it could spin would it be able to support an atmosphere?


Ah, but the moon does spin. The period of its rotation is equal to its
orbital period, that is why the same side of the moon faces us.

And the coincidence in there escapes you?

(At the risk of starting -or whatever- a flame war) It severely limits
the time schedules for all the other chance factors that are required
for evil oceans to spawn, bear fruit not "of its kind" and go on to
conquer the planet in all its levels.

The odds of that happening are... on topic.

On 3 Apr 2006 05:03:04 -0700, in uk.sci.astronomy , "Weatherlawyer"
wrote:


Robbie Mayhem wrote:

Ah, but the moon does spin. The period of its rotation is equal to its
orbital period, that is why the same side of the moon faces us.

And the coincidence in there escapes you?

In fact, the Earth's moon DOESNT quite keep the same face towards us.
Look up Libration and watch the limbs carefully.

But anyway its not coincidence, its a local minimum in the energy
configuration of two bodies. As the Moon rotates, its rocks are
deformed by the gravity of the earth. This absorbs energy. Eventually,
the energy loss caused the rotation to slow. Once the orbital speed
and rotational speed 'matched' the rocks stopped being distorted, no
more energy was lost, and a stable state was reached.

The same is happening to the Earth by the way, and to many other moons
in the solar system.
Mark McIntyre
--

"Mark McIntyre" wrote in message
...
On 3 Apr 2006 05:03:04 -0700, in uk.sci.astronomy , "Weatherlawyer"
wrote:

But anyway its not coincidence, its a local minimum in the energy
configuration of two bodies. As the Moon rotates, its rocks are
deformed by the gravity of the earth. This absorbs energy. Eventually,
the energy loss caused the rotation to slow. Once the orbital speed
and rotational speed 'matched' the rocks stopped being distorted, no
more energy was lost, and a stable state was reached.

The same is happening to the Earth by the way, and to many other moons
in the solar system.
Mark McIntyre
--

Yes.
Charon and Pluto are locked too; (no comments as to whether Pluto is a
planet please).
More to the point, ALL other known moons in the Solar System are
gravitationally locked to the parent planet, except Phoebe.
In addition:
Mercury is locked to the Sun, actually a 3:2 spin-orbit resonance which
accounts for it's large libration.
And Venus is locked to the Earth so that at closest approach it always has
the same side facing us. Not only is the orbit (year) of Venus in a 5:8
resonance with the Earth year, but its rotation (day) is in a 3:2 resonance
with the Earth year.

All this talk of coincidence and divine design is pure codswallop, taking no
account of natural mechanics. All the orbital distances and periods are
related geometrically for the same reason that a pendulum swings in simple
harmonic motion.