What if(on Moon Distance?)

On Oct 15, 6:52*am, "Hagar" wrote:
I don't see how ... the Earth's rotation is also slowing down, as yet
measured in micro-seconds per year, but the slower it spins, the further
the moon will drift. *If that 3.7 cm/year is calculated backwards, it
puts the Moon just outside the Roche Limit, about 18,000 miles
about 4B years ago, giving credence to the theory of the still largely
molten ball of Earth being obliquely impacted by a Mercury/Mars
sized planet traveling in the same direction as Earth, albeit a little
faster, flinging enough surface material into orbit to form the Moon.
The two largely metal cores converged to form the present day core
and exerting the gravity needed to capture the Moon in an steady
orbit. GuthBall really like this theory, along with his Venusian runways
and upper cloud stationed dirigibles.

"Saul Levy" wrote in message

...

No it won't, Hagar! *lmfjao!

Eventually the Moon will return to Earth, reach the Roche limit and
BREAK UP!

The MOON is DOOMED!

Saul Levy

On Wed, 14 Oct 2009 07:12:48 -0700, "Hagar" wrote:

"BradGuth" wrote in message
....
On Oct 13, 10:39 am, "Nightcrawler" wrote:
"G=EMC^2 Glazier" wrote in
...

snipperoony GuthBall drivel

The Moon is receding from Earth appr. 3.7cm per year ... so just wait a
few
billion years and it'll fly off into space by itself, GuthBall.

On Oct 15, 6:52 am, "Hagar" wrote:
“If that 3.7 cm/year is calculated backwards, it puts the Moon just
outside the Roche Limit, about 18,000 miles about 4B years ago, giving
credence to the theory of the still largely molten ball of Earth being
obliquely impacted by a Mercury/Mars sized planet traveling in the
same direction as Earth, albeit a little faster, flinging enough
surface material into orbit to form the Moon. The two largely metal
cores converged to form the present day core and exerting the gravity
needed to capture the Moon in an steady orbit. GuthBall really like
this theory, along with his Venusian runways and upper cloud stationed
dirigibles.”

Your mainstream "credence" on behalf of that old subjective theory is
noted, as is your kosher approved obfuscation/exclusion of all other
evidence that supports my interpretation, in that as of 12,600 +/-
some odd years ago we obtained our icy Selene/moon (most likely
derived from Sirius B).

Of course our Eden/Earth had been near-miss encountered and/or having
been impacted several times before, as well as our having been
affected by the cosmic likes of nearby stellar mass and those pesky
red supergiants with their nova/flashover transformations into white
dwarfs, that subsequently lost their tidal radii grip on whatever
relatively newish planets (such as Venus).

The icy Selene encounter was most likely a slow motion kind of
lithobraking sucker-punch (glancing rear-ender) that created the
Arctic ocean basin and caused the final seasonal tilt that we have
today.

Our unusually large and massive Selene/moon will never migrate back in
contact with Earth, unless sufficient orbital energy is somehow
naturally via retrograde impacts or otherwise artificially removed,
and only then a serious problem if there’s still no applied effort of
ever relocating or rather interactively repositioning it out to Earth
L1 where it can do us the most good.

Btw; I’ve never suggested “upper cloud stationed dirigibles” for
exploring the Venusian environment, but if that’s what makes you a
happy camper to think that I have, then so be it. I’ve always
insisted upon those composite rigid airships/dirigibles as cruising
well below the lower acidic haze, which might suggest an altitude of
25 km (20~40 km depending on their nighttime/daytime operations).

~ BG

On Oct 15, 10:51*am, "HVAC" wrote:
"Hagar" wrote in message

...

I don't see how ... the Earth's rotation is also slowing down, as yet
measured in micro-seconds per year, but the slower it spins, the further
the moon will drift. *If that 3.7 cm/year is calculated backwards, it
puts the Moon just outside the Roche Limit, about 18,000 miles
about 4B years ago, giving credence to the theory of the still largely
molten ball of Earth being obliquely impacted by a Mercury/Mars
sized planet traveling in the same direction as Earth, albeit a little
faster, flinging enough surface material into orbit to form the Moon.
The two largely metal cores converged to form the present day core
and exerting the gravity needed to capture the Moon in an steady
orbit.

Ya. Sometimes a theory just 'sings'.

The moon formation theory that you stated 'sings' to me.

--
1- Never say anything in writing, much less email.
2- Never say over the phone what you can say in person.
3- Never speak when you can nod.
4- Never nod when you can smile.

Except that our extremely unusual Selene/moon has not a significant if
any traditional iron core. Instead its extremely robust crust is
highly paramagnetic as well as hosting diamagnetic elements, along
with multiple other heavy elements and their isotopes plus a rather
great amount of pesky sodium that's just about everywhere, and
apparently there's also no shortage of nitrogen.

~ BG

"Hagar" wrote in message
...
I don't see how ... the Earth's rotation is also slowing down, as yet
measured in micro-seconds per year, but the slower it spins, the further
the moon will drift. If that 3.7 cm/year is calculated backwards, it
puts the Moon just outside the Roche Limit, about 18,000 miles
about 4B years ago, giving credence to the theory of the still largely
molten ball of Earth being obliquely impacted by a Mercury/Mars
sized planet traveling in the same direction as Earth, albeit a little
faster, flinging enough surface material into orbit to form the Moon.
The two largely metal cores converged to form the present day core
and exerting the gravity needed to capture the Moon in an steady
orbit.


Ya. Sometimes a theory just 'sings'.

The moon formation theory that you stated 'sings' to me.





--
1- Never say anything in writing, much less email.
2- Never say over the phone what you can say in person.
3- Never speak when you can nod.
4- Never nod when you can smile.

"Hagar" wrote in message ...
I don't see how ... the Earth's rotation is also slowing down, as yet
measured in micro-seconds per year, but the slower it spins, the further
the moon will drift. If that 3.7 cm/year is calculated backwards, it
puts the Moon just outside the Roche Limit, about 18,000 miles
about 4B years ago, giving credence to the theory of the still largely
molten ball of Earth being obliquely impacted by a Mercury/Mars
sized planet traveling in the same direction as Earth, albeit a little
faster, flinging enough surface material into orbit to form the Moon.
The two largely metal cores converged to form the present day core
and exerting the gravity needed to capture the Moon in an steady
orbit. GuthBall really like this theory, along with his Venusian runways
and upper cloud stationed dirigibles.

From the horse's mouth:

http://www.psi.edu/projects/moon/moon.html

"BradGuth" wrote in message
...
On Oct 15, 6:52 am, "Hagar" wrote:

GuthBall, blow it out your ass, you imbecilic moron.

"Nightcrawler" wrote in message
...

"Hagar" wrote in message
...
I don't see how ... the Earth's rotation is also slowing down, as yet
measured in micro-seconds per year, but the slower it spins, the further
the moon will drift. If that 3.7 cm/year is calculated backwards, it
puts the Moon just outside the Roche Limit, about 18,000 miles
about 4B years ago, giving credence to the theory of the still largely
molten ball of Earth being obliquely impacted by a Mercury/Mars
sized planet traveling in the same direction as Earth, albeit a little
faster, flinging enough surface material into orbit to form the Moon.
The two largely metal cores converged to form the present day core
and exerting the gravity needed to capture the Moon in an steady
orbit. GuthBall really like this theory, along with his Venusian runways
and upper cloud stationed dirigibles.

From the horse's mouth:

http://www.psi.edu/projects/moon/moon.html



Oh Noes ... you pricked that dumb**** GuthBalls fictitious bubble
with those pesky scientifically researched facts ...

On Oct 16, 7:24*am, "Hagar" wrote:
"BradGuth" wrote in message

...
On Oct 15, 6:52 am, "Hagar" wrote:

GuthBall, blow it out your ass, you imbecilic moron.

Why do the honest facts and best available science so upset your
narrow and shallow world where only Zionist/Nazi republicans can fix
everything?

You do realize that our planet is shrinking and losing mass, don't
you?

~ BG

On Oct 16, 11:02*am, BradGuth wrote:
On Oct 16, 7:24*am, "Hagar" wrote:

"BradGuth" wrote in message

...
On Oct 15, 6:52 am, "Hagar" wrote:

GuthBall, blow it out your ass, you imbecilic moron.

Why do the honest facts and best available science so upset your
narrow and shallow world where only Zionist/Nazi republicans can fix
everything?

You do realize that our planet is shrinking and losing mass, don't
you?

*~ BG


The Earth gains an average of 500 million kilograms per year from
meteorites and space dust. It loses less than 100 million kilograms
per year from the atmosphere. Therefore, the Earth is gaining net
mass.

Double-A

On Oct 16, 12:52*pm, Double-A wrote:
On Oct 16, 11:02*am, BradGuth wrote:



On Oct 16, 7:24*am, "Hagar" wrote:

"BradGuth" wrote in message

....
On Oct 15, 6:52 am, "Hagar" wrote:

GuthBall, blow it out your ass, you imbecilic moron.

Why do the honest facts and best available science so upset your
narrow and shallow world where only Zionist/Nazi republicans can fix
everything?

You do realize that our planet is shrinking and losing mass, don't
you?

*~ BG

The Earth gains an average of 500 million kilograms per year from
meteorites and space dust. *It loses less than 100 million kilograms
per year from the atmosphere. *Therefore, the Earth is gaining net
mass.

Double-A

You use funny maths and bogus data. Not half bad for a brown-nosed
clown that's kosher approved.

What about our accelerated loss of helium and hydrogen?

Eden/Earth once had a 100 bar atmosphere. What happened to it?

~ BG

On Oct 16, 12:52*pm, Double-A wrote:
On Oct 16, 11:02*am, BradGuth wrote:



On Oct 16, 7:24*am, "Hagar" wrote:

"BradGuth" wrote in message

....
On Oct 15, 6:52 am, "Hagar" wrote:

GuthBall, blow it out your ass, you imbecilic moron.

Why do the honest facts and best available science so upset your
narrow and shallow world where only Zionist/Nazi republicans can fix
everything?

You do realize that our planet is shrinking and losing mass, don't
you?

*~ BG

The Earth gains an average of 500 million kilograms per year from
meteorites and space dust. *It loses less than 100 million kilograms
per year from the atmosphere. *Therefore, the Earth is gaining net
mass.

Double-A

Receiving 16 kg/sec isn't much compared to 1000+ kg/sec of the ongoing
helium and hydrogen loss. Of course OCO would have objectively nailed
this accounting, and a science platform at Selene L1 would have been
even better, though sadly we do not have either.

~ BG