possible that the asteroid belt is the remnants of mars moon?

"Ian Parker" wrote in message...
...
On 17 Jan, 06:45, S Claus wrote:
Hi all

I wanted to ask a question about the asteroid belt. There is some talk
in some circles that it is the remnants of a planet that exploded in
the distant past. Some people say that it would have been a relatively
small planet as supposedly all the asteroids assembled together equate
to a body about 1/10th the size of our moon.

Of course it could have been a larger body than that as it could be
that most of contents vaporized or dissipated into space as such small
pieces that we do not detect them (e.g. smaller than 1cm across). Or
it could have been a semi-gaseous planet with a solid core.

Anyway, there was this other possibility that came to mind, namely
whether it could be a remnant of mars moon? So perhaps Mars had a moon
in the past that exploded due to an impact or something?

I would like to know whether any research has been done on this
possibility?

Thanks in advance

No, the explanation of the asteroid belt is Jupiter. It is planetary
material that failed to coalese. Asteroids have NEVER been part of a
larger body. The gravitational field of Jupiter has prevented the
formation of a fifth rocy planet.

- Ian Parker

While i agree that the asteroids have never been part of a
larger body, that they are a small portion of what used to be
a lot of matter trying to coalesce into a planet, most of which
was thrown out of the belt long ago by Jupiter, there is still
one biting anomaly brought to light by the OP...

Earth's rotation period has been slowed mostly by tidal
forces due to the presence of planet Selene (the Moon). So
today we enjoy about a 24-hour day instead of the much
shorter day we would have if not for those tidal forces. The
puzzle is that Mars, which has only the two tiny satellites,
Phobos and Deimos, has almost the same rotation period as
Earth. Mars' spin period is in fact a little *longer* than our
Earth's. So if Mars didn't have a large satellite to slow down
its rotation period, then why the heck does it spin so slowly?

The asteroids' spins are much faster and isochronous, so
they're probably not rotating much slower than they were
4.5 billion years ago. Same for Jupiter, which has about an
8-hour day. It's a fair deduction that both Earth and Mars
once had 6 to 8-hour days, too. It's easy to say why Earth
has slowed its spin, but how about planet Mars? What has
slowed its rotation down?

happy days and...
starry starry nights!

--
Indelibly yours,
Paine Ellsworth

P.S.: "Not only is the universe stranger than we
imagine, it is stranger than we can imagine."
Sir Arthur Eddington

P.P.S.: http://yummycake.secretsgolden.com
http://garden-of-ebooks.blogspot.com
http://painellsworth.net

"John Curtis" wrote in message...
...
On Jan 17, 8:57 am, "Greg Neill" wrote:
S Claus wrote:

Hi all

I wanted to ask a question about the asteroid belt. There is some talk
in some circles that it is the remnants of a planet that exploded in
the distant past. Some people say that it would have been a relatively
small planet as supposedly all the asteroids assembled together equate
to a body about 1/10th the size of our moon.

Of course it could have been a larger body than that as it could be
that most of contents vaporized or dissipated into space as such small
pieces that we do not detect them (e.g. smaller than 1cm across). Or
it could have been a semi-gaseous planet with a solid core.

One would have to propose a plausible mechanism for having
a planet spontaneously explode. Where would the energy come
from?

The pressure inside the core of a gas giant can amount to
70 million atmospheres.
http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/Ju...ium_999 .html
Closer to the Sun, a gas giant would lose its hydrogen-helium
atmosphere leading to a violent isostatic rebound. John Curtis

That's an interesting thought, John! I hadn't considered
that there might have been a gas giant where the asteroid
belt is today. Jupiter's core is 70 million atmospheres. I
would imagine Saturn's core is a bit less. But if there had
been a gas giant even larger than Jupiter and nearer to
the Sun, would such a "violent isostatic rebound" be large
and powerful enough to defeat the gravitational energy?
Has a computer model been created to show what might
happen?

It might be possible that a body there could be destroyed by
collision with another interloping body.

Anyway, there was this other possibility that came to mind, namely
whether it could be a remnant of mars moon? So perhaps Mars had a moon
in the past that exploded due to an impact or something?

I think that, given the odd shapes of Mars' moons, it is more
likely that they are captured asteroids rather thyan the other
way around.

Greg, the odd shapes of Phobos and Deimos may not be
enough to draw such a conclusion. One would also come
up against the facts that both satellites revolve around
Mars in very nearly circular orbits, and both orbits are
very nearly right on Mars' equatorial plane. Moreover,
asteroids the size of Phobos and Deimos are rare. All
this makes the captured-asteroid hypothesis just a wee
bit suspect. They are very much alike geologically. It
seems more likely that the two satellites formed right
along with planet Mars in the same area of space.

Aside from this interesting controversy in Solar system
astronomy, have you ever wondered why Mars rotates
at approximately the same period as Earth, and with no
large satellite to tidally force the slowing?

happy days and...
starry starry nights!

--
Indelibly yours,
Paine Ellsworth

P.S.: "Not only is the universe stranger than we
imagine, it is stranger than we can imagine."
Sir Arthur Eddington

P.P.S.: http://yummycake.secretsgolden.com
http://garden-of-ebooks.blogspot.com
http://painellsworth.net

On Jan 17, 4:32*am, Ian Parker wrote:
On 17 Jan, 06:45, S Claus wrote:



Hi all

I wanted to ask a question about the asteroid belt. There is some talk
in some circles that it is the remnants of a planet that exploded in
the distant past. Some people say that it would have been a relatively
small planet as supposedly all the asteroids assembled together equate
to a body about 1/10th the size of our moon.

Of course it could have been a larger body than that as it could be
that most of contents vaporized or dissipated into space as such small
pieces that we do not detect them (e.g. smaller than 1cm across). Or
it could have been a semi-gaseous planet with a solid core.

Anyway, there was this other possibility that came to mind, namely
whether it could be a remnant of mars moon? So perhaps Mars had a moon
in the past that exploded due to an impact or something?

I would like to know whether any research has been done on this
possibility?

Thanks in advance

No, the explanation of the asteroid belt is Jupiter. It is planetary
material that failed to coalese. Asteroids have NEVER been part of a
larger body. The gravitational field of Jupiter has prevented the
formation of a fifth rocy planet.

* - Ian Parker

Good SUBJECTIVE theory, you got there.

In other words, you're saying that cosmic stuff does not go bump in
the night, or red giants do not lose their tidal radius simply by
turning into a white dwarf of 1/5th, 1/6th, 1/7th or 1/8th their
original mass.

Did I get that right?

~ BG

BradGuth wrote:

Good SUBJECTIVE theory, you got there...

***************

You say this as though YOUR wacky theories aren't subjective...