Research conducted at the Technion and the University of Nice sheds light on one of the dilemmas related to the formation of the moon
Since the dawn of mankind, the moon has aroused great interest in most cultures of the world. He played a central role in the creation of calendars, including the Jewish and Muslim calendars, was considered one of the gods in some pagan traditions, and raised many questions about his composition, form and manner of formation. These questions have occupied humanity for thousands of years, and even today many children ask themselves - and their parents - if the moon is made of cheese.
In the modern era, the millennia-old research questions have been replaced by no less difficult scientific questions, which occupy us even today - forty years after the first man landed on the moon. A new study sheds new light on the process of the formation of the moon. The research, published in the journal Nature, was conducted by associate professor Hagai Peretz and the postdoctoral fellow Alessandra Mastrobono-Battisti, in collaboration with Shawn Raymond from the University of Nice.
"From the XNUMXs onward, the paradigm of the 'giant collision' was established in the scientific community," explains Associate Professor Peretz. "According to this model, the moon was formed from a collision between 'Tia' and the ancient Earth. 'Tia' is a body that is about half the size of the Earth and its mass is much smaller. Some of the material splashed as a result of the impact fell to the earth, some splashed far into space, and the rest began to move in separate pieces in orbit around the earth, and slowly crystallized into one object: the moon."
One of the questions that preoccupied the astrophysicists studying the formation of the moon is the origin of the material from which the moon was formed - is it material displaced from the earth or from 'Tia'?
Today it is known - according to complex simulations of this type of collisions - that moons are usually formed from the material of the impacting body ('Tia', in this case) and not of the affected body (Earth, in this case). However, the great material similarity between the Earth and the Moon - a similarity that was reinforced by the analysis of samples brought from the Moon during the Apollo missions - raised a 'suspicion' that the Moon originated from the material of the Earth.
As mentioned, this possibility goes against the common model of moon formation, and this 'contradiction' has been, for about four decades, a major challenge for theorists dealing with the issue of moon formation. Now associate professor Peretz and his colleagues are solving the long-standing mystery.
Based on dozens of simulations of the formation of planets in the solar system, the researchers discovered that in many cases there is a great similarity between planets and the bodies that hit them. Therefore, they conclude, the similarity between the moon and the earth stems from the similarity between 'Tia' - from which the moon was actually formed - and the earth.
"The meaning is that the history of 'Tia' brought it - and not other bodies - close to the Earth," explains Alessandra Mastrobuno-Battisti. "In other words, 'Tia' and the Earth grew in the same area, and therefore formed from similar materials. At some point they did collide with each other, an event that caused material to be spewed from 'Tia', and some of this material later became the moon. In this way, we are actually reconciling what has been perceived so far as a contradiction between the way moons are formed (from the material splashed from the impacting body) and the similarity between the earth and the moon, which caused the scientific community to mistakenly believe that the moon was formed from the earth and not from 'Tia'."
כ
20 תגובות
Can someone show us the simulation. Since the simulation is run using the Monte Carlo method, a number of possibilities are created, the correct one being based on a hypothesis only.
NN - I love you!!!
Yehuda
Don't forget there are also some mad scientists walking around in this world.. not just religious fanatics... and think about it hahaha
As the comments show (and I don't mean the exits of the regular idiots) the article is not clearly formulated and edited. Below is a summary of the conclusions of the simulation of the results of a collision between the Earth and a celestial body which, for the sake of interest, will be called "Tia" even though it cannot be seen near the Earth in the last 3.5 billion years.
1. In such a collision, averaged over a very large number of scenarios, the material that scatters near the collision region originates from the smaller body. Since the Moon is small in relation to the Earth, it must be assumed that it was formed from the material of Tia, not part of the Earth that was splashed off.
2. The samples of the material that the astronauts brought from the moon 40 years ago actually show a similarity to the point of identity between the materials of the moon and the materials of the earth.
3. Conclusion: Tia was built from materials similar to those used to build the Earth. Since similar materials mean creation in the same region from the cloud of gas and dust that surrounded the Sun before the formation of the planets about 4.5 billion years ago, the conclusion is that Tia was a close "sister" of the Earth, until the collision that led to its crash. A large part of the material that was dispersed is today concentrated in the moon and another part was dispersed in the space of the solar system and may be found today in the region of asteroids between Mars and Jupiter.
4. I don't think Moshe Rabino had a principled objection to the above description. The stubborn ignorance, the crazy idea that 5700 years ago the sun, the moon and all the stars appeared out of nowhere and arranged themselves in circles around the earth, and the custom of leaving the synagogue on the first Saturday night of the new moon to dance against the white and recite the holy words "As I cannot touch you..." - no constitute an authentic part of the religion that should lead the world in justice, morality and a rational social order.
In the title it is written that the moon was formed from pieces of Kdhua, while in the body of the article it is clear to the reader that it was formed from pieces of Tia.
Please buy!
"They don't know their great-grandfather, who he is and what he is, and even before him, and confuse about the moon. Just a world of lies and nonsense.
Instead of finally bringing peace (they) chatter. The main thing - (to claim that) God did not create. and why? Because if there is a landlord for everything (then) it obliges...
A translation of Benjamin's response for the benefit of those who have completed 12 years of study and speak Hebrew. Now the question arises, is there any point in trying to answer...?
Ezra
What are you doing on the science site? Do you want to eat from the tree of knowledge again?
Benjamin
It is customary to write in Hebrew on this site. I have no idea what language you tried to write in.
They don't know their great grandfather, who he is and what he was before him, and they confuse the moon with just a world of lies and nonsense.
In the place that finally brought peace, they are chattering, the dear God did not create and why because if there is a landlord for everything it is binding...
Can't believe how many comments from stupid people there are on this site!
To all the stupid people, you are lucky to live in modern times where you are supported by technology and smart people
who support and care for you, these days the natural selection is not valid and that is why you live. 🙁
People as you can see in the comments on this site are the type of people who would try to hunt a lion with a Rogatka.
They don't know the earth and they already want to know the moon.
The most common calendar based on the moon and the sun is the Chinese calendar. (4000 years old)
The oldest calendar based on the moon and the sun is the Jewish calendar. (5775 years old)
The Muslim calendar (1400 years old) is based only on the moon. And the Gregorian (2015 year old) only on the sun.
Nice article, it's just a shame it's not scientific.
Ezra
And then God created Ezra so that even Ezra the scribe would not be of help, he answered because Naaman, the minister of the army, said of him: "Am I the one who lacks madmen?"
Technion Sorry! You write about 'Tia' and don't explain what it is exactly and where it comes from. All the time 'Tia' and only at the end can we indirectly understand what it is.
Adiel First of all maybe forty dollars and billions of years, then the alien will want to replace the moon with cheese - will replace
Hypotheses upon hypotheses, which try to "prove" or "disprove" other hypotheses from 40 years ago. Humanity's megalomania is becoming more and more pathetic, and spending billions of dollars on it. When will we accept the fact that we are not able to know everything about everything...
Only now with visualizations are we discovering what was written in the Holy Zohar by Rabbi Shimon Bar Yochai Zatzukal about 2000 years ago. And for your knowledge, God created from the earth not only the moon, but also the sun, as it is written in "Fateh Eliyahu the Prophet" "And Berat Shemiya and Area and Afkat Manhon Shemsha and Sihra and Kochbia and Mezli" meaning that the Holy One, blessed be He, created the heavens and the earth and took out of them the sun and the moon and the stars and the zodiac signs.
Everyone knows the moon is made of yellow cheese. God made him along with the rest of the stars on Wednesday morning. If you look closely you can see the holes in the cheese.
The scientists do not understand anything. They also tell us that the earth is a ball that just moves in space and does not fall... Not only that, but that it revolves around the sun, and not as it is written in the Torah...
It's a shame that the picture is not related to the simulation at all, and clearly contradicts it.
The moon was not created from the earth.
The moon was created from the sun
When the woman was created from the man
It is ridiculous to state that the simulation proved... and it is still a hypothesis even when something is simulated and it happened so many years ago. is funny.