From what I've heard, the moon is the wrong size to be in its current orbit...

When they impacted it to shoot up dust (or for whatever reason) it apparently rang like a bell for 'hours'...

And it's a heck of a strange coincedence that the same side always faces us...

BUT

I may be completely wrong on all that... some people make up stories... I just repeat them

I listened to a talk radio show about this and it all sounded really convincing until this scientist guy who was the guest & author of the book the show was about said he believed that humans from the future travelled back in time and put it there so that life could exsist on earth.

Talk about a paradox.

I dont think i slept well that night

Well its good to know that others believe the way I always have. I said way back when I was 13 years old that the moon was Hollow and I even did a great science experiment at school that proved it could be. So for once someone has agreed with my strange thinking.

I have a suggestion on why the same section of the moon is always facing the Earth- perhaps it's not because the moon happens to have a perfect rotational/orbital speed that syncs with the Earth's own, but that it is lopsided?

If one hemisphere of the moon had significantly more mass than the other half, wouldn't the heavier half be perpetually "pegged" to the Earth via the basic properties of gravity?

This could lend itself to the idea that "aliens" hollowed out part of the moon, and upon doing so altered its orbit in such a way that the same surface was always facing the Earth, or perhaps during the supposed collision that created the moon a lighter (upper) part of the crust was ejected along with deeper (metal) material, leaving us with an unbalanced moon.

edit: it occurs to me that this would very easily by detectable by observing the path of a single object orbiting the moon. Do we have any satellites that circle the moon regularly? They would surely have to account for this composition? Are we positive at this point that the moon is composed uniformly? Maybe it wouldn't be that easy, if the difference weren't so drastic it might take a long time of orbit to notice the difference in gravity between separate faces of the moon, but over time the heavier side would certainly gravitate towards the Earth, so maybe it's a minor change in composition from the "Earth" side to the "dark" side. Still a possibility?

[edit on 18-2-2009 by Chilkoot]

[edit on 18-2-2009 by Chilkoot]

well, that negates the majority of my post. well done.

You indirectly answered my last remaining question, but I do have to ask it again,

Do we have evidence that the moon is uniformly constructed, with a similar density at any given depth?

I mean when you say hollow.
Everything in someway is hollow.
The earth has caves going into it, volcano's and faults going deep inside it.
The moon could be similar to this.
If you mean like, you open a door on the moon and there is a whole world inside.
Then no its not hollow like that.

I would think that ground penetrating radar would be better served to determine internal structure than gravity measurements.


Cheers!!!!

Why do we shift our focus away from the moon and even Venus and go the opposite direction further away and right outta sight?

Surely by now there must be some backyard astronomer/rocket ship builder that will independently go there and show us the real moon story?

I think the moon is hollow and artificial, and can you imagine how the world would change and minds would open once this is as obvious as the world is round? I personally can't wait! It's always good to see new people bring up the topic of the moon - and it's great to see a resurgence of interest in this mysterious craft.

wZn

Reply to WatchZEITGEISTnow

Whilst it's interesting to speculate on the nature of the Moon, there is no evidence to suggest that it's anything other than a natural satellite, whilst the evidence that it is a natural satellite is pretty conclusive. Incidentally, the debate in the scientic community has now moved on to discussing whether the Moon still has a molten core.

Originally posted by RFBurns

In contrast, if the cap consistency is more like firm snow, with σ ~ 10-5 S/m, aquifer detection with a return signal above the noise level is possible to a depth of about 1 km.

Granted 1km is not that deep either, but would give a good indication if this theory of a hollow moon is true or not.

This is talking about penetration a layer of ice or snow, not rock. I don't think the lunar regolith has the consistency of firm snow. It's pretty doubtful returns from even 10 meters could be attained through the regolith and solid structure beneath it.

I also think it doubtful that much effort would (or should) be devoted to "proving" that the moon is not hollow.

[edit on 2/18/2009 by Phage]