Hollow Moon Theory physically is Possible.

page: 1
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 28 2009 @ 11:07 PM
link   
Gravity on the Moon... Posted by zorgon.This thread got me to thinking. Why the anomaly?

Is there a solid measurable scientific reason to why gravity should be consistent on a mass body? After all given the geological examples of diversity here on Earth surely there must be localization of mass in areas, and conversely, there is also areas where there is measurably less mass.

But to get here, we must go back, way back, back before the Earth was a planet. (sorry creationists)





The forces at work during the inception of the solar system Are, Mass, Trajectory (Orbit), and gravity.

Now at some point our planets core becomes very hot, basically the solar system looks like a cooling lava lamp.

If the idiots in this video ever thought about it they would have learned something.



Yes basic science lost on two morons. (sorry)

But it shows the point on a miniature scale how the solar system was formed.

Now the moon is a strange object in the solar system because it does not revolve on an axis. It is stationary, it revolves on a plane, in its orbit of the earth but it otherwise is stationary.

So along this orbit a hot molten fireball moons crust started to cool creating the mantle. Kinda like an eggshell. Soft and molten inside and hard on the outside.

So this goo on the inside is cooling over god knows how long. but every day it spends less time with gravity than it does with it's own mass.

It ends up sloshing cooling molten iron and nickle to one side of the core than the other offsetting the center of gravity.

Thus the reason for the strange gravitational anomaly on the moon.

 


This opens up the the ever slight chance of the hollow moon theory to exist.

Remember in this theory the majority of the mass of the moon is shifted to the dark side. This is due to centrifugal force. therefore there is less mass on the near earth side due to that effect. Thus the possibility that as the moon cooled a pocket opened up just below the crust.

No aliens required.

Now as for the bell tone from the moon theory?

Now as I have explained above, there is a possibility that there are sections of the moon that are hollow. Cavities running deep under the crust. Where a pocket of space opened during the time the moon cooled.

Smack a drum.




posted on May, 29 2009 @ 12:02 AM
link   
Wouldn't the earth's gravity have an effect on a molten center of the moon?

Centrifugal forces shifting the center of mass of the moon to one side seem to account for the lack of rotation. But that would mean that the opposite side would be under the continuous influence of earth's gravity.
So I would expect to find less dense parts (perhaps even caverns) in a 'ring' around the moon perpendicular to the directions of earth's gravity and the centrifugal force.

Then again...I could be completely wrong and oversimplifying the science involved...



posted on May, 29 2009 @ 12:20 AM
link   
reply to post by Dorfl
 


Your forgetting the suns gravity element on the gravitational equation.

An experiment could be to fill a ping pong ball with hot wax, then spin it on a centrifuge. As elements cool they contract, The spinning of the moon along with the gravitational forces acting on it like the Earth and the Sun could possibly facilitate pockets forming beneath the moons crust.

I wouldn't say they were huge by any means. A few meters at most.



posted on May, 29 2009 @ 12:29 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on May, 29 2009 @ 12:34 AM
link   
Wouldn't the gravitational element of the sun be way less than earth's influence? And for 99% be canceled out by the fact that the moon does rotate from the sun's perspective (round earths axle).

Even if the sun would have a larger influence, that would limit the occurrence of caverns round the polar regions.

But what would you expect to find there? Water?



posted on May, 29 2009 @ 12:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by whatukno
Now the moon is a strange object in the solar system because it does not revolve on an axis. It is stationary, it revolves on a plane, in its orbit of the earth but it otherwise is stationary.


What do you mean by that ?

Last time I checked there is no one single object in universe which does not revolve around it's own axes



posted on May, 29 2009 @ 12:35 AM
link   
reply to post by justsomeboreddude
 


:shk:

Astronomy For Kids

Here you go.



posted on May, 29 2009 @ 12:37 AM
link   
reply to post by 5thElement
 


The moon does revolve around an axis. Namely earth's.
The moon is kinda special in that it revolves around an axis outside it's own body.



posted on May, 29 2009 @ 12:37 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on May, 29 2009 @ 12:38 AM
link   
reply to post by 5thElement
 


Yes actually your right, but it does it in a way that one side shows itself to earth and one side does not.

It's a geostationary orbit. Where it rotates along an axis parallel to the surface of the Earth.



posted on May, 29 2009 @ 12:41 AM
link   
reply to post by Dorfl
 


Which goes to better show the hollow moon theory (or rather evacuated shell)

The constant of the earth's gravity would be offset periodically by the additional pull from the sun. The impacts that started happening favoring one side increased this density, this mass thus showing itself in the far side gravitational anomaly.



posted on May, 29 2009 @ 12:45 AM
link   
reply to post by whatukno
 


Wouldnt it just create a distorted sphere.. like slightly oval. I just dont see how you get it being hollow from gravity. Wouldnt it collapse on itself?
And given its size and mass wouldnt the shell have to be incredibly dense?
Just asking.


[edit on 5/29/2009 by justsomeboreddude]



posted on May, 29 2009 @ 12:47 AM
link   
reply to post by whatukno
 


The you would end up with a dense and less dense side wouldn't you? It wouldn't necessarily point to 'pockets' or caverns, but more likely to the types of material you would be likely to find in the core and mantle on either side of the moon.



posted on May, 29 2009 @ 12:53 AM
link   
reply to post by justsomeboreddude
 


Good point.
The only thing I can offer about this is that you can't observe the shape of the moon form earth. It could be egg-shaped and you wouldn't know as long as the 'tip' is pointed away from earth. But it's unlikely.

At the moment we believe the moon to be round because the space agencies told us it is...OMG...have you just uncovered the next big conspiracy theory?



posted on May, 29 2009 @ 12:57 AM
link   
reply to post by Dorfl
 


LOL.. that is what I do here, uncover conspiracies only to turn around and cover them back up


I see your point though about it being pointed and we wouldnt realize it. That is genius.

I never really meant it being so distorted it was pointed, just more of a distorted sphere, like the moons of Jupiter or Saturn (its late) distort their shape as they circle around the planet and between other giants moons.. Sorry I am rambling and I sound like an idiot. Hopefully you will get my point. You know the moon with all the volcanic activity.



posted on May, 29 2009 @ 01:10 AM
link   
reply to post by justsomeboreddude
 



LOL.. that is what I do here, uncover conspiracies only to turn around and cover them back up

Still hoping for vacancies in the 'men in black' department are you?


I doubt the forces working on the moon are big enough to cause some clearly noticeable distortions. We are (luckily) in the quiet, more laid back part of the universe. Apart from meteors and other flying debris we have not that much to fear.



posted on May, 29 2009 @ 01:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by Dorfl
The moon does revolve around an axis. Namely earth's.
The moon is kinda special in that it revolves around an axis outside it's own body.

What?

That's called an orbit. They're quite common.

The moon revolves on its own axis once every 27 days-and-a-bit days, which is also the period of its orbit round Earth.

This is not a coincidence: it is called phase or tidal locking and many satellites in the solar system exhibit the same behaviour.

More



posted on May, 29 2009 @ 01:45 AM
link   
reply to post by whatukno
 


It's a geostationary orbit.

No, it's not. A geostationary orbit is an equatorial one in which the orbital period is 23 hours 59 minutes or whatever the true length of Earth's day is.

Satellites in geostationary orbit seem to hover above the same point on the Equator without moving. Useful for communications satellites, weapons platforms and the space elevator if we ever build it.

The geostationary altitude is 35,786km, or about a tenth of the distance from Earth to the moon. List of satellites in geostationery orbit.

By the way, one result of tidal locking (see earlier post) is that Earth hangs nearly stationary in the lunar sky, going through the phase cycle from new to full and back every 24 hours.

[edit on 29/5/09 by Astyanax]



posted on May, 29 2009 @ 01:53 AM
link   
reply to post by Dorfl
 


you can't observe the shape of the moon form earth. It could be egg-shaped and you wouldn't know as long as the 'tip' is pointed away from earth.

If it was, one of these would surely have spotted it by now.



posted on May, 29 2009 @ 02:01 AM
link   
reply to post by Astyanax
 


You are absolutely right!
I was thinking along the lines of what the OP was proposing. I completely forgot the actual behavior of that big flying lump of stone!

It's of course in a synchronous rotation.

This realization (or getting back to reality) brings us to something else:
The position of the moon was not alway what it is now. A billion years ago the moon was much closer to earth (about 200000km). Was it in synchronous rotation then? It would have to be for the OP's proposition to 'work'.





new topics

top topics



 
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join