Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Lost world -- what happened to Mars?

page: 3
7
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 17 2013 @ 11:09 PM
link   

sheepslayer247
It is my opinion that Mars was part of a cataclysmic event in which the 5th planet (now the asteroid belt) was destroyed and subsequently, Mars was hit as well.

I could go much deeper than that, but that is beyond the scope of this thread.


Here is my problem with this theory: the planets are aligned in a certain manner not because of mass or happenstance. Pythagoras mentioned that there was music in the movements of the spheres. Harmonics is what causes the planets to be where they are at.

Thus, in this viewpoint, Mars inhabits a part of the solar system that has to have something inhabiting it.

There absolutely was a planet, IMO, that inhabited the asteroid belt. Mars, however, was where it is currently at that time. Or, so I speculate anyway.




posted on Nov, 17 2013 @ 11:33 PM
link   
mars got a smackdown, it looks like.


when? i don't know.

what if it was gradual?

could life adapt?



posted on Nov, 18 2013 @ 12:03 AM
link   

bigfatfurrytexan

sheepslayer247
It is my opinion that Mars was part of a cataclysmic event in which the 5th planet (now the asteroid belt) was destroyed and subsequently, Mars was hit as well.

I could go much deeper than that, but that is beyond the scope of this thread.


Here is my problem with this theory: the planets are aligned in a certain manner not because of mass or happenstance. Pythagoras mentioned that there was music in the movements of the spheres. Harmonics is what causes the planets to be where they are at.

Thus, in this viewpoint, Mars inhabits a part of the solar system that has to have something inhabiting it.

There absolutely was a planet, IMO, that inhabited the asteroid belt. Mars, however, was where it is currently at that time. Or, so I speculate anyway.



you and i sir, agree on that.
just looking at the debris fields and planet pathings.... it lends itself to the eye at least of suggesting somethign else was there, and bits of it now are all that remain
edit on 11-18-13 by okamitengu because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 18 2013 @ 03:00 AM
link   
reply to post by okamitengu
 


If you were to clump all of the asteroids in the belt into a single object, it would be smaller than the Moon. So if there were a planet there, where did the rest of its mass go?

The most likely scenario is that, when the planets were forming through accretion, the material between Mars and Jupiter couldn't coalesce into a planet because of Jupiter's disruptive gravitational infleunce.

Largest main belt asteroids like Vesta and Ceres can be thought of as protoplanets that just didn't have the opportunity to clump into something bigger.
en.wikipedia.org...
www.space.com...



posted on Nov, 18 2013 @ 03:06 AM
link   

wildespace
reply to post by okamitengu
 


If you were to clump all of the asteroids in the belt into a single object, it would be smaller than the Moon. So if there were a planet there, where did the rest of its mass go?

The most likely scenario is that, when the planets were forming through accretion, the material between Mars and Jupiter couldn't coalesce into a planet because of Jupiter's disruptive gravitational infleunce.

Largest main belt asteroids like Vesta and Ceres can be thought of as protoplanets that just didn't have the opportunity to clump into something bigger.
en.wikipedia.org...
www.space.com...


maybe it was mars?



posted on Nov, 18 2013 @ 02:04 PM
link   
reply to post by sheepslayer247
 


No problem sheepslayer, I think it is good to link related threads.

Thanks for the flag.



posted on Nov, 18 2013 @ 02:10 PM
link   
reply to post by tsingtao
 


Yes, this is the reason why I think the asteroid belt might be the former core of Mars, or at least material ejected from Mars.

Maybe the body that is theorized to have melded with Earth came from Mars.

It really is quite the mystery.



posted on Nov, 18 2013 @ 02:40 PM
link   

poet1b
If Mar's didn't have the mass to create a thick atmosphere similar to Earth's, then how did it ever have such an atmosphere?

Boil-off from accreted planetary material. Asteroids and comets are chock full of water and other frozen gasses (and hydrocarbons), and when they jam together to form a planet, the heat of that releases the water and gas. Planets are "born" with atmospheres. Depending on the size and EM shield, and maybe degree of exposure to multiple solar flares, they lose atmosphere at different rates. That would be my guess.



posted on Nov, 18 2013 @ 07:43 PM
link   

intrptr
reply to post by LABTECH767
 


it could have slowed and tried to crash land…


Objects in space maintain constant velocity unless acted upon by another gravity field, in which case they speed up, not slow down. Relative speeds of objects in space are high (several km per second). None that I know of have been clocked slower than 5 miles per second relative to the earth. Thats earths escape velocity.

5 miles per second is actually slow when compared to most objects. There is no atmosphere on the moon to slow whatever made that crater so it would be accelerating towards it until impact.


Correct as far as INANIMATE objects are concerned but have you ever heard of the little invention called the retro rocket, every craft from the early space capsules though the shuttles to todays ultra secret military unmanned shuttle has them in some form and then you can have automatic or manual activation,
I am certain this is what I SEE but others of course see different and I have to postulate that a sophisitcated culture that was able to produce this and then dissapeared may have been,

Passing through explorers
Wiped out in a cataclysm or war, maybe even with another species from elsewhere
Simply gone extinct.

And I find the first two the more plausible by far.
So to reiterate as I did formerly point this out the craft may have crash landed and that means a level of control so yes the retro rockets (or there analogue) would have fired and this would have SLOWED the descent and reduced impact velocity at least somewhat but they certainly did not have an easy landing unless they were destroyed on the surface by a meteor or attack but then that would mean the scar along whith the larger stones have some of the dust removed would be unrelated and I think it is related.

edit on 18-11-2013 by LABTECH767 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 18 2013 @ 08:17 PM
link   
reply to post by poet1b
 


I came across a very interesting Video Theorizing that the Surface of Mars was Sculpted by a Massive Planetwide Electrical Discharge involving another Planetary Body coming into close proximity to it sometime in the not to distant past . This Theory has some merit IMO in discovering what exactly happened on Mars as we see it today . If interested in Viewing it , I would appreciate your thoughts concerning it . Thanks


Part 1 -
www.youtube.com...

Part 2 -
www.youtube.com...



posted on Nov, 18 2013 @ 11:26 PM
link   
reply to post by poet1b
 


If this were true, then wouldn't we expect to see way more similarities to mars, venus and jupiter than we do? Jupiter is unlike any of the inner planets, mars and venus are actually quite different but do how ever show many similarities with Earth.

This leads me to believe Venus, Earth, and Mars are more likely to have come from the same body rather than from Jupiter.

There is far too much solid matter, and far too little of the chemicals we associate with jupiter for this to be true.



posted on Nov, 18 2013 @ 11:42 PM
link   
I haven't checked all the posts, so I don't know if anybody posted this theory yet: What about the huge asteroid belt that is within our solar system? Could that have been the mysterious extra planet at one point in our galactic journey?

Perhaps that planet "self destructed" in a way, whether it be through natural processes or a really, really big comet hitting it. Wouldn't the "fallout" from that collision/explosion/destruction rain "fire and brimstone" onto Mars as well as push it far enough out of the "Goldilocks Zone" to render is useless for life as we know it?

I'm not basing my theory on any sort of scientific fact, just thoughts I've had after reading many, many books over the years.

-TS



posted on Nov, 18 2013 @ 11:50 PM
link   

poet1b
reply to post by sheepslayer247
 


Or, what happened to Mars created the asteroid belt.

This sounds like the most reasonable theory to me.



It would be interesting to think mars created or was part of a larger body that created the asteroid belt, how ever if this were true Mars would probably have more giant volcanoes wouldn't you think? Turning a larger planet into a smaller uniform one would likely be because the ejected "mars" would be mostly molten, then settle into a semi hardened sphere much like Earth.

Now, I'm a firm believer with out the moon, Earth would be a cold dead Rock. Our moon orbits at just the right distance it's gravity acts on the Earth, creating her winds, her tides, and even tectonic forces. When you think of the substantial effect the moon has on the other liquid on the planet, the oceans. It would make sense the moon would have a similar effect on her liquid core.

Now, mars has very insignificant moons in comparison to Earth, so I propose you with this.

What if Mars was a moon? Mars could very well have been a portion of another larger planet, perhaps even that which is theorized to have been the material that produced the asteroid belt. If mars in it's early stages were a moon of a larger planet with it's own molten/semi molten core, when that planet were destroyed perhaps mars was blown from her orbit. The sudden extreme tidal forces could have both created this massive volcano as it's molten material were under extreme gravitational stress. This could also be the material we know as mars' current moons.

Just an extreme outside the box thought as per this threads subject matter.

It could also be, mars once had a moon roughly 1/3rd it's mass, just like Earth does and that moon were destroyed in a similar cataclysmic event which could have in turn provided an extreme stress forming such a large volcano. Just a thought how ever.



posted on Nov, 18 2013 @ 11:51 PM
link   
reply to post by truthseeker1984
 


The asteroid belt is after mars though, wouldn't any catastrophic explosion/debris be pushing it closer to the sun?

Just saying.

Sun, Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, ASTEROID BELT, Jupiter etc

the planets
edit on 18-11-2013 by Hijinx because: To add image



posted on Nov, 20 2013 @ 08:04 PM
link   



posted on Nov, 23 2013 @ 11:08 AM
link   
reply to post by Hijinx
 


If there was some mass ejection from Mars, it could have gone in many directions. If the ejection was towards the sun, then probably a great deal of the mass would have fallen into the sun.

When I think about it, most likely such and ejection would most likely stayed well within the orbital path of Mars around the sun, unless it was an extremely violent ejection. Maybe a collision with a very large comet after it had slingshot around the sun?



posted on Nov, 23 2013 @ 11:09 AM
link   
reply to post by adjensen
 


Nice, thanks, that will be a first for a thread I have started.

I will check it out.



posted on Nov, 23 2013 @ 11:58 AM
link   

sheepslayer247
It is my opinion that Mars was part of a cataclysmic event in which the 5th planet (now the asteroid belt) was destroyed and subsequently, Mars was hit as well.

I could go much deeper than that, but that is beyond the scope of this thread.



The REAL BIG problem with your theory is the amount of mass in the asteroid belt!!!


The total weight of all the asteroids in the asteroid belt is about 1/35th of that of our moon!



posted on Nov, 23 2013 @ 05:31 PM
link   
reply to post by wmd_2008
 


The evidence that something spectacular happened to Mars remains.

I think a good point should be made, that identifying possible signs of where loss mass might have gone would be a good idea.

There is the Sun, Jupiter, and possibly Earth to consider.



posted on Nov, 24 2013 @ 05:19 PM
link   
I do believe that there was life on Mars in the past. But I suspect there was a dreadful war and everyone died. What is left is what we see today. Call it a glimpse of what Earth would look like if full scale global nuclear war took place.





new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join