Allow me: "Current theories about evolution of our Earth/Moon system, namely the impact theory, suggest that the Moon most probably formed 4-5 billion years ago, when the Earth collided with a very large object, ejecting raw materials that eventually became the Moon. However, other theories are perhaps less likely, but still plausible. The Moon's global elemental composition, once it is determined, should provide the best evidence yet to begin to settle this issue." http://lunar.ksc.nasa.gov/science/geologys.html
With your admittedly limited scientific education I can understand why you believe the dominant hypotheses for creation of time, space and matter. Honest scientists do not conduct science by consensus, or mob-rule. Even your own old earth belief is contrary to this opinion. - - - Updated - - - I'd retreat too if I was losing a debate.
I refuse to pour you your cornflakes when I know you won't eat them. If that constitutes a retreat in your world, fine. My avatar is an accurate artist's impression of me right now looking at this "debate".
Which equals 113,636 miles. That puts the moon about twice as far away today as it would have been 4.5 billion years ago. How is that a problem? For a theory that was rejected four decades ago, it seems to be doing pretty well. http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/04/140402-moon-formation-earth-age-space-science/
But if we bring the Moon in really close, suddenly one side of the Earth is a lot closer to the Moon than the other: The Earths near side is 2,158 kilometers from the Moons center, and the far side is nearly 15,000 kilometers away. Thats a huge difference, and the tides felt by the Earth would be amplified enormouslynearly 100,000 times what we experience now! There would be global floods as a tidal wave kilometers high sweeps around the world every 90 minutes (due to the Moons closer, faster orbit), scouring clean everything in its path. The Earth itself would also be stretched up and down, so there would be apocalyptic earthquakes, not to mention huge internal heating of the Earth and subsequent volcanism. Id think that the oceans might even boil away due to the enormous heat released from the Earths interior, so at least that spares you the flood but replaces water with lava. Yay? The Earth is more than 80 times more massive than the Moon, and so the tides the Moon feels would be even bigger. In fact, at that distance the Moon would be well inside the Earths Roche limit, the distance from the Earth where its tides could break another object apart. In other words, the tides from the Earth would literally rip the Moon to pieces! - By Phil Plait
I'd say increased seismic and volcanic activity, and more turbulent oceans. Whatever the effects would be, what do they have to do with the validity of the Old Earth theory? The last sentence seems pretty messed up. As I understand it, the barycenter would have been inside the Earth to begin with and moved away from its center as the Moon receded, and the Moon's orbit wouldn't slow down because it's gaining angular momentum WRT the Earth's center of mass while the Earth is losing it.
Does the Old Earth theory contend that the Moon's initial orbiting distance was 260 miles above the Earth's suface? Because that's the hypothetical distance the author is using.
The Moon would break apart from tidal activity from Earth's gravity. - - - Updated - - - Some computer models place it as touching the Earth some at 116,000 miles depending on how old the Old Earthers need the universe to be to try to explain their fairy tale.
You're absolutely correct the barycenter would move away from the center of the Earth. It's actually still inside the Earth, around 1000 km from the surface. Assuming there was a collision, the momentum of Theia/Moon must have been high enough to carry it out to a somewhat stable orbit, far enough away to keep the tidal forces from tearing each body apart or gravity from pulling the bodies together. What would cause it to gain significant angular momentum after the initial collision? The only place it could transfer it from is Earth, and it would have to slow down the Earth's rotation to do so. Sure tidal forces cause the Moon to gain a bit of angular momentum every year, but I don't think those forces would be dominant immediately after a collision.
Yeah, if it were orbiting within a few hundred miles of the Earth. What theory says that was ever the case? What the hell does that even mean?
I'm glad you asked. If you bothered to READ the OP, the Moon was closer to the Earth in the past. If the universe was created 6,000 years ago, the distance of the orbit of the Moon presents no problem. If the Earth and Moon are 4,500,000,000 to 6,000,000,000 years old, then the Moon's orbit would either be touching the Earth or about 1116,000 miles from Earth. Regardless of the old Earth timescale used, the Moon would disintegrate from the gravitational forces and the Earth would be unsuitable for life for about 4,000,000,000 years, which does not allow enough time for any hypothetical scenario of evolution to take place. Dream up a better fairy tale or admit your religion is flawed.
You need to check your math. 113,636 miles equals about 182,880 kilometers. Earth's diameter is about 12,750 kilometers which is only a 7% difference compared to the 5% difference today. Yes, tides would be stronger, but not all that much. You're quoting from an article that imagines the Moon is orbiting at the same altitude as the International Space Station, or about 260 miles. Nothing even remotely like that is suggested by the math.
I think you meant 116,000 miles. Still, there is a big difference between a moon 116,000 miles from Earth and one touching it, about 111,000 miles to be exact.
From Science Magazine "They started out analyzing moon rocks that arrived on Earth as meteorites but found that the weathering these rocks experienced on Earth was skewing the results. So they got hold of some rock samples from NASA that had been brought back by Apollo missions 11, 12, and 16. They extracted oxygen from all the samples and then passed it through the spectrometer to find out the proportions of each isotope. Their conclusion was that the lunar samples had an O-17 to O-16 ratio that was 12 parts per million higher than rocks derived from Earth’s mantle. - - - Updated - - - Is reading for comprehension a BIG problem for you? Or are you able to understand what you read after re-reading something?
Sorry about the misprint, yes it's supposed to be between 116,000 miles away to touching the Earth depending on how many billions of years the story teller suggests.
Scientists who believe in the Old Earth hypothesis seem to all agree that our Moon was formed or captured by the Earth's gravity approximately 4,500,000,000 years ago. Astronomers and planetary scientists have measured our Moon's orbit and distance from Earth between 225,600 miles at perigee to 252,000 miles at apogee. This distance is increasing at approximately 4 cm (1.6 inches) every year. Simple mathematics then would locate our Moon at approximately 120,000 miles from Earth when it was formed or captured. What would be the effect on Earth's tides if the Moon was that near? What other effects (other than a shorter month) would that have on the Earth? (It would be catastrophic disintegration of the Moon and the Earth would have tidal waves of water and lava)
You know that tidal forces are due to gravity, right? Since gravitation force is a function of the square of the distance between two objects, if the Moon were half the distance to Earth that it is now, tidal forces would be four times as great. Significant, but hardly enough to cause serious problems.
Why would the earth be moving away from the earth? Do not orbiting satellites very slowly lose momentum due to tidal forces and the radius of orbit becomes smaller over time?
Tidal forces are function of the cube of the distance. The forces would be on the order of 10 times greater.
I assume you mean the Moon and the Earth. The moon exerts tidal forces on the Earth. This causes a bulge on the Earth (actually 2, one close to the Moon and one opposite). Since the Earth rotates faster than the Moon orbits, the Moon is always pulling at that bulge against the Earth's rotation, effectively slowing the Earth down. Conversely, the Earth is pulling the Moon forward in its orbit. Angular momentum has to be conserved so exactly the same amount of rotation the Earth loses determines how much angular momentum the Moon gains. Note that this only works because the rotation of the Earth and Moon are in the same direction, and that the two masses are big enough to affect each other. A little man made satellite isn't going to cause enough tidal forces or gravitational pull to do much. I should add an increase in angular momentum of an orbital body causes the body's orbital distance to increase.
It's not simple mathematics though, there's not a linear relation. Whether the Moon was captured or was due to a collision, there's some amount of time for the disturbed Earth-Moon system to settle. Also at some point the Moon rotated in relation to the Earth, it doesn't anymore because the exchange of angular momentum slowed its rotation.
From the abstract of the article you linked to (emphasis mine): "The Moon was probably formed by a catastrophic collision of the proto-Earth with a planetesimal named Theia. Most numerical models of this collision imply a higher portion of Theia in the Moon than in Earth. Because of the isotope heterogeneity among solar system bodies, the isotopic composition of Earth and the Moon should thus be distinct. So far, however, all attempts to identify the isotopic component of Theia in lunar rocks have failed. Our triple oxygen isotope data reveal a 12 ± 3 parts per million difference in Δ17O between Earth and the Moon, which supports the giant impact hypothesis of Moon formation."
