Announcement

Collapse

Natural Science 301 Guidelines

This is an open forum area for all members for discussions on all issues of science and origins. This area will and does get volatile at times, but we ask that it be kept to a dull roar, and moderators will intervene to keep the peace if necessary. This means obvious trolling and flaming that becomes a problem will be dealt with, and you might find yourself in the doghouse.

As usual, Tweb rules apply. If you haven't read them now would be a good time.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Thanks for the moon

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Thanks for the moon

    It stabilizes the earth's rotational tilt:

    Source: Reasons to Believe

    The stability of Earth’s rotation axis tilt is the most life-critical feature of the Moon. If it were not for the Moon, Earth’s rotation axis tilt would change so dramatically as to induce climate changes severe enough to wipe out nearly all forms of life.

    Source

    © Copyright Original Source



    The moon's magnetosphere helped protect life on early earth:

    Source: RTB

    Green’s team showed that regardless of the orientations of Earth’s and Moon’s magnets, the coupled magnetosphere of the Earth-Moon system previous to 4 billion years ago was sufficiently strong and stable to prevent the intense solar wind from sputtering away or seriously degrading either Earth’s atmosphere or its hydrosphere. It also was strong and stable enough to protect the microbes on Earth’s surface at that time from deadly solar radiation.

    Source

    © Copyright Original Source



    The moon helps keep our magnetosphere active:

    Source: Discover Magazine

    In a study published Wednesday in the journal Earth and Planetary Science Letters, scientists from the National Center for Scientific Research in France say the the moon plays a key role keeping life on Earth safe. Although the moon sits some 230,000 miles away, researchers believe its gravitational tug churns iron alloy in the core, which, in turn, helps maintain the magnetic field that protects our planet.

    Source

    © Copyright Original Source



    Blessings,
    Lee
    "What I pray of you is, to keep your eye upon Him, for that is everything. Do you say, 'How am I to keep my eye on Him?' I reply, keep your eye off everything else, and you will soon see Him. All depends on the eye of faith being kept on Him. How simple it is!" (J.B. Stoney)

  • #2
    Serious question...

    How does this or the other thread differ than ones started saying... "Thanks for water"?

    Or, "Thanks for air." "Thanks for gravity." Thanks for atomic structure." And so on

    I'm always still in trouble again

    "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
    "Of course, human life begins at fertilization thatís not the argument." --Tassman

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
      Serious question...

      How does this or the other thread differ than ones started saying... "Thanks for water"?

      Or, "Thanks for air." "Thanks for gravity." Thanks for atomic structure." And so on
      Because the moon is rare, possibly even unique!

      Source: space.com

      Earth's Stabilizing Moon May Be Unique Within Universe

      New simulations show that Earth's moon is not only unique in the solar system, but may also be rare throughout the universe.

      Research reveals that less than 10 percent of terrestrial planets may have a satellite large enough to provide the stability life needs to develop.

      Source

      © Copyright Original Source



      Blessings,
      Lee
      "What I pray of you is, to keep your eye upon Him, for that is everything. Do you say, 'How am I to keep my eye on Him?' I reply, keep your eye off everything else, and you will soon see Him. All depends on the eye of faith being kept on Him. How simple it is!" (J.B. Stoney)

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by lee_merrill View Post
        Because the moon is rare, possibly even unique!

        Source: space.com

        Earth's Stabilizing Moon May Be Unique Within Universe

        New simulations show that Earth's moon is not only unique in the solar system, but may also be rare throughout the universe.

        Research reveals that less than 10 percent of terrestrial planets may have a satellite large enough to provide the stability life needs to develop.

        Source

        © Copyright Original Source



        Blessings,
        Lee
        That quote from saying it is "unique" to saying that it is "rare" and "less than 10 percent of terrestrial planets may have a satellite large enough to provide the stability life needs to develop" in very quick order.

        If it is "unique" the number would be smaller by several factors.

        And given the size of the universe, even taking low estimates for the number of terrestrial planets out there (NASA estimates there could be over 10 Billion in our galaxy alone), even if only a tenth of a tenth of a tenth of them had sufficiently large satellites you're looking at least 10 million in our galaxy.

        Now keep in mind that the Milky Way is probably larger than average but nowhere nearly among the biggest and there are supposedly something like a million and a half galaxies catalogued by Hubble and other telescopes, and estimates vary between there being hundreds of millions to a couple billion galaxies in the universe in total.

        So even if there were an average of only 5 million planets with sufficiently large satellites per galaxy and we take a lower end estimate to the number of galaxies (say 500 million) we are looking at approximately 2.5 quadrillion or 2,500,000,000,000,000 planets with "a satellite large enough to provide the stability life needs to develop."

        Now that doesn't mean there are that many Earth-like planets, but given that number even if its a mere one in a billion (1/1,000,000,000) we're still looking at roughly 2.5 million of them.

        And remember, I purposely used estimates closer to the lower end than the top
        Last edited by rogue06; 06-16-2021, 07:08 PM.

        I'm always still in trouble again

        "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
        "Of course, human life begins at fertilization thatís not the argument." --Tassman

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
          That quote from saying it is "unique" to saying that it is "rare" and "less than 10 percent of terrestrial planets may have a satellite large enough to provide the stability life needs to develop" in very quick order.
          But there are other factors, too, such as the composition of the planet that struck earth (which indicates that it formed at an orbital distance different than earth), and the obliqueness of the collision. Such factors would reduce the percentage.

          ... even if only a tenth of a tenth of a tenth of them had sufficiently large satellites you're looking at least 10 million in our galaxy.
          But we could still give thanks that we were in that tenth of a tenth of a tenth.

          Blessings,
          Lee

          "What I pray of you is, to keep your eye upon Him, for that is everything. Do you say, 'How am I to keep my eye on Him?' I reply, keep your eye off everything else, and you will soon see Him. All depends on the eye of faith being kept on Him. How simple it is!" (J.B. Stoney)

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by lee_merrill View Post
            But there are other factors, too, such as the composition of the planet that struck earth (which indicates that it formed at an orbital distance different than earth), and the obliqueness of the collision. Such factors would reduce the percentage.
            Not really they're just part of what makes large satellites for terrestrial planets as uncommon as they are. And we already factored in for their relative rarity.

            Originally posted by lee_merrill View Post
            But we could still give thanks that we were in that tenth of a tenth of a tenth.

            Blessings,
            Lee
            Or whatever percentage it is.

            I'm always still in trouble again

            "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
            "Of course, human life begins at fertilization thatís not the argument." --Tassman

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by lee_merrill View Post
              Source: Reasons to Believe

              The stability of Earth’s rotation axis tilt is the most life-critical feature of the Moon. If it were not for the Moon, Earth’s rotation axis tilt would change so dramatically as to induce climate changes severe enough to wipe out nearly all forms of life.

              Source

              © Copyright Original Source

              i'd like to highlight this because it is, in fact, a lie. "Wipe out nearly all forms of life"? Seriously? Bacteria would go on as they always have, and they are most forms of life, so that's just garbage. But animals are remarkably adaptable, too. They survive in the Arctic and Antarctic, they undergo massive migration to find the right climates to feed, breed, and avoid the worst of winter, etc.

              Lee, once again, your sources are stupid. Do better.
              "Any sufficiently advanced stupidity is indistinguishable from trolling."

              Comment


              • #8

                Tardigrade.jpg And then there's the tardigrade. mountaintops, mud volcanoes, rain-forests, Antarctica, starvation, extreme pressures (including vacuum of space and deepest ocean), radiation, dehydration, starvation - one species or another (more than 1000 all up) will survive it.
                Last edited by tabibito; 06-17-2021, 08:39 AM.
                sigpic1 Cor 15:34 εκνηψατε δικαιως και μη αμαρτανετε αγνωσιαν γαρ θεου τινες εχουσιν προς εντροπην υμιν λεγω

                Comment


                • #9
                  Research reveals that less than 10 percent of terrestrial planets may have a satellite large enough to provide the stability life needs to develop.
                  To date, 25% of all known terrestrial planets have satellites as large as our moon.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Faber View Post
                    To date, 25% of all known terrestrial planets have satellites as large as our moon.
                    Linky?

                    I'm always still in trouble again

                    "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                    "Of course, human life begins at fertilization thatís not the argument." --Tassman

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Linky? There are only four planets close enough to observe, only one of which has a moon the size of ours. Mars has two, which are likely captured asteroids.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Faber View Post
                        Linky? There are only four planets close enough to observe, only one of which has a moon the size of ours. Mars has two, which are likely captured asteroids.
                        Ah, I thought you were referring to the satellites observed orbiting exoplanets.

                        I'm always still in trouble again

                        "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                        "Of course, human life begins at fertilization thatís not the argument." --Tassman

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                          Ah, I thought you were referring to the satellites observed orbiting exoplanets.
                          These are really, really hard to detect. The primary method is what's called a transit timing variation. You take a planet that transits in front of its star from Earth's perspective, and look for orbits that are faster (because the moon's ahead of it in orbit) or slower (because the moon's behind) than expected. But the effects are really small unless you have an unusually massive moon, and similar timing variations can also be caused by other planets orbiting the same star, so it's extremely difficult to know what you're looking at is a Moon. (You essentially need other planets in the same system that don't show transit timing variations to rule out another planet.)

                          Hardware has to spend a lot of time staring at the same star to get enough data to sort this sort of thing out — something that can be difficult to justify. Checking Wikipedia, there are a dozen or so candidates, but none are confirmed.
                          "Any sufficiently advanced stupidity is indistinguishable from trolling."

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by TheLurch View Post
                            These are really, really hard to detect. The primary method is what's called a transit timing variation. You take a planet that transits in front of its star from Earth's perspective, and look for orbits that are faster (because the moon's ahead of it in orbit) or slower (because the moon's behind) than expected. But the effects are really small unless you have an unusually massive moon, and similar timing variations can also be caused by other planets orbiting the same star, so it's extremely difficult to know what you're looking at is a Moon. (You essentially need other planets in the same system that don't show transit timing variations to rule out another planet.)

                            Hardware has to spend a lot of time staring at the same star to get enough data to sort this sort of thing out — something that can be difficult to justify. Checking Wikipedia, there are a dozen or so candidates, but none are confirmed.
                            I think the first was only detected a couple years back and it is still awaiting confirmation.

                            This is why I asked for a link.

                            I'm always still in trouble again

                            "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                            "Of course, human life begins at fertilization thatís not the argument." --Tassman

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by TheLurch View Post
                              "Wipe out nearly all forms of life"? Seriously? Bacteria would go on as they always have, and they are most forms of life, so that's just garbage. But animals are remarkably adaptable, too. They survive in the Arctic and Antarctic, they undergo massive migration to find the right climates to feed, breed, and avoid the worst of winter, etc.
                              Source: space.com

                              The moon has long been recognized as a significant stabilizer of Earth's orbital axis. Without it, astronomers have predicted that Earth's tilt could vary as much as 85 degrees. In such a scenario, the sun would swing from being directly over the equator to directly over the poles over the course of a few million years, a change which could result in dramatic climatic shifts.

                              Source

                              © Copyright Original Source


                              Dramatic climatic shifts such as happened to Mars, which would indeed make earth difficult for many, or even most forms of life.

                              Blessings,
                              Lee
                              "What I pray of you is, to keep your eye upon Him, for that is everything. Do you say, 'How am I to keep my eye on Him?' I reply, keep your eye off everything else, and you will soon see Him. All depends on the eye of faith being kept on Him. How simple it is!" (J.B. Stoney)

                              Comment

                              Related Threads

                              Collapse

                              Topics Statistics Last Post
                              Started by shunyadragon, Yesterday, 06:14 PM
                              1 response
                              7 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post rogue06
                              by rogue06
                               
                              Started by rogue06, 07-22-2021, 07:50 AM
                              1 response
                              15 views
                              1 like
                              Last Post shunyadragon  
                              Started by Cow Poke, 07-21-2021, 08:13 AM
                              13 responses
                              40 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Cow Poke  
                              Started by Sparko, 07-20-2021, 06:52 AM
                              45 responses
                              138 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Sparko
                              by Sparko
                               
                              Started by rogue06, 07-18-2021, 12:17 PM
                              19 responses
                              69 views
                              2 likes
                              Last Post Sparko
                              by Sparko
                               
                              Working...
                              X