SCI The Moon is Millions of Years older than Previously Thought.

Melodi

Disaster Cat
I thought this article was interesting. I've seen it in several places today. Hopefully, more information will be released soon.

Moon is millions of years older than previously thought, study suggests
Senior author of the study, Professor Philipp Heck, said it was "amazing being able to have proof that the rock you're holding is the oldest bit of the moon we've found so far".


Reemul Balla
News reporter @Reemul_B

Monday 23 October 2023 15:11, UK


The moon is 40 million years older than scientists previously thought, according to a new study.

Researchers analysed crystals brought back by Apollo astronauts between 1969 and 1972 to pinpoint the time of the moon's formation.

Sponsored link
Recommended byWhat is Outbrain
brand logo

During Apollo missions, astronauts gathered rocks, pebbles, sand and dust from the moon's surface - and it was lunar dust samples from Apollo 17's final crewed mission used in the study.

They contain zircon crystals that formed billions of years ago, which researchers say are a key indicator of when the moon must have formed.

Scientists believe the moon could have been created from the debris resulting from the Earth being struck a glancing blow by a planetary body about the size of Mars - and the energy from the impact melted the rock which eventually became the moon's surface.



The crystals, which are the "oldest known solids" that formed after the giant impact, according to University of Chicago professor Philipp Heck, suggest the moon is at least 4.46 billion years old.

Theorising on the moon's creation, the professor said: "When the surface was molten like that, zircon crystals couldn't form and survive, so any crystals on the moon's surface must have formed after this lunar magma ocean cooled; otherwise, they would have been melted and their chemical signatures would be erased."


Since the crystals must have formed after the magma ocean cooled, determining their age would reveal the moon's minimum possible age.

Previous research had suggested the earlier age of the moon, but this study marks the first use of atom probe tomography - analysis of a structure at atomic levels - of the lunar crystal.

The crystal sample was sharpened into a tip using a focused ion beam microscope, then UV lasers were used to evaporate atoms from the tip, lead author of the study Dr Jennika Greer said.

Dr Greer added: "The atoms travel through a mass spectrometer, and how fast they move tells us how heavy they are, which in turn tells us what they're made of."

Many of the atoms found inside the crystals had undergone radioactive decay - a process by which they would have shed some protons and neutrons.

Scientists have established how long it takes this process to occur, and, by looking at the proportion of different uranium and lead atoms (called isotopes) present in a sample, they can tell how old it is - leading to the new conclusion about the moon's age.

Mr Heck, who is also curator in charge of the meteorite and physical geology collections at Chicago's Natural History Field Museum, added: "It's amazing being able to have proof that the rock you're holding is the oldest bit of the moon we've found so far.

"It's an anchor point for so many questions about the Earth. When you know how old something is, you can better understand what has happened to it in its history."

The findings have been published in the journal Geochemical Perspectives Letters.
 

PghPanther

Has No Life - Lives on TB
Reading about this lately in some library books I have.................its amazing detective work that can take evidence and construct what may have happened that long ago with a high degree of confidence due to the evidence.

Unless of course that involves DNA blood samples and OJ Simpson........
 

TxGal

Day by day
I seem to recall that Zacharia Sitchen (sp?) wrote about that collision in one of his books. Read that gosh, maybe 30 yrs ago?
 

Doc1

Has No Life - Lives on TB
This example is just one of the reasons we should take the latest pronouncements from science with a healthy dose of skepticism.

The Moon is our nearest celestial neighbor, we've sent dozens of unmanned missions to it and we've sent a handful of manned missions to its surface. Instead of gaining clarity, the passage of years only seems to result in more confusion about the Moon's origins. I say that we all just agree to agree that the Moon originated in the empty field behind Fred's gas station and call it good.

Best
Doc
 

Squib

Veteran Member
Reading about this lately in some library books I have.................its amazing detective work that can take evidence and construct what may have happened that long ago with a high degree of confidence due to the evidence.

Unless of course that involves DNA blood samples and OJ Simpson........

And that’s at least one major issue…agendas.

So much is based on multiple hypotheses, logical inference, and …here’s the key…a theory with an agenda or a theory constructed by a person with an agenda or presuppositions.

We all have biases and they color our working theories…then we fall in love with them and they’re like a religion, we can’t bear to part with them and protect them at all costs.

Sometimes it’s because of plain religious fervor, sometimes it’s because the money funding the research will dry up if our new, honest theories take us in a different direction…

So, I guess the thing is, we can trust the science, but not the scientist or scientific community..

See recent Covid psyop.
 

PghPanther

Has No Life - Lives on TB
And that’s at least one major issue…agendas.

So much is based on multiple hypotheses, logical inference, and …here’s the key…a theory with an agenda or a theory constructed by a person with an agenda or presuppositions.

We all have biases and they color our working theories…then we fall in love with them and they’re like a religion, we can’t bear to part with them and protect them at all costs.

Sometimes it’s because of plain religious fervor, sometimes it’s because the money funding the research will dry up if our new, honest theories take us in a different direction…

So, I guess the thing is, we can trust the science, but not the scientist or scientific community..

See recent Covid psyop.

The important thing to remember is despite human error, greed and manipulation that the scientific method is a self correcting process that sooner or later the provisional truth of an observation based on evidence will find its way to the forefront.
 

JMG91

Veteran Member
The important thing to remember is despite human error, greed and manipulation that the scientific method is a self correcting process that sooner or later the provisional truth of an observation based on evidence will find its way to the forefront.
True. The main issue we face today though is that many so-called scientists are not even using the scientific method, but a type of pseudo-science that can be neither witnessed nor proven. We're simply expected to take their word for it because they're the "experts." If it cannot be replicated or proven by using an observable baseline, it ain't science.
 

SquonkHunter

Geezer (ret.)
I always heard that God created the heavens and the earth.
He did but he did not go into any detail (that we could understand) about how he did it. He just spoke it into existence. I remember reading many years ago that the sequence of the Creation story synched up with currently known scientific theory if you use a very broad interpretation of the time spans involved; i.e. one day was actually billions of years.

Disclaimer: I am neither a scientist nor theologian, just a poor, miserable human so don't try to draw me into any detailed debate about either. I am not qualified. That is all. :(
 

Melodi

Disaster Cat
Gang, I almost didn't post this story because I was concerned it would get hijacked over another dust-up about when or how the Divinity of Your Choice created Life, The Universe, and Everything. Personally, I thought the information, though way too limited in scope, was interesting enough to risk this happening anyway.

Like Doc1, I know that very little real science is ever "settled" and that new information and discoveries are always made. To me, that is exciting and interesting, but your mileage may vary. But please, let's keep the theology off this thread, though articles and related comments are welcome.

There can always be a thread in the religion room. You know that in the Norse Cosmology, the Moon is Male and the Sun is Female....that's how we get The Man in the Moon. Manni was the Anglosaxon name of the Moongod.
 

SSTemplar

Veteran Member
The moon is an electromagnetic phenomena and nothing else. I suspect that it is as old as the earth. Maybe around 15 thousand years at most 6 thousand at least.
 

SouthernBreeze

Has No Life - Lives on TB
Gang, I almost didn't post this story because I was concerned it would get hijacked over another dust-up about when or how the Divinity of Your Choice created Life, The Universe, and Everything. Personally, I thought the information, though way too limited in scope, was interesting enough to risk this happening anyway.

Like Doc1, I know that very little real science is ever "settled" and that new information and discoveries are always made. To me, that is exciting and interesting, but your mileage may vary. But please, let's keep the theology off this thread, though articles and related comments are welcome.

There can always be a thread in the religion room. You know that in the Norse Cosmology, the Moon is Male and the Sun is Female....that's how we get The Man in the Moon. Manni was the Anglosaxon name of the Moongod.

Go back and look at my posts. I did not introduce religion into this thread. I answered someone's question. Then, an atheist took it upon himself to attack me and my beliefs. Let the admin take it up with him.
 

Melodi

Disaster Cat
I didn't point any fingers at anyone. For the most part, I wasn't even paying attention to who posted what. I simply noticed the thread was quickly going from interesting things about the moon, age of the moon. lunar missions and other related stuff (or even that age of Mars or the Earth) and into the usual arguments of those who follow one set of traditions vs. those who don't. i even tried to inject a bit of humor into it.
 

RB Martin

Veteran Member
The moon has an apparent age. All the evidence will point to that apparent age. The actual truth may be different.
 

West

Senior
40 million when compared to 4.6 billion is a rounding error.
True, also chump change when our leaders spend our tax dollars before we can even make it, or our kids, kids make it. Trillions nowdays.

Let they can't spend a extra trillion to build a moon base!

I'm beginning to think there's merit in the conspiracy theories that we was told not to.
 

tanstaafl

Has No Life - Lives on TB
What I don’t understand is if the moon was created/formed by a piece of earth why is its composition/ rocks, dirt, etc different from earth?

As far as I know there is nothing element-wise on the Moon that doesn't also exist on Earth (helium 3 to the contrary). The last I knew the Moon was created by mostly material that was located above the heavier elements in Earth's core, so the Moon (at least on its surface) is mostly the lighter elements from Earth's crust. Or not.
 

end game

Veteran Member
It's only 5000 years old, saw the documentary.

vlcsnap-2010-12-25-18h15m45s190.png

enhanced-32537-1423695652-1.jpg
 

packyderms_wife

Neither here nor there.
Scientifically we should already have a small town at least on the moon by now. And space ships making weekly stops to and from the moon, with a healthy tourist turnover every week.

Go ahead and use the excuses of the lame stream PC and NASA uses, I'm not buying it.
Who says we don't have a colony there already? After all we have a colony on Ganymede.
 
Top