Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

No Moon

Expand Messages
  • slinter@juno.com
    Avete, Alphani- Sunday night, on the Discovery Channel, is a special we all might find interesting. If We Had No Moon . We ve all wondered about the effect of
    Message 1 of 7 , Jun 7, 2003
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      Avete, Alphani-
      Sunday night, on the Discovery Channel, is a special we all might
      find interesting. "If We Had No Moon". We've all wondered about the
      effect of losing Alpha. Might be worth the hour.











      S.

      ________________________________________________________________
      The best thing to hit the internet in years - Juno SpeedBand!
      Surf the web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER!
      Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today!
    • Bret Feinblatt
      I believe that¹s more along the lines of ³what if the moon never existed.² There¹s a theory that without the effects the moon has on Earth, life might
      Message 2 of 7 , Jun 7, 2003
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        I believe that¹s more along the lines of ³what if the moon never existed.²
        There¹s a theory that without the effects the moon has on Earth, life might
        never have evolved ­ or at least might have been very different. Not so sure
        how reasonable a theory it is, but...

        On 6/8/03 12:35 AM, "slinter@..." <slinter@...> wrote:

        > Avete, Alphani-
        > Sunday night, on the Discovery Channel, is a special we all might
        > find interesting. "If We Had No Moon". We've all wondered about the
        > effect of losing Alpha. Might be worth the hour.
        --
        "The trouble with our times is that the future is not what it used to be."
        --Paul Valery


        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Phil Merkel
        ... Thanks for the heads up! I saw this documentary months ago and it was pretty interesting, but I don t think I ran a tape. Also saw a terrific special on
        Message 3 of 7 , Jun 8, 2003
        View Source
        • 0 Attachment
          >On 6/8/03 12:35 AM, "slinter@..." <slinter@...> wrote:
          >
          > > Avete, Alphani-
          > > Sunday night, on the Discovery Channel, is a special we all might
          > > find interesting. "If We Had No Moon". We've all wondered about the
          > > effect of losing Alpha. Might be worth the hour.


          Thanks for the heads up! I saw this documentary months ago and it was
          pretty interesting, but I don't think I ran a tape. Also saw a terrific
          special on Black Holes on the Discovery Science Channel (part of Direct
          TV's bank of Discovery channels) a few weeks ago which theorized black
          holes are what cause Galaxies to form stars and without them Galaxies
          wouldn't exist. (Or something along those lines.)

          Speaking of related Space 1999 TV I was just watching CBS Sunday morning
          which had a segment on Bill Claxton the great photographer

          http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/06/05/sunday/main557163.shtml

          the segment touched on the model which he later married, Peggy Moffit who
          modeled Rudy Gernreich's topless bathing suit (We've heard a lot about that
          bathing suit!)

          here is a C&P from the link

          >Claxton easily segued into fashion photography, not surprisingly since he
          >married Peggy Moffitt, a fashion model. She was fashion's "it" girl in the
          >1960s, displaying the colorful, outrageous fashions of Rudy Gernreich in
          >photos by Claxton.
          >
          >Moffitt says having Claxton behind the camera helped her in front of the
          >lens.
          >
          >"Most fashion photographers tell you what to do," she says. "[Claxton]
          >respected me, and so did Rudy. So for me, I could do what I do well, which
          >is respond to clothes, and perform in them."
          >
          >One picture drew particular attention. It was Gernreich's topless bathing
          >suit.
          >
          >"I wanted it to be a fashion statement," says Moffitt. "I think it was
          >prophetic. I think it was the moment that fashion did become modern. Not
          >because people were wearing the topless bathing suit, but it affected
          >clothes. It affected the way dresses were made."
          >
          >Claxton says the times were wild for Moffitt, Gernreich and himself from
          >1964 to 1965.
          >
          >"It was pretty avant-garde," he explains. "I think it put Rudy on the map,
          >put him on the cover of Time magazine, put Peggy on the cover of Time
          >magazine."

          Interesting stuff. I can't say I'd know much or care much about Rudy
          Gernreich if it wasn't for Space 1999! : - ) Then again I think I'm the
          least fashionable person on the planet...a fashion exile! I think Rudy was
          in an episode of Batman in the 1960's as well.

          Anyway, a little Space 1999 link with the morning news....not to mention a
          little nudity! (They showed Peggy's picture in the suit. Went well with
          my morning coffee!)
        • Tom Kuchar
          The idea that the moon was necessary for evolution is due to the tidal effects of the moon. The hypothesis goes that amino acids, forming in the oceans, need
          Message 4 of 7 , Jun 9, 2003
          View Source
          • 0 Attachment
            The idea that the moon was necessary for evolution is due to the tidal effects
            of the moon.

            The hypothesis goes that amino acids, forming in the oceans, need places to
            gather to form large protein structures. This is facilitated if they can be
            isolated from the ocean and dried out somewhat. The moon can cause tidal pools
            to form, thus giving the opportunity for complex protein strings (e.g. primitive
            self replicating proteins, the precursors of DNA) to form.

            That's it, in a nutshell. There may be other affects as well.

            ----- Original Message -----
            Date: Sun, 08 Jun 2003 01:12:00 -0400
            From: Bret Feinblatt <bafein@...>
            Subject: Re: No Moon

            I believe that¹s more along the lines of ³what if the moon never existed.²
            There¹s a theory that without the effects the moon has on Earth, life might
            never have evolved ­ or at least might have been very different. Not so sure
            how reasonable a theory it is, but...
          • cblpgm
            ... tidal effects ... places to ... they can be ... tidal pools ... (e.g. primitive ... It was actually a very good show. It began describing the moon s
            Message 5 of 7 , Jun 21, 2003
            View Source
            • 0 Attachment
              --- In OnlineAlpha@yahoogroups.com, "Tom Kuchar" <tom_k35@h...> wrote:
              > The idea that the moon was necessary for evolution is due to the
              tidal effects
              > of the moon.
              >
              > The hypothesis goes that amino acids, forming in the oceans, need
              places to
              > gather to form large protein structures. This is facilitated if
              they can be
              > isolated from the ocean and dried out somewhat. The moon can cause
              tidal pools
              > to form, thus giving the opportunity for complex protein strings
              (e.g. primitive
              > self replicating proteins, the precursors of DNA) to form.
              >
              > That's it, in a nutshell. There may be other affects as well.
              >




              It was actually a very good show. It began describing the moon's
              formation, when a smaller, Mars-sized, 10th planet slammed into the
              earth, throwing out ejecta which eventually formed the Moon. It
              spoke to the affects how the moon's existence actually slowed the
              Earth's rotatation from 4 hours per day to its current 24 and how it
              kept the tilt within a few degrees. Otherwise, the Earth would
              wobble wildly, up to 90 degrees. Without such a large moon, the
              Earth would be similar to Venus today: wild wobble and toxic
              atmosphere at best.





              > ----- Original Message -----
              > Date: Sun, 08 Jun 2003 01:12:00 -0400
              > From: Bret Feinblatt <bafein@m...>
              > Subject: Re: No Moon
              >
              > I believe that¹s more along the lines of ³what if the moon never
              existed.²
              > There¹s a theory that without the effects the moon has on Earth,
              life might
              > never have evolved ­ or at least might have been very different. Not
              so sure
              > how reasonable a theory it is, but...
            • Bret Feinblatt
              An interesting theory, but I see a few flaws with it. For one thing, Venus is upside-down, for reasons unknown (my guess would be a high-gravity object passing
              Message 6 of 7 , Jun 21, 2003
              View Source
              • 0 Attachment
                An interesting theory, but I see a few flaws with it.

                For one thing, Venus is upside-down, for reasons unknown (my guess would be
                a high-gravity object passing thru the system and flipping Venus as it went
                by), but has a nearly vertical rotational axis. I don¹t see much indication
                of wobbling going on there.

                Where did they get the 4-hour rotation figure from? Also, how did it explain
                the idea that Earth would wobble so much? Mars is the only planet I know of
                without a real moon (can¹t call those two asteroids orbiting it moons), yet
                it maintains an axis tilted about the same as Earth. 24+ hour day, too.

                Also, the moon is 5 degrees or so off-axis from Earth. Wouldn¹t it be
                logical for it to be pretty much on-axis, if it were the main stabilizing
                factor for our axis?

                Another thing about Venus: as far as I know, a good part of the cause of its
                nasty atmosphere is its slow retrograde rotation. Too much heating time, not
                nearly enough cool-down. If it was right-side up and rotating faster, it
                might just be a real balmy version of Earth.

                I had a geology professor with an interesting theory, namely that the moon
                was actually a part of Mercury that got sheared off and bumped out early on.
                Part of it is based on the unusual mantle:core size differences on Mercury
                and the moon, part due to similar rock types found on the surfaces of each.
                I don¹t know how much more accurate his theory is than this one, but when
                your professor¹s a Seyfert (yes, his dad discovered Seyfert galaxies), you
                tend to give his ideas a bit more credence.

                On 6/21/2003 11:42 AM, "cblpgm" <cblpgm@...> wrote:

                > --- In OnlineAlpha@yahoogroups.com, "Tom Kuchar" <tom_k35@h...> wrote:
                >> The idea that the moon was necessary for evolution is due to the
                > tidal effects
                >> of the moon.
                >
                > It was actually a very good show. It began describing the moon's
                > formation, when a smaller, Mars-sized, 10th planet slammed into the
                > earth, throwing out ejecta which eventually formed the Moon. It
                > spoke to the affects how the moon's existence actually slowed the
                > Earth's rotatation from 4 hours per day to its current 24 and how it
                > kept the tilt within a few degrees. Otherwise, the Earth would
                > wobble wildly, up to 90 degrees. Without such a large moon, the
                > Earth would be similar to Venus today: wild wobble and toxic
                > atmosphere at best.

                --
                Censors are people who know more than they think you ought to.



                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              • cblpgm
                ... the moon ... early on. ... Mercury ... of each. ... but when ... galaxies), you ... Theories of Earth capturing a rogue moon are very old and were debunked
                Message 7 of 7 , Jun 21, 2003
                View Source
                • 0 Attachment
                  --- In OnlineAlpha@yahoogroups.com, Bret Feinblatt <bafein@m...>
                  wrote:

                  > I had a geology professor with an interesting theory, namely that
                  the moon
                  > was actually a part of Mercury that got sheared off and bumped out
                  early on.
                  > Part of it is based on the unusual mantle:core size differences on
                  Mercury
                  > and the moon, part due to similar rock types found on the surfaces
                  of each.
                  > I don¹t know how much more accurate his theory is than this one,
                  but when
                  > your professor¹s a Seyfert (yes, his dad discovered Seyfert
                  galaxies), you
                  > tend to give his ideas a bit more credence.


                  Theories of Earth capturing a rogue moon are very old and were
                  debunked some time ago. For details, I have an astronomer friend at
                  the Royal Observatory in Greenwhich that will be more than happy to
                  set your geologist friend straight. But a very large body, possibly
                  a 10th planet with a similar orbit to Earth's, slammed into Earth
                  early on; the debris forming the Moon. Also, you mention the
                  relative stability of other planets. In our lifetimes, yes, but over
                  the eons, no.

                  Preceeding, or following (I forget which), was another good episode
                  about the Snowball Earth, in which the glaciers had locked the Earth
                  solid, from pole to pole.

                  Oh, but back to the Lunar theories... The Moon is receeding from the
                  Earth at about 1/2" per year. So, we will one day lose it
                  altogether. Nuclear waste dump explosion or not...



                  .
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.