The Big Splat: Origin of Our Moon

  • Thread starter chronon
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Theory
In summary, the book 'The Big Splat, or How Our Moon came to Be' by Dana Mackenzie discusses the theory that the moon formed when a Mars-size planetoid collided with the Earth soon after its origin. This idea gained credibility after the study of moon rocks retrieved during the Apollo program. Despite its acceptance among scientists, it has not gained as much attention in popular culture compared to other scientific ideas, such as the extinction of dinosaurs or the acceleration of the universe's expansion. The theory was first presented in 1974 and further developed in 1976, but it wasn't until a conference in 1984 that it gained widespread recognition. However, it has not been popularized by well-known scientists such as Asimov
  • #1
chronon
500
0
I've been reading 'The Big Splat, or How Our Moon came to Be' by Dana Mackenzie. This describes how at a meeting in 1984, the consensus was quickly reached that the moon formed when a Mars-size planetoid collided with the Earth soon after its origin.

What I found a bit surprising is that if this new idea suddenly became accepted, then why doesn't it seem to have entered the public consciousness very quickly? I have to admit that before reading the book I hadn't really taken in this idea, although I'd probably read about it in passing a few times. Contrast this with ideas such as a meteor impact causing the extinction of the dinosaurs, or of the acceleration of the expansion of the universe. These ideas seemed to spread quickly, being discussed in many popular science books and TV problems.

So have I just missed the spread of this idea until now? Have other people come across this idea, heard it discussed etc., and if so, when did it seem to enter the popular mindset? If not then why not? Is the origin of the moon less interesting than the ideas above? I would have thought it would be something everyone could relate to, especially the generation brought up with the moon landings (the data from which lead to this idea).
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
  • #2
If you happen to be in the vicinity of the Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Md on April 5, you can hear Dana Mckenzie, founder of the big splat theory, tell the story. http://ecolloq.gsfc.nasa.gov/announce.mackenzie.html
The theory gained credence after study of moon rocks retrieved during the Apollo program.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #3
The lack of dead dinosaurs doesn't help. Also, it hasn't been taken up by any of the great popularizers of science. Asimov, Sagan, Hawkings, Dawkins and Feynman all pretty much overlooked it, for example. Sagan would have been the only real logical one of that list to make the case, but he focused on other points.
 
  • #4
According to this web page:

http://www.psi.edu/projects/moon/moon.html

the collision theory was presented in 1974 by William Hartmann and Donald Davis. Harvard researcher A. G. W. Cameron and William Ward were working on a similar model, and published their findings in 1976. The 1984 conference in Hawaii established the viability of the theory, but it had already been around for 10 years.
 

1. What is the Big Splat theory?

The Big Splat theory proposes that the Moon was formed from debris ejected from Earth after a collision with a Mars-sized object approximately 4.5 billion years ago.

2. How does the Big Splat theory explain the formation of the Moon?

The theory suggests that the impact between Earth and the other object was so powerful that it caused a large amount of debris to be ejected into space. This debris eventually coalesced and formed the Moon.

3. What evidence supports the Big Splat theory?

Scientists have found that the composition of the Moon's rocks is similar to that of Earth's mantle, suggesting a common origin. Additionally, computer simulations and studies of the Moon's orbit and rotation provide further evidence for the Big Splat theory.

4. Are there any alternative theories for the formation of the Moon?

Yes, there are other theories such as the fission theory, which suggests that the Moon was once a part of Earth that broke off due to high rotational velocity. The capture theory proposes that the Moon was originally a separate object that was captured by Earth's gravitational pull. However, the Big Splat theory is currently the most widely accepted explanation.

5. How does the Big Splat theory impact our understanding of the solar system?

The Big Splat theory not only explains the formation of our Moon, but it also provides insight into the early stages of our solar system. This theory suggests that collisions between large objects were common during this time, and may have played a role in shaping the other planets as well.

Similar threads

  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
Replies
25
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
10
Views
1K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • General Discussion
Replies
3
Views
816
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
82
  • Earth Sciences
Replies
5
Views
5K
  • Feedback and Announcements
Replies
1
Views
385
Replies
1
Views
966
Back
Top