Date: 24/09/2013 15:34:27
From: Riff-in-Thyme
ID: 400708
Subject: How Old Is The Moon? 100 Million Years Younger Than Once Thought, New Research Suggests

The moon is quite a bit younger than scientists had previously believed, new research suggests.

The leading theory of how the moon formed holds that it was created when a mysterious planet — one the size of Mars or larger — slammed into Earth about 4.56 billion years ago, just after the solar system came together. But new analyses of lunar rocks suggest that the moon, which likely coalesced from the debris blasted into space by this monster impact, is actually between 4.4 billion and 4.45 billion years old.

The finding, which would make the moon 100 million years younger than previously thought, could reshape scientists’ understanding of the early Earth as well as its natural satellite, researchers said.

“There are several important implications of this late moon formation that have not yet been worked out,” Richard Carlson, of the Carnegie Institution for Science in Washington, D.C., said in a statement.

“For example, if the Earth was already differentiated prior to the giant impact, would the impact have blown off the primordial atmosphere that formed from this earlier epoch of Earth history?” added Carlson, who is presenting the new results Monday (Sept. 23) in London at a meeting organized by the Royal Society called “Origin of the Moon.”

more….

Reply Quote

Date: 24/09/2013 17:20:09
From: mollwollfumble
ID: 400791
Subject: re: How Old Is The Moon? 100 Million Years Younger Than Once Thought, New Research Suggests

From Wikipedia entry on Genesis Rock:

> It was originally thought they had found a piece of the Moon’s primordial crust, but later analysis initially showed that the rock was only 4.1 ± 0.1 billion years old, which is younger than the Moon itself; and was formed after the Moon’s crust solidified. But it was still an extremely old sample, and was from the Pre-Nectarian. Dating of pyroxenes from other anorthosite samples gave a samarium-neodymium age of crystallization of 4.46 billion years

But the news article has:
> Previous work in this area had a large margin of error, but Carlson says improved technology has allowed him to narrow that margin significantly. “Back in the 1970s, you couldn’t distinguish between 4.45 and 4.55 billion years. Today, we can, and everything we are seeing suggests the 4.4 billion number.” One of the most interesting implications of Carlson’s research is to imagine what the Earth might have been like before it had a moon. “We know the age of the solar system very well — 4.568 billion years. So the Earth may have had two phases of its life — one before the giant impact, and another one greatly modified by the impact.”

Anyone want to bet on the possible presence of life on Earth before the Moon was formed? Back then it would have had its primordial reducing atmosphere, before that was stripped off by impact and replaced by an atmosphere less favourable for the formation of life.

Reply Quote

Date: 24/09/2013 21:58:27
From: Stealth
ID: 401019
Subject: re: How Old Is The Moon? 100 Million Years Younger Than Once Thought, New Research Suggests

“We know the age of the solar system very well — 4.568 billion years.
————————
That seems very precise. At what point does a spinning disc of coalescing dust and gas become a stellar system?

Reply Quote

Date: 24/09/2013 22:00:19
From: OCDC
ID: 401020
Subject: re: How Old Is The Moon? 100 Million Years Younger Than Once Thought, New Research Suggests

Stealth said:

“We know the age of the solar system very well — 4.568 billion years.
————————
That seems very precise. At what point does a spinning disc of coalescing dust and gas become a stellar system?

I’d say once it has a star ie a coalescence of dust and gas that can support on-going nuclear fusion.

Reply Quote

Date: 24/09/2013 22:12:57
From: mollwollfumble
ID: 401026
Subject: re: How Old Is The Moon? 100 Million Years Younger Than Once Thought, New Research Suggests

> That seems very precise. At what point does a spinning disc of coalescing dust and gas become a stellar system?

It’s very precise because the solar system formed extremely rapidly. We have dates from CAIs calcium-aluminium-inclusions in meteorites. So the date of 4.568 billion years comes from these and similar minerals.

There are a number of stages in the formation of a stellar system, in thius general (but not exact) order.

All this happened within of rough order of a million years. I could give you some more accurate numbers.

Reply Quote