Slashdot Mirror


Moon's Bulge Explained

anthemaniac writes "The moon has an unexplained bulge that astronomers have been trying to find a source for since 1799. Finally, an apparent answer: The equatorial bulge developed back when the developing moon was like molasses (and you thought it was cheese!) and, rather than today's nearly circular orbit, it 'moved in an eccentric oval-shaped orbit 100 million years after its violent formation.'"

204 comments

  1. no by GigsVT · · Score: 5, Funny

    It's just happy to see you.

    --
    I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
    1. Re:no by DurendalMac · · Score: 2, Funny

      Well, seeing as this is a moon, it could just be prairie doggin'. When it finally squeezed that bulge out, we're all gonna be fucked.

    2. Re:no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I actually went to the linked article and got a bulge from the MSN adds. Wow, something my corporate internet does not block! What constitutes "porn" is relative I guess.

    3. Re:no by Jack+Action · · Score: 1

      Maybe there's something to those Father Sky, Mother Earth myths after all.

    4. Re:no by alamandrax · · Score: 0, Troll

      No!

      G_d gave the moon child-bearing hips. Blasphemers! All of you!

      --
      'tis but a scratch.
    5. Re:no by Altima(BoB) · · Score: 1

      So that's why the moon's always holding a clipboard over its lap when I look skyward...

      --
      Yup...
    6. Re:no by ToasterofDOOM · · Score: 1

      If viagra says to seek medical help if you have an erection more that 4 hours, surely the moon has something really potent!

      --
      I am Spartacus
  2. Well by styryx · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Hey, way to suck the fun out of this with 'the cheese' joke in the description.

    1. Re:Well by Tackhead · · Score: 0, Redundant
      > Hey, way to suck the fun out of this with 'the cheese' joke in the description.

      No kidding. Everyone knows the real reason for the bulge is because Ballmer threw a chair at it. The side that got hit is indented in the form of the letters "CHA"...

    2. Re:Well by Sabaki · · Score: 1

      Ballmer, aka Professor Chromedome?

    3. Re:Well by AmberBlackCat · · Score: 1

      After viewing enough of the posts modded as "Funny", I am quite surprised to find somebody complaining about a cheese joke.

    4. Re:Well by 88NoSoup4U88 · · Score: 1

      The equatorial bulge developed back when the developing moon was like molasses (and you thought it was cheese!)

      It is?

  3. Uh huh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    Its nothing more than a little baby fat.

    1. Re:Uh huh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not fat! It's just big-boned!

  4. You know you're old when... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ""The moon has an unexplained bulge that astronomers have been trying to find a source for since 1799."

    Well there goes the middle-age spread excuse.

    ---
    It's been 20 minutes since you last successfully posted a comment-and that hasn't stopped me yet, Taco.

  5. Wait a minute... by The+Real+Toad+King · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Don't all circular/spherical objects bulge around the middle? take this o for example. The middle part of it is wide at the middle, and short at the top and bottom.

    1. Re:Wait a minute... by Kelson · · Score: 3, Informative

      The radius at the equator is slightly longer than the radius at the poles. It's not quite a perfect sphere.* Sort of like if you took a rubber ball, set it on the floor, then pushed down slightly.

      The same is true of the Earth, though I believe it's generally attributed to the Earth's rotation.

      * Yes, I know that craters and such interfere with it being a perfect sphere too. No need to get pedantic, people of Slashdot. Well, no more than usual.

    2. Re:Wait a minute... by Mr.+Underbridge · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Right. I'd assume these guys accounted for the tendency of a rotating body to form an oblate spheroid, and that the moon's current orbit can't account for the degree of its oblacity (if that's a word). Thus it would need to have exhibited some more violent orbit in the past.

    3. Re:Wait a minute... by eggoeater · · Score: 1

      IANACosmologist/Astronomer...but I think you can explain the Earth's bulge because it is still active;i.e. is not solid so it can expand here, contract there, sorta like a water balloon. The moon is probably completely solid and therefore should not bulge.

    4. Re:Wait a minute... by Billosaur · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Don't all circular/spherical objects bulge around the middle?

      If they are planets and they are spinning, yes. Just look at pics of the Jovian worlds, especially Saturn. And the Sun has a definite bulge. Of course, for most of the planets, the bulge is pronounced because they are still elastic to some degree. The Earth bulges owing to the fact that the continents are riding around on their crustal plates, which ooze on molten material, and the Moon is tugging on them as it goes aroudn us. The Moon's is more fascinating because it is a geologically dead world, so the bulge happened some time in the past and then got frozen in place.

      --
      GetOuttaMySpace - The Anti-Social Network
    5. Re:Wait a minute... by qeveren · · Score: 1

      Astronomers think that the Moon still has a molten core, IIRC.

      --
      Don't just stand there, get that other dog!
    6. Re:Wait a minute... by werewolf1031 · · Score: 1

      Then why is there no volcanism on the moon? Or is there, and I just haven't heard about it?

    7. Re:Wait a minute... by unknownideal · · Score: 1

      Yes, "oblate spheroid" is the term for the shape.

    8. Re:Wait a minute... by SteveAyre · · Score: 1

      That would need high temperatures and pressure near the surface.

      It's possible that it has cooled enough to have frozen solid near the surface (thus no longer having techtonic plates or eruptions), but it could still be molten at the centre.

    9. Re:Wait a minute... by cluckshot · · Score: 1

      A much better explanation is here

      --
      Never Politically Correct ~ I prefer the facts If you don't like what I say, get a life, or comment yourself.
    10. Re:Wait a minute... by devonbowen · · Score: 1
      the continents are riding around on their crustal plates, which ooze on molten material

      Just nitpicking... The mantle isn't actually molten. The lava we see flowing from volcanoes is just a local effect. Though if you go way, way down to the outer core, you'll probably find liquid.

      Devon

    11. Re:Wait a minute... by ultranova · · Score: 1

      IANACosmologist/Astronomer...but I think you can explain the Earth's bulge because it is still active;i.e. is not solid so it can expand here, contract there, sorta like a water balloon. The moon is probably completely solid and therefore should not bulge.

      As you may or may not know, if you take liquid and keep it in a certain shape while it cools and solidifies, it stays in that shape. So, any bulges the Moon might have developed when it was still molten won't go away just because it solidifies.

      Besides, even solid stone deforms. For example, the solid rock that makes up Himalaya has deformed quite a bit from its original flat configuration.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    12. Re:Wait a minute... by astralbat · · Score: 1

      According to what I've heard (sorry no sources), the moon used to spin, but tidal forces from the Earth has slowed this down over time so that it's (almost) completely fixed. In fact, tidal forces from the moon on to the Earth is slowing it's rotation every so slightly. The result is that the day length is gradually getting longer!

      Could tidal forces from the Earth explain this bulge? I would have thought these forces would be big enough to make some impression on the moon and give it a bulge.

    13. Re:Wait a minute... by UseTheSource · · Score: 1

      According to what I've heard (sorry no sources), the moon used to spin, but tidal forces from the Earth has slowed this down over time so that it's (almost) completely fixed. In fact, tidal forces from the moon on to the Earth is slowing it's rotation every so slightly. The result is that the day length is gradually getting longer!

      The moon still does spin, just at the same rate at which it revolves around the Earth, which is why it always presents the same face to us. Eventually, the Earth's rotation will slow to that point, as well, so they both will always present the same side to each other.

      --
      "Ein Volk, ein Reich, ein Führer." -Adolf Hitler
      "We are one Nation, we are one People." -The One 'leader'
    14. Re:Wait a minute... by Chr0nik · · Score: 1

      No, simply orbiting cannot cause oblateness, it has to spin on it's axis to create that effect. It's the lack of spin that confuses astronomers as to why the moon has the bulge at it's equator.There's not enough centrifugal force to cause the effect that we see.

      --


      ... what did you expect, something profound?
    15. Re:Wait a minute... by Chr0nik · · Score: 1

      The moon is geologically dead. If there were volcanism on the moon it would have a carbon dioxide atmosphere, and it's surface would be much more interesting.. Like venus.

      --


      ... what did you expect, something profound?
    16. Re:Wait a minute... by Convector · · Score: 1

      The correct word is "oblateness", not to be confused with "obliquity" which is the tilt of a planet's rotational axis wrt the orbital plane.

    17. Re:Wait a minute... by Convector · · Score: 1

      A few more nits to pick, if I may. The mantle is indeed solid, but behaves as a fluid on geologic timescales. And the planets bulge because they are viscous to some degree, not because they are elastic. The term "elastic" refers to a material's ability to recover its original shape after the deforming stress is released, and its ability to support stresses without deforming. Colloquially, "elastic" means "stretchy" which causes the word to be misused a lot. In a geological context, "elastic" really means "rigid". "Viscous" means that a material will flow. The planets bulge because they behave as spinning fluids or did when they were warm. As they cool, they become more elastic. Even if the spin rate changes, the elastic bulge will not change that much because the new stresses are being supported.

    18. Re:Wait a minute... by Billosaur · · Score: 1

      I stand corrected -- it's been too long since Geology 101 back in college.

      --
      GetOuttaMySpace - The Anti-Social Network
  6. Come on people, give the moon a break... by Bamafan77 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Everyone knows your metabolism slows down after a certain age. Still though, a half hour a day on the treadmill probably wouldn't hurt either.

    1. Re:Come on people, give the moon a break... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      30 minutes a day on the treadmill? The fucker goes 1km/sec ALL DAY LONG!

      YOU do that, fat-ass!

    2. Re:Come on people, give the moon a break... by Joebert · · Score: 1
      Still though, a half hour a day on the treadmill probably wouldn't hurt either.

      Oh yeah, I see you orbiting around the earth 24 hours a day 365 days a year, 366 on leapyears, you have plenty of room to talk.
      --
      Wanna fight ? Bend over, stick your head up your ass, and fight for air.
    3. Re:Come on people, give the moon a break... by Bamafan77 · · Score: 1
      Oh yeah, I see you orbiting around the earth 24 hours a day 365 days a year, 366 on leapyears, you have plenty of room to talk.
      No one is asking the moon to be a workaholic. I know everyone expects her to be Super Moon, but she needs to say "No" every once in a while and take some "me time". Just look what happened to the moon in the opening sequence of "Thundarr the Barbarian". Take heed, moon, take heed.

      (Wait, the moon IS a chick, isn't it?)

    4. Re:Come on people, give the moon a break... by Joebert · · Score: 1
      Wait, the moon IS a chick, isn't it?

      Do you feel like you're in the back of a Range Rover, with Jack Nickelson driving, & Woody Harrelson in the back seat with you ?
      --
      Wanna fight ? Bend over, stick your head up your ass, and fight for air.
    5. Re:Come on people, give the moon a break... by Tony+Hoyle · · Score: 1

      Orbitings easy - you just have to fall towards the ground and miss.

      It's *not* orbiting that's the hard bit.

    6. Re:Come on people, give the moon a break... by smart.id · · Score: 1

      Wow, an obscure Anger Management reference. However, what the hell did it have to do with your parent poster?

      --
      blog & fiction: jd87
    7. Re:Come on people, give the moon a break... by isellmacs · · Score: 5, Informative
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luna_(moon)

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Selene

      I'd say "Her" would be appropriate, as the name Luna (the name of our moon) comes from the Roman Goddess of the Moon.

    8. Re:Come on people, give the moon a break... by Joebert · · Score: 1
      Orbitings easy - you just have to fall towards the ground and miss.

      It's *not* orbiting that's the hard bit.

      Anyone can get lucky & miss the ground sooner or later, it takes dedication to keep doing it.
      --
      Wanna fight ? Bend over, stick your head up your ass, and fight for air.
    9. Re:Come on people, give the moon a break... by Saint+Stephen · · Score: 2, Interesting

      In Tolkien the Sun was the woman and the Moon was the man, always seeking her brilliance ... and occasionally wandering into the sky with her, only to be burned terribly.

      I always found that mythology better.

      The sun is a woman, and the moon loves her!

    10. Re:Come on people, give the moon a break... by cagle_.25 · · Score: 1

      While losing no energy, at that (except for the whole 'tides' thing).

      --
      Human being (n.): A genetically human, genetically distinct, functioning organism.
    11. Re:Come on people, give the moon a break... by MartyMcFly · · Score: 0

      Rather, sign up for a spinning class...

    12. Re:Come on people, give the moon a break... by LordP · · Score: 1

      So that must mean she's "retaining water" (instead of beer).

      --
      Nothing is so smiple that it can't be screwed up.
    13. Re:Come on people, give the moon a break... by 19thNervousBreakdown · · Score: 4, Funny

      (Wait, the moon IS a chick, isn't it?)

      Hmm. So beautiful it inspires poetry, so attractive it pulls the sea, and men feel compelled to spend more than they can afford just to walk all over it. Oh, and let's not forget, every 28 days it swells and causes dogs to howl.

      I think you're on the right track.

      --
      <xml><I><am><so><damn>Web 2.0</damn></so></am></I></xml>
    14. Re:Come on people, give the moon a break... by fireboy1919 · · Score: 1

      I happen to know some people *from* the moon - one named Ignignot and one named Ur.
      I have a transcript of a conversation I saw of them.

      Ignignot: Some would say that the Earth is *our* moon.
      Ur: *We're* the Moon!
      Ignignot: But that would belittle the name of our Moon, which is "The Moon."
      Ur: Point is, we're at the center, not you!

      As you can clearly see, our moon is not called Luna. That's a sissy name. The name of our moon is "The Moon."

      --
      Mod me down and I will become more powerful than you can possibly imagine!
    15. Re:Come on people, give the moon a break... by The+Great+Pretender · · Score: 1
      "astronomers have been trying to find a source for since 1799"

      Wow! I didn't even notice until just now...my wife must have me trained too well...yes dear you look lovely in spandex

      --
      A positive attitude may not solve all your problems, but it will annoy enough people to make it worth the effort.
    16. Re:Come on people, give the moon a break... by whitehatlurker · · Score: 1

      Well, she is a harsh mistress, so the gender would be right. But, "Luna" comes from Diana? (No, I read the wiki article, too.)

      --
      .. paranoid crackpot leftover from the days of Amiga.
    17. Re:Come on people, give the moon a break... by psavo · · Score: 1

      Umm.. Earth is doing 30km/s and Moon is doing 1km/s around that.

      --
      fucktard is a tenderhearted description
    18. Re:Come on people, give the moon a break... by gkhan1 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      If that is true, it is a baaad mythology. The moon has always in the human mind been female, for basically every known religion. It was a good long while since I studied this, so I apologise if I make any mistakes.

      In most (almost all I think) mythologies there exists a goddess that is identified with the moon (and a god that is identified with the sun, although he is rarely as important). For instance in greek mythology, it's Artemis, the goddess of the new moon. See, it has everything to do with phases. That's a funadmental theme in many religions, the cycle of birth-life-death-rebirth. The moon is the perfect symbol for this, first being very small (new moon), to becoming brilliant (full moon) to eventually dying (dark moon), and then being reborn (new moon again). This is closely tied to another classic mythological motif (a favourite of mine), that of the descent to the underworld. This one is everywhere in mythology and literature, Inanna does it, Jesus does it, Gandalf does it (when he fights the Balrog), frickin' Harry Potter does it. The motif is basically where a "hero" (Inanna/Jesus/Gandalf/Harry!) descends to the land of the dead (sumerian underworld/hell/beneth the mines of Moria/the Chamber of secrets), on the way he/she gets "undressed", either metaphorically or literally (Inanna loses her armour i think/Jesus is whipped and put on a cross/Gandalf skipped that part of the mythology/Harry loses both Ron and Hermione), faces the dark side of himself/herself (Erishkigal/the Devil/the Balrog/Voldemort), dies and is reborn (Inanna comes back/Jesus gets resurrected/Gandalf becomes Gandalf the white/Harry is resurrected by the Pheonix). Anyway, this is a tangent, back to the point.

      This montly cycle does not only symbolize life and death, but also a decidedly more feminine cycle (if you can't guess what it is, I ain't gonna tell ya). While this connection is rarely explicit, it is certainly present. The moon also symbolizes many aspects that we as humans connect with femininity, such as darkness, magic, mystery and death, wheras the sun symbolizes typically male attributes such as ligth, reason, strength and life (it's so sexist that I can barely type without gagging, but that is the way the archetypes work). Therefore, the moon is often assigned to a female deity. Infact, because of the phases thing, it is sometimes assigned several. Artemis is the virgin goddess of life, the hunt and rebirth, and is the goddess of the new moon. Hecate, the dark witch-queen of sorcery is essentially the dark side of Artemis, is the dark moons goddess. One interpretation of this is that once a month, the beautiful, lively, and wonderful goddess (=a woman) turns into a raging witch-queen (=a bitch). (I'm telling you, this is so god-damn sexist, I want to vomit!) This female connection with the moon is the reason that many dark and mysterious concepts are frequently connected to women, such as intuition. You never hear anyone mention male intuition, do you? This is also why there are much more witches than warlocks in mythology and literature.

      Anyway, I've been rambling on for a while now, and I should stop. The point is, if Tolkien chose to make the moon male, he made the wrong choice. In the human mind the moon is, and has always been, female.

    19. Re:Come on people, give the moon a break... by KDR_11k · · Score: 2, Funny

      Oh come on, once we drag relativity into this we have to add the speed of the sun and the galactic core.

      And why am I not getting thinner from making 30km/sec???

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    20. Re:Come on people, give the moon a break... by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      One interpretation of this is that once a month, the beautiful, lively, and wonderful goddess (=a woman) turns into a raging witch-queen (=a bitch). (I'm telling you, this is so god-damn sexist, I want to vomit!)

      You mean PMS is sexist?

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    21. Re:Come on people, give the moon a break... by Shadow+Of+The+Sun · · Score: 4, Informative

      In the Norse mythos, the moon is masculine and the sun is feminine.

      And almost everything that Tolkien wrote is based off of the Norse mythos. For example, the Norse term for the Earth is Midgard. Midgard means "Middle Earth."

    22. Re:Come on people, give the moon a break... by Neurotoxic666 · · Score: 2, Informative

      The moon has always in the human mind been female, for basically every known religion.

      Wrong. Die Sonne, der Mond. In Germanic/Northern mythologies, the Sun was female and the Moon was male.

      --
      You are more than the sum of what you consume. Desire is not an occupation.
    23. Re:Come on people, give the moon a break... by Chr0nik · · Score: 3, Interesting

      In ancient Arab and Sumerian religions, the moon was a Male god, and was considered the King of gods. You can see the crescent moon on much of the period coins etc. Harran was the literal city of the moon god and was named after him. Long before Muslims undertook Haaj to Mecca, it was a center for a religion of this type. The Kabah actually pre-existed Islam. In Babylon there were two distinct versions of this polytheism one in which the moon god was a man, and the other in which it was a woman. The Male versions of the moon God when by many different names, Sin(pronounced seen), Allah, Haran, Aksum, Yerah... Probably many others. In Egypt, Greece, and later, Rome it was always a woman, because by that time, it had been determined to be a smaller body than the sun, although closer. Since it was smaller, it could obviously not be male... Oh yeah, and saying that mythos regarding rebirth is related to the mentral cycle is like saying that my paying bills every thirty or so days is related the wife's cycle. That's simply rediculous, because if that was true, the fucking bills would come at a much better time of the month.

      --


      ... what did you expect, something profound?
    24. Re:Come on people, give the moon a break... by Speare · · Score: 1

      You said that Gandalf "skipped" the undressing mythology. Er, aside from the brief passage when he recounts his ordeal and said something like being laid bare, I think you'd be pretty blind to forget his very prominent change of raiment. It is this transformation of death and rebirth that caused/enabled him to transcend from Gandalf Grayhame to Gandalf the White.

      --
      [ .sig file not found ]
    25. Re:Come on people, give the moon a break... by metternich · · Score: 1

      Read Mark Twain's The Awful German Language Gender in German is very arbitrary.

      --
      Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored.
    26. Re:Come on people, give the moon a break... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I'd say "Her" would be appropriate

      Gives new meaning to the phrase "man in the moon".

    27. Re:Come on people, give the moon a break... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      [i](I'm telling you, this is so god-damn sexist, I want to vomit!)[/i]

      Naw, that's just cramps - you have PMS.

    28. Re:Come on people, give the moon a break... by Neurotoxic666 · · Score: 1

      Perhaps so, but the sun and the moon have nevertheless been considered respectively feminine and masculine in Norse religions. Gender is also often arbitrary in French (which is my native language) and we say "le soleil" and "la lune" (contrary to the Germans) and that still doesn't change the fact that the moon was masculine and the sun feminine in some old religions/cultures. And these religions actually inspired Tolkien.

      --
      You are more than the sum of what you consume. Desire is not an occupation.
  7. The answer is apparent. by BoBathan · · Score: 5, Funny

    Bulge at the equator, violent formation, clearly the Moon is American.

    --
    EOF
    1. Re:The answer is apparent. by Joebert · · Score: 1
      Bulge at the equator, violent formation, clearly the Moon is American.

      Australian chicks figured that out after reading the first word.
      --
      Wanna fight ? Bend over, stick your head up your ass, and fight for air.
    2. Re:The answer is apparent. by Lord+Ender · · Score: 0

      No other country was started by violent revolution, no other country has overweight people, and this lame joke hasn't been overused to the point of absurdity.

      May the mods have mercy on your witless soul.

      --
      A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
    3. Re:The answer is apparent. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How's +5 sound, you fat, violent American?

    4. Re:The answer is apparent. by Gordonjcp · · Score: 1

      No other country was started by violent revolution, no other country has overweight people, and this lame joke hasn't been overused to the point of absurdity.


      When are you going to lay off the "French are cowards" schtick then?

    5. Re:The answer is apparent. by argStyopa · · Score: 1

      Everyone resents the moon?

      --
      -Styopa
    6. Re:The answer is apparent. by toddmori · · Score: 1
      No other country was started by violent revolution, no other country has overweight people, and this lame joke hasn't been overused to the point of absurdity.

      When are you going to lay off the "French are cowards" schtick then?

      when they quit being cheese-eating surrender monkeys?

    7. Re:The answer is apparent. by WilliamSChips · · Score: 1

      The day they stop calling us "Yanks". That's also when I'm going to stop calling Scots English.

      --
      Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
    8. Re:The answer is apparent. by Gordonjcp · · Score: 1

      Could be dangerous, calling Scots "English"... You do know that 70% of the population of Scotland owns a gun, right?

    9. Re:The answer is apparent. by WilliamSChips · · Score: 1

      Well, if 70% of the population only owns one gun, they'll all be fighting over who gets to use it. But hopefully less than 70% of Scots lack a sense of humo(u)r.

      --
      Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
  8. Oblig... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    That's no moon...

    1. Re:Oblig... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oblig..? Really? I don't think so mister..

    2. Re:Oblig... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You must be new here.

    3. Re:Oblig... by Tim_sama · · Score: 0, Redundant

      No, THESE are oblig: Yeah, but does it run Linux? Imagine a Beowulf cluster of these babies! In Soviet Russia, bulges moon YOU! I, for one, welcome our new bulging moon overlords...

    4. Re:Oblig... by Kelson · · Score: 1
      That's no moon...

      It's a big-a pizza pie!

    5. Re:Oblig... by Joebert · · Score: 1
      In Soviet Russia, bulges moon YOU!

      I'm moving to Russia...
      --
      Wanna fight ? Bend over, stick your head up your ass, and fight for air.
    6. Re:Oblig... by TheDreadSlashdotterD · · Score: 1

      If only life were a bad music video...

      --
      I have nothing to say.
    7. Re:Oblig... by Joebert · · Score: 1

      As long as they're in it, it can get played 24-7 on TRL for all I care.

      --
      Wanna fight ? Bend over, stick your head up your ass, and fight for air.
    8. Re:Oblig... by Kittenman · · Score: 1

      Not to mention

      1: Moon forms
      2: Moon develops bulge
      3: ????
      4: Profit!!!

      --
      "The greatest lesson in life is to know that even fools are right sometimes" - Winston Churchill
    9. Re:Oblig... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, sorry.. lemmie hike that up!

  9. Better than the last theory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I remember in High School the only theory they had was that something "very large" had impacted the moon while it was in development.

  10. no-A moon with a view. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    [Insert 'mooning' your girlfriend joke here]

  11. sometimes... things come to mind... by CarnivoreMan · · Score: 3, Funny

    Well... perhaps the man in the moon was thinkin about some of them women from Venus....

    1. Re:sometimes... things come to mind... by SonicSpike · · Score: 1

      maybe he's gay and was thinkin 'bout Uranus!?!?! :-(

      --
      Libertas in infinitum
  12. Excellent... by Quaoar · · Score: 4, Funny

    Now when I have to explain the bulge in my pants, I'll say it's because I'm eccentric! /Badump bump

    --
    I'll form my OWN solar system! With blackjack! And hookers!
    1. Re:Excellent... by Roddd · · Score: 1

      I'd say your more of a lunatic

  13. Whatever by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeh and our ancestors are monkeys.

  14. scientific explanation debunked by peektwice · · Score: 4, Funny

    It's a codpiece.

    --
    Other than this text, there is no discernible information contained in this sig.
  15. But it is cheese! by cazbar · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Just look at the Google map (zoom all the way in).

    1. Re:But it is cheese! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But like everything else google has, it's in beta. *me ducks* ;)

  16. Monolith? by wingfoot · · Score: 4, Funny

    There wouldn't happen to be a strong magnetic field at the bulge would there....? How about a black monolith buried beneath the surface causing the bulge....?

    1. Re:Monolith? by Brieeyebarr · · Score: 1

      Maybe. I guess if you want to know for sure you'll have to travel in time to the far off year 2001, I heard they were going to be excavating the moon around that time.

    2. Re:Monolith? by Prof.Phreak · · Score: 1

      Nah. I believe it's 'cause of the whales. Someone should really go up there and harpoon a few. Maybe even sing a whailing tune.

      --

      "If anything can go wrong, it will." - Murphy

    3. Re:Monolith? by idontgno · · Score: 1

      You've been reading Involution Ocean again, haven't you?

      --
      Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
  17. Missing energy by Harmonious+Botch · · Score: 4, Interesting

    So how did the eccentric orbit become so nearly circular? That takes a lot of energy ( and a little coincidence )

    1. Re:Missing energy by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 1
      So how did the eccentric orbit become so nearly circular? That takes a lot of energy ( and a little coincidence )
      Secret moon base with nuclear reactor in operation since the early 70's...
      --
      If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
    2. Re:Missing energy by Jazzer_Techie · · Score: 5, Informative

      Actually, circular orbits are the lowest energy state. Thus, tidal forces cause the system to gradually lose energy until it settles into a circular orbit. When you add up the 1/r potential of gravity and the repulsive 1/r^2 centrifugal potential, you get a function with a nice minimum which is the radius of a circular orbit. The reason that elliptical orbits occur is because the period of the orbit exactly matches the period of oscillations around the minimum potential. Thus when you go around once, you end up right back where you started and get a closed, elliptical orbit. (Note that this is true only for Newtonian mechanics. Once you take General Relativity into account, the periods aren't the same and orbits precess. We can directly observe this in the orbit of Mercury as a perhelion shift of 43 arcseconds/century.)

    3. Re:Missing energy by frankyfranky · · Score: 1, Funny

      May I be the first to say...

      What the fuck?

    4. Re:Missing energy by gardyloo · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Whoa. What's the repulsive 1/r^2 "centrifugal" potential? At first I thought you were including G.R. with the talk of tidal forces, but then I realized (via the 1/r potential) that you're talking about regular old Newtonian gravity. That's fine. But where's the repulsive potential?
            The only tidal forces I can see in this problem are evinced in the deformation of the earth or the moon, their atmospheres, and the ocean of the earth. Wikipedia has this to say about tidal locking:

      There is a tendency for a moon to orient itself in the lowest energy configuration, with the heavy side facing the planet. Irregular shaped bodies will align their long axis to point towards the planet. Both cases are analogous to how a rounded floating object will orient itself with its heavy end downwards. In many cases this planet-facing hemisphere is visibly different from the rest of the moon's surface.

      The orientation of the Earth's moon might be related to this process. The lunar maria are composed of basalt, which is heavier than the surrounding highland crust, and were formed on the side of the moon on which the crust is markedly thinner. The Earth-facing hemisphere contains all the large maria. The simple picture of the moon stabilising with its heavy side towards the Earth is incorrect, however, because the tidal locking occurred over a very short timescale of a thousand years or less, while the Maria formed much later.


          I'll have to try to work out how tidal forces within one astronomical body might lead to a circular orbit. It might be a well-known effect, but it's not obvious to me.

    5. Re:Missing energy by joeljkp · · Score: 1, Informative

      A more straightforward way of visualizing it may be to imagine a satellite around Earth in a highly elliptical orbit. At the nearest points to Earth, it's getting a little bit more resistance from the atmosphere, the magnetic field, etc. This extra resistance means it can't get as far out the next go-around, leading to a decrease in eccentricity, or a circularization of the orbit.

      --
      WeRelate.org - wiki-based genealogy
    6. Re:Missing energy by gardyloo · · Score: 1

      Ah. If you're talking about the pseudo-repulsive potential mentioned in the article (away from the barycenter), fine. BUT the sum of conservative potentials (as the 1/r and 1/r^2 ones are) is also conservative, and will STILL lead to elliptical orbits in general. So you've got to propose some non-conservative forces acting, and then you can't even really use "potential" in its usual sense of leading to a force via the gradient.

    7. Re:Missing energy by Amazing+Quantum+Man · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't this be the right place for one of those The Moon: A Ridiculous Liberal Myth trolls?

      --
      Fascism starts when the efficiency of the government becomes more important than the rights of the people.
    8. Re:Missing energy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Drag from tides causes angular momentum to transfer from the Earth's rotation to the Moon's orbit, which causes the Moon over time to go into a higher and higher orbit. This effect is 3-4 centimeters/year.

      However the Moon is in an elliptical orbit. When it is closer to the Earth the tides are bigger and therefore the transfer is bigger. Conversely when it is away from the Earth, there is less of this. The resulting variation in drag tends to push the Moon to even out its orbit over time.

    9. Re:Missing energy by gardyloo · · Score: 1

      And yet, the effect claimed has nothing to do with atmospheric drag, nor any magnetic induction.

    10. Re:Missing energy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1) There is no such thing as a circular orbit because there are no fixed bodies. The mutual gravitation necessarily causes the obiting body to settle into an elliptical orbit, with the two foci of the ellipse being defined as the position of the center of mass of the host body at apehelion and perihelion.
      2) There is no such thing as "cetrifugal" force. There is only CentriPETAL force, which is the force vector toward the center point of the orbit. There is no "repulsive" force involved, only an attractive force.
      3) General relativity does indeed predict precession, but it also predicts the 3:2 orbital-synchronous rotation of Mercury, and the 1:1 syncronous rotation of the Moon.

    11. Re:Missing energy by joeljkp · · Score: 1

      Yeah, you're probably right. I was just explaining how circularization can happen, not how it did in this case.

      --
      WeRelate.org - wiki-based genealogy
    12. Re:Missing energy by slowhand · · Score: 1

      So how did the eccentric orbit become so nearly circular?

      Its got 2 turntables and a microphone...

      --
      Busy aligning my non-linear thoughts.
    13. Re:Missing energy by camperdave · · Score: 1

      Replace atmospheric drag and electromagnetic induction with tidal friction, and you've probably got it.

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    14. Re:Missing energy by dmatos · · Score: 1

      When it is closer to the Earth the tides are bigger

      I don't know if the distance from the Earth to the Moon has an effect on the size of the tides. The major variation in tides (with spring tides being highest, and neap tides being lowest) occurs on a 14-day cycle, and is related to the angle formed between the earth, sun and moon. When all three are aligned, the gravity of the sun and moon work together, causing the highest (spring) tides. When the sun and the moon are at right angles with respect to the earth, they work against one another, resulting in the lowest (neap) tides.

      I won a free coffee from Williams by knowing this. The question of the day was "What is the phase of the moon during a neap tide?"

      --

      It may look like I'm doing nothing, but I'm actively waiting for my problems to go away.
      --Scott Adams
    15. Re:Missing energy by ultranova · · Score: 1

      Actually, circular orbits are the lowest energy state. Thus, tidal forces cause the system to gradually lose energy until it settles into a circular orbit.

      Except that the tidal forces in the Earth-Moon system give energy to the Moon, not take it (to be more exact, they transfer Earth's rotational energy to the Moon, causing Moon's orbital speed to grow and Earth's day to lengthen). And those tidal forces are the strongest when the Moon is closest to the Earth. Now, all you astronavigators out there, what happens when an object in an elliptical orbit gets a speed boost at the lowest point of the orbit ? That's right, the highest point rises and the lowest point is unchanged.

      So, Moon's orbit should become more, not less, elliptical over time due to the tidal forces of the Earth-Moon system.

      Of course Moon also gets a speed boost at the highest point of its orbit, but that boost is less strong because the distance to Earth is greater; nonetheless, the lowest point of the orbit also rises over time, just slower than the highest point.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    16. Re:Missing energy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I do know the answer, and the answer is that it does. :-)

      Gravity falls off as 1/r^2. Tidal "forces" are the result of how rapidly gravity is changing, and that falls off like 1/r^3. So reducing r increases tidal forces.

      Therefore there is a variation in tidal forces from the Moon, but since its orbit is close to circular, that variation is small. As you point out, currently total tidal forces on the Earth most strongly depends on whether the Moon and Sun work together or against each other. However from the point of view of its effects on the Moon's orbit, the Sun's effects on tidal acceleration evens out over the years and so become irrelevant.

      Furthermore when the Moon had a more erratic motion it was also far closer. At that point the tides raised by the Moon were far stronger than they are today. Suppose that the Moon was 1/10 of its current distance. Then the tides it raised would be 1000 times stronger than today, and even a slight variation in distance would be a very large variation in tides. At that point the Sun had a negligible effect on the tides, and the main cause of variations in the tides was how close the Moon happened to be to the Earth. How erratic was the Moon's orbit? Well the Moon is believed to have been caused by an impact on the Earth, and the fact that the Moon didn't break up in a ring says that the Moon started its orbit must have averaged at least 1/20th its current one. So the very first orbit was going between just touching the Earth to about 1/10 its current orbit. That's erratic!

      This article claims that the evening out in the Moon's orbit took about a million years. Given the tidal forces involved, I can believe that.

    17. Re:Missing energy by florescent_beige · · Score: 1

      A previous moon-related story got me to do some calcs I have been thinking about for a while, to find how large the forward dragging (thrust) force on the moon would have to be to cause the orbit to increase by 3.8 cm a year.

      I'm notoriously dicey with complicated algebra, but if I've done it right (assuming a circular orbit) the total (kinetic plus potential) energy of the moon is -.5*G*me*mm*delta(1/r); me, mm masses of earth & moon, r radius of the orbit. The delta can be approximated as -delta(r)/r^2, plugging in values gives a delta energy of 3.84e18 J

      Distance travelled in a year is about 3.2e10m so the average thrust would be (force=work/distance) 3.84e18/3.2e10 = 1.2e8 N = 120,000 tonnes.

      Another interesting thing is the ratio of this to the primary graviataional force. Fg = 1.9e20N so the ratio is about 5.8e-13. If we think about how far the force vector between the earth and moon is offset to give the calculated thrust, it is only about .22mm (thats 5.8e-13*r). That is, instead of the gravitational force vector passing directly through the center of the moon's orbit, it passes 0.22mm to the leading side due to tidal action. I find that surprisingly small, given that the center of mass of the earth is offset much further (1000's of kms) from the that point and the tidal bulging must be in the meters or 10's of meters.

      --
      Equine Mammals Are Considerably Smaller
    18. Re:Missing energy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I haven't reviewed your calculation, but the order of magnitude does not surprise me. The extra force is due to the turning Earth pulling the tides ahead of where they should be. So the displacement vector is a small fraction of the height of the tides. And tides are due to slight differences in the balance between gravitational forces and centripetal forces. So they are far smaller than the centripetal force that is being offset.

      BTW FYI, tides from the Moon in the open ocean are about 1 meter.

    19. Re:Missing energy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So how did the eccentric orbit become so nearly circular?

      Except it isn't. The Moon's apogee is nearly 406,000 km, its perigee just over 363,000 km. That's a difference of 43,000 km, or little over 10% of its mean distance. For comparison, the Earth's orbit around the Sun deviates by about only 3.3%. In fact, the Moon's orbital eccentricity lies within the normal range for planetary bodies in our solar system.

      The effect is quite noticable on Earth too; the Moon's appearant size in the sky varies an equal amount. Since the Moon's orbital node shifts quite rapidly, there will be periods when you have a 'large' moon in the winter, and a few years later you have the same near, thus large, moon during summer. However, the former is more readily observed during winter since there's simply more time when the moon is visible.

  18. Then... then... by EqualOrLesserValue · · Score: 0

    ...then where did Wallace and Gromit go? What am I going to tell my children?!

    --
    The trouble with Karma is: it always gets worse.
    1. Re:Then... then... by ackthpt · · Score: 1

      What am I going to tell my children?!

      Tell them that Wallace and Gromit went to the English Moon.

      Until the UK lands on the Moon, to them it's still, cheese!!!

      just because americans have to go and disect and kill every romantic myth doesn't mean the rest of the world has to

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
  19. Since they're explaining bulges... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...maybe they can explain Brandon Routh's bulge in his Superman outfit. Scientifically that is.

  20. thanks for explaining! by tanveer1979 · · Score: 1

    All the time I was thinking it was due to eating too much Double Quarter Pounders at McDonalds

    --
    My Aurora : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o91ZsGwJYyg
    FB : https://www.facebook.com/TanveersPhotography
  21. Like a dinosaur by Namarrgon · · Score: 4, Funny

    It's thin at one end, much much thicker in the middle, and thin again at the other end.

    I have another theory, you know...

    --
    Why would anyone engrave "Elbereth"?
    1. Re:Like a dinosaur by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      An Elk. Err, Miss Anne Elk. Ahem.

    2. Re:Like a dinosaur by Spunk · · Score: 1

      A boa constrictor that swallowed an elephant?

    3. Re:Like a dinosaur by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thin at both ends, thick in the middle... it's Ohio??

      Oh, wait... that's round at both ends, high in the middle... damn...

    4. Re:Like a dinosaur by mfrank · · Score: 1

      Hello, Jackie. Hello, Allan. That is your theory, which is yours . . .

  22. It's quite simple actually... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    It's where they covered up the "CHA" that Chairface Chippendale put there. They used a little too much moondust.

    1. Re:It's quite simple actually... by db32 · · Score: 1

      I wonder how many people even get that reference....
      SPOOOOOoooooooooooon!

      --
      The only change I can believe in is what I find in my couch cushions.
  23. And now... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I can sleep in peace tonight...

  24. OB Joke by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ----------- Cut here ----------

    Every joke posted above this line are what flashed through your mind as you read the headline.

  25. Gravity by ModestMotorhead · · Score: 1

    Gravity is an amazing thing. On Earth we feel the pull of gravity constantly from the moon (tides). When the moon was more viscous it only goes to show that the Earth or other celestial bodies had some influence on the final shape of the moon.

    --
    -- "Mathematics is music for the mind, and Music is Mathematics for the Soul. - J.S. Bach"
  26. shapes by ah247msg · · Score: 4, Funny

    I wish the bulge around my middle had as good an explanation... adam0@247msg.com

  27. Moonbase by winphreak · · Score: 1

    Well, here in a good amount of years, won't that bulge possibly be a base?

    --
    "I'm a well-wisher, in that I don't wish you any specific harm."
    1. Re:Moonbase by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As long as they are belong to us. All of your's, at least.

  28. Duh! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Duh! After it slamed into the earth. Remember?

  29. Bit it IS made of cheese!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://moon.google.com/ and zoom very very very close, if you don't believe me

  30. Enough already by midkay · · Score: 2, Informative

    Isn't that enough of the "Because it's fat!" and "Because it's horny!" comments? If I knew how to mod all of you "Redundant", make no mistake, I would!

    1. Re:Enough already by thePowerOfGrayskull · · Score: 1

      Of course it's not enough. We all know the moon is fat and horny. It needs to take a quick orbit around the earth, then drift on over to the Sun to relieve some of that biological... erm... geological pressure.

    2. Re:Enough already by posterlogo · · Score: 1

      Sure, you're right, but with so much of the same lame jokes, shouldn't it have occured to some editor to not choose such a retarded article title?

    3. Re:Enough already by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Preggers?

  31. mmmm.... by denttford · · Score: 5, Funny

    Space Beer.

    --

    Leben Sie jetzt die Fragen.
    1. Re:mmmm.... by DigiShaman · · Score: 1

      Because in space, NO ONE can hear you burp!

      Drink very carefully!

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
  32. I don't think so by npietraniec · · Score: 3, Informative
    1. Re:I don't think so by OverlordQ · · Score: 2

      Wow and I thought the 'moon landing was a hoax' people were crazy

      --
      Your hair look like poop, Bob! - Wanker.
    2. Re:I don't think so by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      The moon is actually a spaceship. 4, Informative

      There's nowhere in the galaxy quite like Slashdot.

    3. Re:I don't think so by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "We refuse to engage in speculation about who exactly staged this unique experiment, which only a highly developed civilisation was capable of."

      Funny, considering the undisciplined, wild-eyed, crackpot speculation filling the rest of the article.

      I like the end:

      "Now, of course, we have to wait for direct evidence to support our idea. Or refute it.
      Probably there will not be long to wait."

    4. Re:I don't think so by Daniel_Staal · · Score: 2, Informative

      He is informative: He's informing us of a crackpot theory that most haven't heard of. So we can all laugh at it.

      --
      'Sensible' is a curse word.
    5. Re:I don't think so by NanoGradStudent · · Score: 1

      Wasn't this the plot of a sci-fi novel? (You can read the first book, in its entirety, free courtesy of the Baen free library)

      --
      Just a little guy, y'know?
  33. medical emergency by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Frickin' Viagra - if your bulge lasts more than 4 hours you are supposed to contact a physician immediately!!!

  34. Make the moon a spaceship? by mOdQuArK! · · Score: 1

    I wonder how fast you'd have to spin the Moon and how much you would have to hollow it to get a 1G environment on the inside of it?

    1. Re:Make the moon a spaceship? by solitas · · Score: 1

      Have a look at: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/044006550X and http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0006Y2ORW - I've read the latter, and it is...interesting...to say the least. Enough to keep me searching for a (cheap) copy of the former.

      --
      "It's time to take life by the cans." ~ Bender ("Bendin' in the Wind", ep. 3-13)
    2. Re:Make the moon a spaceship? by Arker · · Score: 1

      Why on earth would you want to do that? Enjoy the low gravity instead. Give our overworked hearts a break. Strap on your wings and fly!

      --
      =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
      Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
    3. Re:Make the moon a spaceship? by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

      Why on earth would you want to do that?

      A better question is "Why on moon would you want to do that?" On earth, we already have an earth-like gravity.

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
    4. Re:Make the moon a spaceship? by mOdQuArK! · · Score: 1

      Just daydreaming whether you could turn the Moon into a mind-boggling huge "space colony" with people living in the inside of a shell, yet still be able to achieve 1G.

    5. Re:Make the moon a spaceship? by rrohbeck · · Score: 1

      I wonder how fast you'd have to spin the Moon and how much you would have to hollow it to get a 1G environment on the inside of it?

      a=omega^2 * r.
      Moon's diameter=3476.2 km according to Wikipedia.
      omega=sqrt(9.81/(3476200/2))=0.002375.
      T=1/(omega/(2*pi))=2645 s. One rev per 44 minutes. Assuming there's no mass left inside, i.e. it's completely hollow and all mass is outside of you so its gravity cancels out.

      Don't ask me how to keep it from flying apart at the equator and collapsing at the poles.

    6. Re:Make the moon a spaceship? by mOdQuArK! · · Score: 1

      Heh - made me go back & look at my high school physics book on angular acceleration :-)

      Makes me seriously rethink how fast space stations/colonies would have to spin
      to provide 1G gravity, especially realizing what a small radius a space station/colony
      is going to have relative to the moon. I suppose there's no real engineering difficulty
      at building structures that can stand 1G stresses (although I wonder how easy that will
      be if we're trying to build a colony several miles in diameter)?

      Now I'm wondering how significant the Coriolis effect is going to be on the
      inhabitants of a smaller space station/colony. For simplicity, let's try a 100ft
      radius space colony:

      omega = sqrt(9.8m/sec^2 / (100ft)) = 0.567029373/sec

      (I'm letting Google take care of unit conversion)

      From Wikipedia, acceleration due to Coriolis effect is:

      a = -2 * omega (x) v

      where (x) is vector multiplication & v is velocity w/in
      rotating reference.

      So let's assume a slow walk of 1mph in whatever direction
      will maximize the Corilios effect:

      a = -2 * 0.567029373/sec * (1mph) = -0.506969622 m / sec^2

      so about 5% of 1G.

      I supposed that'd probably be a bearable side effect for most
      people, although I suspect there'd be a higher susceptability
      to motion sickness for some.

      Think of what kind of weird effects a fast baseball would have:

      -2 * 0.567029373/sec * (100mph) in g = -5.16965143 g

      Or better yet, what about a bullet?

      (((-2) * 0.567029373) / sec) * (896 (m / s)) = -103.615061 g

      That sure would make target practice in a space colony an interesting experience...

      I'd love to see a science fiction show that actually simulated these
      kinds of effects accurately instead of using magic "gravity control"
      systems.

  35. Flat Earth Scoiety by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wonder how they explain this one.

  36. Space viagra! by Mr.+Jaggers · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Hey, if space coke worked for Cheech & Chong, why not?

    --

    When I grow up, I want to have Christopher Walken hair.
  37. Mod up by aztektum · · Score: 1

    +1 Crapping In Our Cocoa Crispies

    --
    :: aztek ::
    No sig for you!!
  38. What does it say.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What does it say about a person who notices the title of this article and immediately says "The moon has a penis?"

  39. Re:no... I thought it was just by davidsyes · · Score: 2, Funny

    "MOONING" da HOEs (Humans on Earth)

    --
    Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
  40. That's not a buldge, it is a feature! by CodeMasterPhilzar · · Score: 1

    We here at Moon-Soft (tm) have warped the very shape of reality...er...this semi-spherical body. We can now provide longer vistas. Of course to fully take advantage of the improved horizons you'll need to upgrade your ship's thrust capacity, your visor's light filters... In fact, let me refer you to our friends over at Intele-spatial rockets. I'm sure they can outfit you with all the hardware you need to fully appreciate our development.

    What's that? You prefer to keep your existing modest ship? Go where? Open-Orbit's space station? You say it is closer at hand, more affordable, and they even let you work on it if you'd like? What a preposterous idea! I'm sure they can't possibly offer you the same experience we have. Why, nearly everyone is going to the moon these days... Who'd want to stay in a closer, faster orbit?

    --
    --- Just another Code-Monkey
  41. Better explanation by alshithead · · Score: 0

    I know where the bulge came from. The moon has been consuming massive amounts of cosmic beer. It's nothing more than a big beer belly folks!

    --
    I reserve the right to think for myself. Others' opinions are optional. Puppy on lap = typos...not illiteracy.
  42. Re:Eccentric vs. Circular Orbit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    While you have a very interesting theory, I think it is more likely due to the fact that circular orbits are the lowest energy state. Thus, tidal forces cause the system to gradually lose energy until it settles into a circular orbit. When you add up the 1/r potential of gravity and the repulsive 1/r^2 centrifugal potential, you get a function with a nice minimum which is the radius of a circular orbit. The reason that elliptical orbits occur is because the period of the orbit exactly matches the period of oscillations around the minimum potential. Thus when you go around once, you end up right back where you started and get a closed, elliptical orbit. (Note that this is true only for Newtonian mechanics. Once you take General Relativity into account, the periods aren't the same and orbits precess. We can directly observe this in the orbit of Mercury as a perhelion shift of 43 arcseconds/century.) . . . more or less.

  43. How did Laplace find it? by helioquake · · Score: 2, Insightful

    How did Laplace determine the existence of the bulge?

    Was it a "simple" measurement of the shape of the Moon or something more sophisticated via his favorite mathematic tricks? Considering it is Laplace, he must have measured its eccentricity fairly accurately. I wonder what he used to do that in 1799.

  44. Fondue by fattybob · · Score: 3, Funny

    Mollases is more of a textural camparsion, but it must be remembered that this occured as the moon cooled, cooling from molten to solid cheese, so perhaps a better explanation would be that the bulge occured during cooling while the moon was like Fondue.

  45. Oooh.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...I like bulges!

    -muppet

  46. mmmm... by glwtta · · Score: 1

    Mmmmm.... Moon-Bulge...

    (got nothing - pants/fat/aliens/etc were already done)

    --
    sic transit gloria mundi
  47. The Moons Bulge.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The bulge exists because the moon just saw Uranus.

  48. That's no moon... by Kazrael · · Score: 1

    It's a space station!

    No, it's a really a moon. And it is reminding me about some the rotund bitches I've dated in my life... sad. Let's get the hyper-hell outta here.
    =(

    --
    Development notes at http://devscribbles.blogspot.com
  49. but what if... by FunnyLookinHat · · Score: 1

    we think that timespan is a load of crap? evolution still isn't proven you silly way-thinkers!

  50. That's no moon... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    that's a space station!

  51. Actually... by ackthpt · · Score: 2, Funny

    Well there goes the middle-age spread excuse.

    Acutally it's still digesting Earth's former "other" moon.

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
  52. Made of bleu cheese by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    what if it were made of BBQ spare ribs?

    Would you eat it then?

  53. Iapetus by j1m+5n0w · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Maybe next they'll be able to explain this...

  54. MODERATORS: The parent is not informative! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Holy crap, how in the fuck did the parent get modded as +4 Informative!??

    How about +4 Funny or +4 Raving Lunatic? Or better yet +0 Utterly Wrong?

    Hello? Moderators? That's right, the moon is not a spaceship. Everything the linked article talked about ranged from bizarre to mind-bogglingly naive, to simply completely wrong. The parent comment is not informative. Please fix...thank you.

    1. Re:MODERATORS: The parent is not informative! by Asztal_ · · Score: 1

      You're completely right. The moon is obviously a giant server, I can't believe nobody's realised!

  55. In future news... by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

    Explorers from the Japanese Moon base, excavating the "bulge", have uncovered a large, black, granite slab of some sort. Asked about the possibility of un-earthing other pieces (so to speak), a researcher was quoted as saying, "no, it looks farily monothlic". We hope to have film at 11 pm.

    --
    It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    1. Re:In future news... by StressedEd · · Score: 1

      Tsk.... that was about five years ago..... *ahem*

      --
      Be nice to people on the way up. You will meet them again on your way down!
  56. Whew! by IlliniECE · · Score: 0

    I'm glad we got that out of the way. Damn thing kept me awake at night.

  57. The moon has a bulge because... by mtm · · Score: 1

    it's attracted to the earth.

    ba-dum chhhhh......

    thanks folks, I'll be here all week... try the veal...

  58. Finally Explained?!?! by MBHkewl · · Score: 1

    I know this may stir a lot of anger around here, but as everyone else had pointed their point of view, I'd like to state mine, as well.

    The Holy Quran (the book of Islam) mentions the moon's bulge, or rather what caused the bulge. The moon had split, by God, roughly 1426 years ago; That is, before Prophet Mohammad had left Mekka for the first time.
    The reason God split the moon is that the heathens of Mekka (Quraish) had asked the Prophet to prove that God existed by asking God to split the moon. When the moon split, a man called Abu Jahel said to wait and ask people coming from far long if it did or not. If yes, then it is true otherwise Mohammad had played magic on our eyes.
    People who came from far long did confirm the story, but the heathens said that it was a great magic and still refused to believe in God.

    This is mere translation to two verses of the Holy Quran. I don't know where to find an english translation of the Holy Quran and I hope someone does find one and post it.

    Here're the versus in Arabic :: { * }
    Surat Al-Qamar -- versus (1) & (2)

    --
    Mod points are a dangerous tool. Abuse them wisely.
    1. Re:Finally Explained?!?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Riiiiiiight....

      Obviously, this cannot be true as they did not have 747s 1426 years ago...

    2. Re:Finally Explained?!?! by gameboyhippo · · Score: 1

      Then the believers all strapped bombs to themselves and blew up the heathens of Mekka for their disbelief.

  59. Finally Explained?!?! (Reference) by MBHkewl · · Score: 1

    Seems like Arabic characters are filtered...
    Here's the link to page I got it from (including the explanation & story) :: http://www.islampedia.com/MIE2/tafsir/54kamar.html

    --
    Mod points are a dangerous tool. Abuse them wisely.
  60. There is no such thing as an oval orbit by flowerp · · Score: 1


    The right term is elliptical.

    Slashdot - news for ... people who are not expected to know math terminology?

    --
    --- Eat my sig.
  61. More stereotypical bulges by no_space_in_time · · Score: 1

    Warren Moon, he was a black football player. 'Nuff said Sun Myung Moon, Asian, small but a faux demigod. Nobody dare stare. Moon Zappa, daddy was a very tall rock star. Her bulge are bulges. Ah-nold, his bulge may be a 'brain tumor' after all.

    --
    "save a cow, eat a vegetarian"
  62. Not much of an explanation by Junior+J.+Junior+III · · Score: 1

    The article doesn't really explain how we "know" what the moon's orbit was 100 million years ago. Also, we don't really know exactly how the moon formed. The theory that it was formed out of an immense object striking earth and tearing a chunk out of it is perhaps the currently prevailing theory, but it's not something that we know for absolutely certain.

    Also, 100 million years ago wasn't really that long ago. The earth's age is estimated at about 4 billion years. I'd expect that the moon formed way earlier than this. Orbits don't just change by themselves, so we need an explanation for what would have changed the orbit.

    In short, there's still a lot of unanswered questions.

    --
    You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
    1. Re:Not much of an explanation by 1cebird · · Score: 1
      I was going to ask if anyone else reads things like this and thinks, "How in blazes would they know what happened billions of years ago?" Apparently I'm not alone.
      The equatorial bulge developed back when the developing moon was like molasses (and you thought it was cheese!) and, rather than today's nearly circular orbit, it 'moved in an eccentric oval-shaped orbit 100 million years after its violent formation.'"
      ...and if you'll notice they said 100 million years after its formation, not 100 million years ago.
      --
      -K
    2. Re:Not much of an explanation by Vellmont · · Score: 1


      The article doesn't really explain how we "know" what the moon's orbit was 100 million years ago.

      Celestial mechanics is very deterministic. Just add in extra energy the moon gets from tides, and work backwards. It's really not all that complicated.

      Also, we don't really know exactly how the moon formed. The theory that it was formed out of an immense object striking earth and tearing a chunk out of it is perhaps the currently prevailing theory, but it's not something that we know for absolutely certain.

      Well, we know from studying the rocks brought back from the Apollo missions that the moon is made of earth. That means either the impact theory is correct, or both bodies formed from the same collection of material. One of the reasons the collision theory is fairly well accepted is that the moon is mostly made of the same elements in the earths crust. For this theory it doesn't really matter how the moon formed, just when it formed and what kind of stuff it's made of.

      Also, 100 million years ago wasn't really that long ago.

      True, but as someone else pointed out the article says 100 million years after the moon formed. This is important because it's early enough after the moon formed to still be like molasses.

      Orbits don't just change by themselves, so we need an explanation for what would have changed the orbit.

      Also true, but we know (and can measure) that the moons orbit is changing right now do to the tides.

      --
      AccountKiller
  63. Re:Eccentric vs. Circular Orbit by Duodecimal · · Score: 1

    I thought crashing into the bottom of the gravity well was the lowest energy state.

  64. 100 million? by sardiskan · · Score: 1

    Why do you assume that the earth and the moon are that old? There is not a shred of hard evidence that shows the age of anything to be that old. You believe that propaganda just as much as theologists believe everything was created. It's not different. If we are just going on propaganda/belief and not on hard evidence, then I say the bulge in the moon is actually a slow forming pimple, ready to pop and spew molten moon pimple juices all over the earth. GAG.

    1. Re:100 million? by Floody · · Score: 1
      Why do you assume that the earth and the moon are that old? There is not a shred of hard evidence that shows the age of anything to be that old. You believe that propaganda just as much as theologists believe everything was created. It's not different. If we are just going on propaganda/belief and not on hard evidence, then I say the bulge in the moon is actually a slow forming pimple, ready to pop and spew molten moon pimple juices all over the earth. GAG.
      There is plenty of evidence to indicate both luna and terra ages, and their relationship, merely by analyzing crystalized zirconium enriched samples. The relationships of the various isotopes of Hafium and Tungsten are particularly revealing. Hafium, which is chemically very similar to Zirconium and behaves predictably during crystalization from Zirconium enriched liquids, has a naturally extinct isotope Hafium-182, with a halflife of about 9 million years (it can exist naturally due to cosmic ray bombardment, but there are other telltale signs of this). Hafium-182 decay byproduct is the stable Tungsten-182 isotope. Tungsten is considerably more dense than Hafium and less reactive (and does not behave similarly during crystalization). In a large molten body, Tungsten will tend to sink due to its density. Thus, in a zirconium enriched sample that contains little of the other Tungsten isotopes, logically any 182W is the result of 182Hf decay. This can further be isolated by examining the ratio of 182W, 183W, 184W (all stable) and 180W. 180W is a rare Tungsten isotope that occurs naturally in 0.12% of unprocessed tungsten, has a halflife of 1.8E+18 years and decays to 176Hf (stable). This can be used to approximate the age of a sample when plotted in correlation with 182W:180Hf ratios (in this case, considering the 180Hf, stable, to be crystalized during original formation).
  65. Developers! Developers! Developers! by blueZ3 · · Score: 1

    Are you sure it was the chair-throwing incident?

    I thought it was actually where the moon was deformed due to the whole "Developers, Developers, Developers" music video

    --
    Interested in a Flash-based MAME front end? Visit mame.danzbb.com
  66. Duh! by pseudorand · · Score: 1

    Is it just me, or is "it used to be liquid" the absolute first guess that everyone though of about .3 seconds after learning the mood had a bulge. It seems the article is simply saying that some very bored astronomer finally got around to doing the math behind the assumption.

  67. Blow it up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My analysis of the situation after carefully skipping all of the Informative posts and Reading all the '0' mod comments: The moon is adversely affecting the orbit of the earth and must be destroyed with a large nuclear payload.

  68. The Moon is a Harsh Mistress, and Bulgy, Too! by nrrd · · Score: 1

    I guess "The Moon is a Bulgy Mistress" just wasn't a good enough title for Heinlien.

    --
    "Eye halve a spelling chequer, It came with my pea sea, It plainly marques four my revue, Miss steaks eye kin knot sea"
  69. Viscosity? by JumperCable · · Score: 1

    What if the moon, on a planetary scale, had a very very low viscosity?
    http://www.kirchersociety.org/blog/?p=541?

    Just and idea. But sometimes you have to think big.

  70. it might look like a moon now but... by jagdish · · Score: 1

    That's no moon!
    It's a space station.
    It's too big to be a space station.
    Turn around Chewie

    I have nothing else to add.

  71. Perhaps the moon is gay... by SonicSpike · · Score: 1

    ...and caught a glimpse of Uranus!

    sorry - I couldn't resist ;-)

    --
    Libertas in infinitum