Hotspot Found On Moon's Far Side

derGoldstein tips this news from Discovery.com: "Scientists have found evidence of volcanoes on the far side of the moon. The new discovery, reported in the journal Nature Geoscience (abstract) is a rare example of volcanism on the lunar surface not associated with asteroid, meteor or comet impact events. ... They focused on an area containing numerous domes, some more than six kilometers high. The domes featured steeply sloping sides which Jolliff and colleagues interpret as, 'volcanic in origin and formed from viscous lava.'"

Comments

Submission completed

[dtmos]

The domes featured steeply sloping sides which Jolliff and colleagues interpret as, 'volcanic in origin and formed from viscous lava'. . .

. . . 800 million years ago. While undeniably still an interesting and intriguing find, it was a hotspot, um, a while back.

Re:Submission completed

[derGoldstein]

The history of the moon is a subject that keeps being revised and researched. If you asked 20 years ago: "What is the Moon's origin?", it's likely that you'd be told it was a planet that got caught in Earth's gravity, because using the information they had then, it was the most likely theory. Now the Giant Impact Hypothesis is favored. And water on the moon? Just a few years ago that would be a joke. Any new information helps.

Re:Submission completed

[SleazyRidr]

Maybe in astronomical terms 800 million years isn't a long time, but geologically it's still quite a while. The Earth looked quite different 800 million years ago.

Hotspot Found on Moon's Far Side

[tomcode]

The bad news: You need an AT&T account to use it.

It's a black monolith

[Megahard]

Buried on the far side. Dimensions 1:4:9.

Re:It's a black monolith

[sconeu]

Turn in your geek card.

The monolith was in Tycho, which is on Nearside, not Farside.

$32 for the results of public funded research

[anwyn]

This information was mostly created by NASA. The Authors mostly have jobs at Universities. So why does a member of the public have to pay $32 to read this paper?

Re:$32 for the results of public funded research

[Will.Woodhull]

basically the publisher charges for organizing the peer review, editing and distribution.

That used to be the case, but increasingly in the USA over the last 20 years, companies like elsevier have been following a new paradigm: the publisher charges to make a profit.

Re:$32 for the results of public funded research

[RockDoctor]

This information was mostly created by NASA. The Authors mostly have jobs at Universities. So why does a member of the public have to pay $32 to read this paper?

The authors are at a mixture of American and German institutions (that information is freely available) ; the publication is British (costs a little research). So surely your question should be "why should anyone who is not British, German or American have to pay â30(Euro symbol, thank you incompetence of Slashcode) to read the full article?

To which the answer is : you do have the choice of paying around â150 (I don't know this years price scheme) and getting access to thousands of such article per year.

Your choice. Or perhaps you'd like the job of administering the paywall that keeps out non-Anglo-Americo-Deutsch people who haven't paid their sheckels?

Re:Didn’t I

[derGoldstein]

Dude... You actually watched that thing? My condolences.

Re:TITLE AND SUMMARY CORRECTION.....

[derGoldstein]

Thank you for your constructive criticism. The title is actually the title as it appears on Discovery.com, and the part that's in quotes is ( -- wait for it -- ) a quote. I'm sure that Discovery News has a feedback section -- you should contact them asap, and include your edifying CAPS-LOCK comments.

wifi

[Tom]

Ok, hands up, who else thought "what the heck are they doing with WIFI on the moon?" upon reading the headline? :-)