Slashdot Mirror
Moon Younger Than Previously Thought
TaeKwonDood writes "Analysis of a piece of lunar rock brought back to Earth by the Apollo 16 mission in 1972 has shown that the Moon may be much younger than previously believed. Researchers say that the findings allow for one of two possibilities: the moon is 200 million years younger than previously thought, or the theory that the moon used to be a molten ocean is wrong."
It's a first post
God just made it that way. He's God. He's makes moons however he wants.
Thought he was only 91-year-old.
Please, no "that's no moon" jokes this time. It's getting old. Not as old as previously thought, but still damn old.
You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
That's not the only thing that turns out to be younger than you thought.
It sounds like they are assuming that they just happened to grab one of the oldest pieces of rock on the moon, or that the moon solidified all at once and there were never any later events (volcanoes, large body collisions). If you happened to grab the wrong piece of rock on Earth, say from a recently-erupted volcano, you would determine that the earth was only about a week old...
TFA says: Once we removed the contamination, we found that this sample is almost 100 million years younger than we expected," says researcher James Connelly of the Centre for Star and Planet Formation.
Come on /., doesn't anybody verify facts / articles anymore ??
Shouldn't all of the moon matter (silicon, magnesium, iron, etc.) be just as old as earth components from the previous supernova and nebula that created the solar system anyway? Most matter is fused within seconds of solar implosion and explosion. Since it is still taking meteor impacts, we could say it is perpetually new if it is a matter of age in that regard.
Lobbest thou thy Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch towards thy foe, who, being naughty in My sight, shall snuff it.
So, the moon lied about its birthday?
From the article:
The team analysed the isotopes of the elements lead and neodymium to place the age of a sample of a FAN at 4.36 billion years. This figure is significantly younger than earlier estimates of the Moon’s age that range to nearly as old as the age of the solar system itself at 4.567 billion years.
So when they say 200 million years younger, that means 4.3 byr instead of 4.5 byr. I'm sure this is interesting to those in the field, but I don't think that counts as "much younger".
It's because of all of the sun exposure.
that's us?
hasn't changed the profitsized much smaller population outcome yet. whiners. who needs 'em?
it's clearly an unproven mess, evidenced by the apparent need for even more deceptive distracting sideshow style theatrics by our rulers & the chosen ones' miniotic neogods arrogance.
should it not be considered that the domestic threats to all of us/our
freedoms perpetrated by unsavory megalomaniacs be intervened on/removed, so we wouldn't be compelled to hide our
sentiments, &/or the truth, about ANYTHING, including the origins of the
hymenology council, & their sacred mission? with nothing left to hide,
there'd be room for so much more genuine quantifiable progress?
you call this 'weather'? much of our land masses/planet are going under
water, or burning up, as we fail to consider anything at all that really
matters, as we've been instructed that we must maintain our silence (our
last valid right?), to continue our 'safety' from... mounting terror.
meanwhile, back at the raunch; there are exceptions? the unmentionable
sociopath weapons peddlers are thriving in these times of worldwide
sufferance? the royals? our self appointed murderous neogod rulers? all
better than ok, thank..... us. their stipends/egos/disguises are secure,
so we'll all be ok/not killed by mistaken changes in the MANufactured
'weather', or being one of the unchosen 'too many' of us, etc...?
truth telling & disarming are the only mathematically & spiritually
correct options. read the teepeeleaks etchings. see you there?
diaperleaks group worldwide.
ahab the arab's 'funniest' home vdo; http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=0bb_1312569503
We all know it was created just a few thousand years ago on day 4.
NASA could have saved the trip if they'd just asked the local priest!
I'm just wondering how accurately we can know when a certain piece of rock on the moon was formed anyway. I assume its by some means of geologic comparison of similar rocks on earth or something. But considering the size difference, you have to figure the moon, once it coalesced into existence after the supposed explosion that ejected that matter from earth, cooled a lot quicker than earth did.
She's 43, according to Wikipedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moon_Zappa
I've known this for a while. For years, I've been skeptical every time a scientist claimed that the moon was 2,006,000 years old.
Cripes, I fail big time! 2 million is not 200 million!
It is my understanding that the surface is composed of meteorites that hit long after the core formed. Dating the surface should not give you the age of the moon as a whole unless it's uniform in composition. If you do the same to date the Earth, then creationists will have plenty more fuel to support their story.
he doesnt look anywhere near 200 million years old.
Good people go to bed earlier.
The nutcase Young Earth Creationalists over at Conservapedia will be happy! Too bad we couldn't prove it was 6,000 years old, but don't worry, science is always eventually wrong so eventually someone will prove it's as young as we say!
Check out my sci-fi book "Lacuna" at http://goo.gl/MVxX8
... every Japanese male is now guilty of possession of child pornography.
Oh, wait, you didn't mean Sailor Moon?
Please change "use to be" to "used to be".
TROLLLLLLLL!
We'll never make it.......oh! we made it! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SWf3iJjqYCM&list=FL7kKrE4eTs17mQl7eyvJIOg
I swear I thought it was older!
When I was a youngster the moon was 4.567 billion years old. (Scientists said it therefore it is true). Today the moon is only 4.36 billion years old. (again science). Therefore the solar system is traveling backward in time. It also means that I am -207 million years young. (appologies to Erdos.)
If we define religion as the belief in an omnipotent entity / entities that can never be wrong, and whose smallest whim is the absolute word of law, then scientist would fit into this category. At least here on slashdot; To question a 'scientist' is heresy. It does not matter that the average ./ is an has a very very basic understanding of what real science is, and can not follow the logic that real scientist used to make their predictions. All the slashdot user knows is that a 'scientist' said it, therefore it must be true. You can turn off your brain, and listen to the scientists. They know what is going on. Always have always will. How do magnets work. They work with science. How does gravity work. Science. Why does the sun work. Because of Science. There is no difference between an unfounded belief in religion and an unfounded belief in science. Scientists are great! Slashdot users who push the 'I believe button' whenever a scientist says something without thinking are not.
-The only thing more evil then the will to power is the will to obey.
-Some dead guy who is old and smelly, and therefore a faggot.
According to the soil sample I was provided, I believe there is truth to the fact that the cow really DID jump over the moon.
Well, old Qfwfq was right.
Finally released the birth certificate?
Some claim the Moon has had several surgeries to retain its youthful appearance, including carefully executed meteor bombardment procedures and volcanic eruptions in times past. We asked the Moon how old she was, and she told us that she is most definitely 29. We believe her, plus or minus 4.5 (or is it now 4.3?) billion years.
http://knol.google.com/k/gurdjieff-the-moon-organic-life#
"So, is the moon dead or merely a very young planet (in planetary terms) beginning its process of growth? Gurdjieff stated quite clearly that the moon is a being, a younger version of the Earth, evolving and growing with the help of organic life on Earth."
Are they sure they analyzer real Moon rock, instead of the fossilized wood samples that NASA gave away as Moon rocks to some institutions?
Someone owes the moon some flowers and candy for this one. And even then, they're still sleeping on the couch.
Crystallization causes a zeroing of the isotopic clock. In other words, if a crystal of all potassium is formed, it will contain some potassium-40 isotopes, but no argon-40. This is used to determine when the rock was initially formed. As time passes, potassium-40 decays into argon-40 with a half life of 1.3 billion years. So, if a crystal contains a 1:1 ratio, or 50% (1 half life) potassium-40 to argon-40, the rock was formed 1.3 billion years ago. If it is 25% potassium-40 to 75% argon-40, the rock was formed 1.3 billion years ago.
Of course, the problem with this in planetary dating is that A) you have to assume the crystals were formed exactly when the planet/moon formed, which likely is not the case, since it requires, however brief, a period of cooling for the crystals to form and B) you have to find the rocks that first formed, aka, the oldest rocks.
There is also the problem of margin for error, but this is usually small enough to not really matter. If something is 4 or 5 billion years old, having a 100-200 million year margin for error is still pretty small. The other issue is to use as many of these clocks as possible to find out where they all tend to synchronize. In this case, they used lead and neodymium. And their change was no more spectacular, really, than the Shroud of Turin being dated either 1250 or 1350 AD. We can still say it was around 1300 AD (ignoring the "it caught on fire" contamination theory).
More info: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiometric_dating
I8-D
... give or take 4.5 billion years. Well, more give than take.
The world is made by those who show up for the job.
Wasn't it just brought up that a long time ago we had two moons and they collided togethet. Maybe that happened around 200 million years after the moon was made? The rock they got was from when the two moons collided and made a new crust? Just a thought.
"Although the samples have been carefully stored at NASA Johnson Space Center since their return to Earth, we had to extensively pre-clean the samples using a new method to remove terrestrial lead contamination."
If the samples were carefully stored, how did they become contaminated with lead?
Exhaust from cars? (1972 was before the U.S. banned lead in gasoline.)
Just to put it into perspective, 200 MY younger would be a little less than 5% younger than previously theorized.
The moon lied about its age to get into a nightclub when it was younger, using a phony Alaska drivers license. It's been living a lie since the early 1970s, and is secretly relieved that all this has come out now.
the article states that the sample is 100 million years younger than previously thought, not 200 as the title here would indicate. I was also wondering what are the chances (if even possible that it's been mistaken) that the sample is actually the remnant of something that collided with said moon , say like about 100 million years after it was 'born'. Is that possible? Can something like that even be scientifically checked for certainty ? Is this something like nasa has conclusive evidence that something might have happened ?
Free speech was meant to be free for all... how can anyone grow up in a nanny state ?