The Giant Impactor Theory (sometimes called The Ejected Ring Theory): This theory proposes that a planetesimal (or small planet) the size of Mars struck the Earth just after the formation of the solar system, ejecting large volumes of heated material from the outer layers of both objects. A disk of orbiting material was formed, and this eventually stuck together to form the Moon in orbit around the Earth. This theory can explain why the Moon is made mostly of rock and how the rock was excessively heated. Furthermore, we see evidence in many places in the solar system that such collisions were common late in the formative stages of the solar system. This theory is discussed further below.
Yes. The current experiments and modeling efforts predominantly use the giant impact hypothesis as the basis of their studies. In other words, approximately 4.5 billion years ago, a collision of the early Earth with a Mars-sized object resulted in the formation of the Earth/Moon system. This model provides answers to the reasons behind the Earth/Moon high-spin system, the low density of the Moon, and lunar composition. Other hypothesis on lunar formation are that a planetoid (the Moon) was captures in the Earth’s gravity well, or that the Earth and Moon co-formed together through accretion. Neither of these explanations provide quite the full picture that the giant impact does, however.
It has been said that moon landing is fake the picture and video of moonlanding Is was captured in USA only.
USA have so many area were no one have the permission to see inside the restricted area infact the satellite can also not capture a picture of that area and the aeroplane or helicopter are not allowed to go from there …
If the moonlanding is true then can you tell in zero gravity why the flag is waving, I know the reason but I wanna know how you prove it
Matthew , is it really he was landed in moon?.. ,, how can it possible ..?
where there havent air , and so less gravity .. and many things are not clear ,
some times i am thinking about that , it is a English H-wood movie Film , nothing else .. can you please send me the side or link were i can find out the original view
IT IS BEYOND ME HOW ANYONE CAN THINK THAT THE MOON IS HOLLOW. If the moon was hollow that would mean much less mass which means the geometry of the orbital time verses the weight of the moon can’t orbit in the time it takes. Do the math. Especially since John Lear says there is more gravity there on the moon than what is officially documented. Too many contradictions. The moon is no different than any other moon in this solar system, of course there are some variations in the make up of the moons but basically the mass make up is about the same. Thanks for your time.
There are too many errors they made filming that hoax. You will find a lot of them: lights converging to a point, no stars around even when focusing on the earth, the high radiation outside the Van Allen Belts, the even higher radiation within the Van Allen Belts, and some others. Some people may claim that they stayed only a few minutes in those belts. Well, radiation works like rain: if you run faster though rain you will not get less wet. But anyhow, the biggest problem is not all those listed above, it is this:
THE BIGGEST NASA’s mess up was that they used THE SAME backgrounds for different shots, allegedly miles/days away! In some shots you can see the moon lander, in other shots, with EXACTLY the same background, point for point, it is absent. It took 2 hours for Russians physicists to know it was a hoax when they first saw the pics. Now, you may wonder why they haven’t told on the Americans. Well, they both have the same program to get money off their tax payers to build better rockets/weapons, so they are on the same side.
A closely-related theory is the Spaceship Moon Theory, or for you science buffs out there, the Vasin-Shcherbakov Theory. This theory takes the concept of a hollow moon one step further into pure science fiction territory. In an by Michael Vasin and Alexander Shcherbakov published in 1970 it was hypothesised that the Moon was actually an artificial, hollowed out Earth satellite that had been put into place by unknown beings. Vasin and Shcherbakov were members of the then Soviet Academy of Sciences, but the article was published not in a science journal but in Sputnik, a sort of Soviet Reader’s Digest. In the article they refused to speculate what type of unknown beings put the artificial satellite in the Earth’s orbit, but we do think that this is a discussion that should be had at another time. We won’t go too in depth into the finer details of this theory, as we could talk about it for a while, but the general feeling of this article that was produced is that the Moon is made of up everything that a spaceship could be made of, such as materials that can withstand both extreme heat and cold and are extremely tough so could withstand blow from meteorites. Some of Vasin and Shcherbakov’s article claims mica, uranium, brass (a human-made alloy) and neptunium (a radioactive element which does not exist in nature) were discovered in samples returned by Apollo missions but this is not in the original article and is also untrue. Sadly not everything you read on the internet is to be believed.
Dear admin,how the flag placed by Armstrong on the moon flap,when there is no atmosphere on moon I’m not against the moon landing or anything but I just researched a bit on Google regarding proof that moon landing was fake. It states many other things like there can’t be shadow on the moon, there is a certain letter marked on all the photos which were taken during moonlanding and that particular alphabet (which I don’t remember) is used during shooting to mark an area where the actors must stand.
Please clear these queries as I’m very eager to know about these theories.