[meteorite-list] rlv (Lunar Tektite Theory holds no water)

From: meteorites_at_space.com <meteorites_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Thu Apr 22 09:43:29 2004
Message-ID: <20010707192826.6825.cpmta_at_c000.snv.cp.net>

On Sat, 07 July 2001, "Darryl S. Futrell" wrote:

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Darryl S. Futrell <futrelds_at_gte.net>
> To: meteorite-list_at_meteoritecentral.com
> <meteorite-list_at_meteoritecentral.com>
> Date: Friday, July 06, 2001 1:04 PM
> Subject: [meteorite-list] rlv
> I need to either temporarily retract or put a hold on the following two
> references until I can verify exactly where they appear on that LPSC CD
> rom, or if they appear elsewhere. I do have the last three years of LPSC
> abstracts on CD roms, but they will not run in my computer. This has left
> me at quite a disadvantage when it comes to recent LPSC abstracts. I am
> sending emails off to several of the co-authors and hope to soon have some
> results.
> Darryl
> >Lawson, S. L., et al., 2001, Preliminary results from the Lunar Prospector
> Alpha Particle Spectrometer. ??? XXXII (32nd) LPSC, Houston, March 12-16,
> Abstract (radon, etc).
> >
> >Schultz, P. H., et al., 2001, Recent lunar activity: evidence and
> >implications. ??? XXXII (32nd) LPSC, Houston, March 12-16, Abstract.
> All of the other references I listed have been posted before and are
> absolutely correct.

(But mostly dated from the pre-Apollo Mission era)

Darryl is stubborn when it comes to maintaining his belief that tektites came from the Moon. And I think it has been demonstrated that it has no factual basis, and that it is *religion* to him-- not a matter of having an empirical foundation.

Hydrogen, radon gas aside, there is no solid evidence of "recent" pyroclastic or basaltic flows on the moon. Such events, in keeping with all volcanic eruptions, produce prodigious amounts of gas in
the form of sulfur dioxide, water vapor, carbon dioxide, and other gasses. This alone would be clearly evident in observations of the Moon as the gravity is sufficiently strong there to keep in around for some time.

In this regard, years ago I read an interesting article about "terraforming" the Moon. According to the theory, comets could be slammed into the Moon and the cometary gas would then be captured by the Moon's gravity to create an atmosphere that would last for a thousand years before having to be replenished. This atmosphere could be as thick as the Earth's so one would not need a space suit to explore the Moon.

Might be a reality some time in the distant future.

Anyway, Futrell's Lunar theory holds no water, and is as dry as the tektites in his collection.

All the evidence points to terrestrial origin-- with perhpas one exception-- they are so dry-- virtually waterless.

And that is a real mystery, and may also provide a clue, as I shall explain. PhD's will be awareded to those looking into the dynamics of tektite formation. And the fact that they formed on the Earth is all the more extraordinary. A Lunar origin would be simple if it were in fact the case. Tektites demonstrate that Man has a lot to learn about the dynamics of large scale impacts.

In this Comet Shoemaker-Levy 9 revealed much.

The late Dr. Shoemaker, before his untimely death was perplexed about the huge amounts of elemental hydrogen released in those impacts. What he expected from the comet impact was a large amount of water vapor. Such would be in keeping with the fact that comets have water.

But this was not the case.

It gave me an idea, and I had discussed it with him before that accident that took his life.

My thoughts were that the impact was so energetic that in bursting in the Jovian atmosphere the cometary H2O was not only vaporized but dissociated so that the oxygen-hydrogen bond was broken and the separate elements ionized. Being that oxygen is a heavier molecule, and its electron shells more complex, its ionic state would allow it to still have electrons, and it would also be by virtue of this more likely to stay in the Jovian atmosphere. On the other hand, hydrogen with one electron would lose it and a free proton would then shoot up into space in search of a free electron. Finding it, it would then release energy yet still be in space to be observed as the hydrogen gas in the plume jetting up from the Jovian impact site.

He thought my idea interesting, but unfortunately we were not able to continue with further discussion.

I carry it further here to render a possible explanation as to why tektites lack water.

Could it be that cometary impacts on the Earth also released enough energy to break the hydrogen-oxygen bond? If this were the case, and surface rocks along with cometary solids were vaporized in the process, when the material re-condensed to form tektites they would then lack water. Large amounts of oxygen would be present in the resulting product (and I think that I read somewhere that tektites have an inexplicably large amount of oxygen) because the hydrogen was ionized and ejected out into space before they re-condensed.

I wonder if there are any researhers working on this angle, or if there are computer models that could be used to explore this scenario.

That the tektites formed on Earth and we cannot at this time explain the how of it is really remarkable.

But I think that with time we will figure it out, and the shear power of the impacts that created them will give mankind something to ponder as we look up into the sky at comets that could and will certainly strike the Earth again.

Steve Schoner

Join the Space Program: Get FREE E-mail at http://www.space.com.
Received on Sat 07 Jul 2001 03:28:26 PM PDT

Help support this free mailing list:

Yahoo MyWeb