from the now-Andy-did-you-hear-about-this-one? dept.
The "Man in the Moon" is older than we thought.
Scientists have proposed resetting the lunar clock after reassessing impact craters on the surface of the moon. This means that some features of the moon, like the formation that makes up the face of the "Man in the Moon" formation could be 200 million years older than previously theorized.
The new dating system could help to better tell the story of the evolution of the lunar surface and has important implications for our understanding of the violent and turbulent early history of the solar system during which bodies like Earth and the moon were subject to intense bombardment by space rocks.
The new evaluation involved reexamining two separate ways of dating the lunar surface: Counting the number of craters caused by the impact of space rocks; and the assessment of moon rocks collected by the Apollo missions. These two dating methods have traditionally given different results, especially for the ages of the heavily cratered and mountainous highlands of the moon.
[...] "Looking at the signs of these impacts on the moon shows what Earth would be like without the geological churning of plate tectonics which took place here on Earth," Werner said. "What we have done is to show that large portions of the lunar crust are around 200 million years older than had been thought."
The team behind the findings explains that the new dating system doesn't change estimates of the moon's age as a whole, which remains around 4.53 billion years. Instead, it changes the age of all areas of the moon's surface but not in a uniform way; the new dating system suggests older areas are subject to the greatest shift in age due to the new system.
[...] "Such a heavy bombardment period must have affected the origin and early evolution of life on Earth and potentially other planets such as Mars," Bouvier said in a statement. "Bringing back rock samples from Jezero Crater on Mars will be the next giant leap forward to search for signs of ancient life on another planet in the solar system, and when."
The team's research was presented at the Goldschmidt Conference held in Lyon, France, between July 9 and July 14. It has been accepted for publication in the Planetary Science Journal.
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 14 2023, @12:40PM (6 children)
What's the conversion factor for Man on the Moon to Library of Congress?
(Score: 4, Informative) by Freeman on Tuesday November 14 2023, @04:16PM (5 children)
I would go with approximately 35 million Library of Congresses per "Man on the Moon" face.
ME: How many Library of Congress buildings would fit in a hypothetical face on the moon?
ChatGPT:
Determining the number of Library of Congress buildings that would fit in a hypothetical face on the moon involves some estimation due to the lack of precise dimensions for the perceived face on the moon. However, if we take the approximate dimensions of the Library of Congress building, which has a footprint of about 415 feet by 340 feet (or roughly 126 meters by 104 meters), and consider the scale of the moon's surface, we can attempt an estimation.
The perceived "Man on the Moon" face is an optical illusion created by various lunar features and spans a significant portion of the visible lunar surface. Let's consider a hypothetical area on the moon's surface that might encompass the "face." If we imagine a circular area with a diameter of, for instance, 300 miles (approximately 482 kilometers), and assuming the face fits within this circle, we can estimate the number of Library of Congress buildings that might fit within it.
Let's calculate:
Area of the circle (representing the hypothetical face) = π * (radius)^2
Radius = Diameter / 2 = 300 miles / 2 = 150 miles
Area = π * (150 miles)^2
Area ≈ 70,685 square miles
Now, let's find out how many Library of Congress buildings (with a footprint of about 415 feet by 340 feet) would fit in an area of 70,685 square miles:
Convert the area of one Library of Congress building to square miles:
(415 feet * 340 feet) * (1 mile / 5280 feet)^2 ≈ 0.002 acres
Number of Library of Congress buildings in the area = Area of the circle / Area of one building
Number of buildings ≈ 70,685 square miles / 0.002 acres ≈ 35,342,500
This rough estimation suggests that approximately 35,342,500 Library of Congress buildings, based on their footprint, could fit within a hypothetical circular area on the moon with a 300-mile diameter that encompasses the perceived face. However, remember this is a highly theoretical and imaginative exercise given the subjective nature of the "Man on the Moon" perception.
Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday November 14 2023, @06:21PM (4 children)
It's a thing of beauty.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Tork on Tuesday November 14 2023, @07:25PM
🏳️🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️🌈
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 16 2023, @11:21AM (2 children)
It's also wrong.
415 feet * 340 feet is not 0.002 acres. It's closer to 3.
(Score: 2) by Freeman on Friday November 17 2023, @02:27PM (1 child)
Hmm..., when I crunch the numbers manually, I'm getting approximately 0.005, as opposed to approximately 0.002. While 0.002 may be good enough for horse shoes and hand grenades, even one of those off by 0.003 acres would be way off. Being 0.003 acres off when dropping a nuke, 'eh, probably good.
That's assuming that equation is correct and not totally bogus. Which, to be honest, I didn't check, I just did straight copy pasta.
Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 17 2023, @10:53PM
No, 415 feet * 340 feet is 3.24 acres.
The original statement was
(1 mile / 5280 feet)^2 = 1 and can be ignored.
That leaves (415 feet * 340 feet) ≈ 0.002 acres
It is wrong by a factor of 1500.
It's not even just the wrong units as it is about 0.005 square miles.