An interesting new model for the evolution of earth moon system

[madscience]

Hi Guys,

I recently read a very interesting article about a new model of the evolution of the earth moon system, which is based on non-Newtonian physics approach. To me, this model makes a lot more sense than the tidal friction theory. Here is the link

 

http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0704/0704.0003.pdf

 

Any comments?

[swansont]

The paper claims that the tidal coupling should have been greater in the past (and thus fails) and I think that's incorrect. The tidal coupling for a Pangea-like arrangement is smaller, because there are large areas of water with no land to get in the way.

 

 

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/moonrec.html

"paleontological evidence shows a much slower lunar acceleration in the past, and that this is compatible with the models for continental spreading from Pangea"

[madscience]

The fact is that the Moon was closer and the Earth's rotation was faster in the past, the gravity of the moon pulling the water had to be stronger, the earth's rotation is always ahead of Moon's orbital motion, the ocean tidal current had to be higher than present value, the friction at the ocean bed should be no less than present value, even there was no land to get in the way as assumed in Pangea-like arrangement. The tidal friction theory used "the paleontological evidence shows a much slower lunar acceleration in the past" to construct its model, therefore, it is guaranteed that the result of the model is compatible with the evidence.

The new model does not depend on the past evidence and any assumed continental conditions, but it gives a reasonable description of the past evolution which is compatible with the paleontological evidence. This is what I think making more sense. I believe in the "KISS" Rule (Keep It Stupid Simple), that is the nature should be. Or I could be wrong. Nice discussion.

[granpa]

the paper states that the recession rate of the moon would be greater in the past because the moon was closer (tidal force is inversely proportional to the cube of the distance). it then states that this contradicts the geological evidence that the rate was slower in the past.

[madscience]

That is what the paper claims that the tidal friction can not be the primary contribution to the recession of the Moon.