Stevenson replies: I thank these letter writers for their alternative suggestions. Actually, neither is really new, and my failure to mention them—or others—is not because I was unaware of their existence, but rather because of the major challenges that these alternatives must overcome. In the Lagrange point scenario, which is widely known in the community, the challenge is to devise a story in which such bodies naturally arise in the context of a model that explains the planetary system, not just Earth–Moon. It is not sufficient to postulate them. A new paper1 might suggest that the similarity of the impacting body and target is not so unreasonable. In the more astonishing fission story, the challenge lies in the basic physics of the proposed process, which is questionable.
Skip Nav Destination
Article navigation
April 01 2015
Alternative hypotheses for making the Moon
David Stevenson
David Stevenson
California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
Search for other works by this author on:
David Stevenson
California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
Physics Today 68 (4), 10 (2015);
Citation
David Stevenson; Alternative hypotheses for making the Moon. Physics Today 1 April 2015; 68 (4): 10. https://doi.org/10.1063/PT.3.2733
Download citation file:
358
Views
Citing articles via
The no-cloning theorem
William K. Wootters; Wojciech H. Zurek
Dense crowds follow their own rules
Johanna L. Miller
Focus on software, data acquisition, and instrumentation
Andreas Mandelis