If planet Earth began as a water planet with a salt core and the Earth (land, rock...) is actually extraterrestrial, wouldn't that explain many of the problems on the formation of planet Earth? Having another planet ( Mercury) be the impactor planet 3.8 billion years ago also gives us our moon along with many other questions about Earths history. The great unconformity, the salt in the seas, where the water came from, why the moon appears to only come from one planet rather than the collision between two rocky worlds. The lost billion years is still on planet Mercury.
The Earth formation should have another look rather than the majority accepted flawed science.
There is no other life forms found on other planets. How is the earth flawed and what other age time table would you suggest?
- how did she pick Mercury? Planet x?
http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=ord … ajaxhist=0
But anyway I like the bigger picture.
For it's extremely hot with weird sunsets.
Now we 'll have to get to Mercury... or have we already?
or its too hot?
"Because it has almost no atmosphere to retain heat, Mercury's surface experiences the greatest temperature variation of the planets in the Solar System, ranging from 100 K (−173 °C; −280 °F) at night to 700 K (427 °C; 800 °F) during the day at some equatorial regions. The poles are constantly below 180 K (−93 °C; −136 °F)."
"Two spacecraft have visited Mercury: Mariner 10 flew by in the 1970s; and MESSENGER, launched in 2004, orbited Mercury over 4,000 times in four years, before exhausting its fuel and crashing into the planet's surface on *April 30, 2015. * " !
Mercury's density is the second highest in the Solar System at 5.427 g/cm3, only slightly less than Earth's density of 5.515 g/cm3. If the effect of gravitational compression were to be factored out, the materials of which Mercury is made would be denser, with an uncompressed density of 5.3 g/cm3 versus Earth's 4.4 g/cm3.
"Mercury's density can be used to infer details of its inner structure. Although Earth's high density results appreciably from gravitational compression, particularly at the core, Mercury is much smaller and its inner regions are not as compressed. Therefore, for it to have such a high density, its core must be large and rich in iron." Wikipedia
Temperture is a big factor, when it get over 400c tools or spacecrafts have a hard time. Same with drilling 6 km below the surface of the earth.
The NASA probe MESSENGER was placed in orbit around Mercury in March, 2011.
Curiously, Mercury's molten iron core is surrounded by liquid iron sulfide. Not to mention it has the largest quantity of sulfur on its surface, necessary for life.
just for a fun oddity, maybe the impactor planet that created the moon, referred to as planet Theia was really planet Thera, and when you scramble those letters up you get Earth!
I chose Mercury because it is missing most of its crust, it has a magnetic field oriented the same North, South, polarity, Mercury was not formed in its current location, first rock from the sun, there is water ice on Mercury, it was formed roughly 4 billion years ago, so was earth, and the moon, and the asteroid belt, it just fits if Earth was formed as a water, ice planet with a salt core, much like Europa,
thanks for reading:)
I think the 4 billion year time table is sufficient for making Mercury the seed to Earths pond.
planet gleisi 581c as well as the moon Europa is evidence of a water planet with a salt core, they do exist, I believe this is how earth formed, not rocky iron planet as formerly suggested
when water is compressed enough it changes into salt (halite) it is called ice Vll (7)
I have a couple of issues with this theory:
1)If Mercury had impacted with Earth then Mercury would no longer exist. Mercury is also pretty far away from earth, what with Venus's orbit in between them.
2)We know that the solar system operates within certain rules of physics (so far from what we have observed). When the solar system formed the planets formed out of an accretion disk of rock, plasma, liquid and gas. That conformed to a broadly stable planar system. All the planets that originally formed in our solar system (not pluto) orbit on the same plane and their orbits do not cross each other as a function of the formation process. On average: heavy elements closer to the sun, gas giants further out.
3) The impact theory is used to explain the existence of our moon which is a significant derivation from the norm in that it is much bigger than it should be relative to earth's size when compared to the other planets. Possibly the best way to learn more about the impact will be to study isotopic evidence and the structure of the moon as well as the asteroid belt between Earth and Mars as that is thought to be left over debris from the impact.
4) As I understand it, it is currently thought that an asteroid the size of Mars is thought to be the body that impacted with Earth some 4.5 billion years ago.
5) I'm not really sure what you mean about salts. Salts are chemical compounds just like minerals and exist in rocks, when compounds and crystal lattices dissolve in water anions and cations enter the water system and can precipitate out for a number of different reasons, usually temperature related and oxygen enrichment related...
I agree that there are very much more questions than answers where it comes to the great impact theory but it is still the most likely with the evidence at hand.
to solve this problem, the Earth, before there was earth, was a giant planet with a salt core, Mercury, the rock, crashed into the proto-Earth, 4 times the size today, you could allow for this anomaly and explain Mercury's sodium tail.
I also believe that Jupiters great red spot is from the anti-impact with Mercury, knocking it out of orbit and into ours, leaving us the moon and the asteroid belt, and perhaps the scar on mars. I also believe that Mercury's magnetic field reverses when the Earth's magnetic field reverses by way of magnetic reconnection
Mercury has 42 percent oxygen in its crust, compared to Earths 47 percent in its crust
poleflux, your ideas are interesting and I'd like to see you write more hubs and participate more in the forums. We need fresh ideas here.
by lesliebyars3 years ago
Many scientists believe their is life on other planets. Not on Mars or Venus but in the next Solar System. What do you think and should NASA take this issue seriously?
by alec504 years ago
I have always been fascinated with astrology and all the planets in our solar system, but in theory the planet Earth is just a needle in haystack.. There is so much explore, I believe we're not the only ones living on a...
by Michele Travis4 years ago
Made a mistake in the title of the forum. I hope reposting it is ok.I just wrote a hub about the end of the world in 2012. However, what I did not put into the hub, was the number of times the end of the...
by RPirate4 years ago
Hello Hubworld philosophers,I always had these thoughts, thinking about different planets. Have you heard of Kepler-22b? I recently wrote a hub about it.Do you believe in other life?
by Daffy Duck5 years ago
There are millions of other worlds in countless star systems in thousands of galaxies yet we have found no life yet....Why? Is it because there is no other life in the universe? Is it because there use to be...
by dishyum5 years ago
# The Sun is 330,000 times larger than the Earth.# The moons of all other planets in the solar system are named after Greek gods, except for those of Uranus, which are named after Shakespearean characters.Got more?
Copyright © 2016 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.