home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!spool.mu.edu!think.com!enterpoop.mit.edu!eru.mt.luth.se!lunic!sunic!ugle.unit.no!alf.uib.no!hsr.no!onar
- From: onar@hsr.no (Onar Aam)
- Newsgroups: talk.origins
- Subject: Re: Cosmos without Gravitation
- Message-ID: <1992Dec31.070344.15578@hsr.no>
- Date: 31 Dec 92 07:03:44 GMT
- References: <1992Dec28.133106.22923@linus.mitre.org> <1992Dec29.143703.7029@hsr.no> <1992Dec29.164826.5044@linus.mitre.org>
- Sender: news@hsr.no
- Organization: Rogaland University Centre
- Lines: 26
-
- >In article <1992Dec29.143703.7029@hsr.no> onar@hsr.no (Onar Aam) writes:
- >}>13. If planets and satellites were once molten masses...they would not have been
- >}>able to
- >}>obtain spherical form, especially those which do not rotate, as Mercury or the
- >}>moon (with
- >}^^^^^
- >}>respect to its primary)
- >}
- >}
- >}That is simply not true. The moon is rotating (ever heard of earth rise?)
- >}although only slightly.
- >
- >wobbles, not rotate. If it rotated, 100% would (eventually) become visable.
- >It doesn't.
- >
- >ref "earthrise". No, I haven't. Reference, please.
-
-
- Sorry! My fault! Earthrise is of course not caused by rotation but rather more an
- effect called liberation. This allows us to see about 60% of the moon from earth.
-
- The moon rotates but only ever so slightly that it is barely noticable.
-
-
-
- Onar.
-