home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!news.service.uci.edu!ucivax!bvickers
- From: bvickers@valentine.ics.uci.edu (Brett J. Vickers)
- Subject: Re: Moon Dust
- Nntp-Posting-Host: valentine.ics.uci.edu
- Message-ID: <2B643C69.26813@ics.uci.edu>
- Newsgroups: talk.origins
- Reply-To: bvickers@ics.uci.edu (Brett J. Vickers)
- Organization: Univ. of Calif., Irvine, Info. & Computer Sci. Dept.
- Lines: 73
- Date: 25 Jan 93 19:15:53 GMT
- References: <1k1a58INN3d1@dmsoproto.ida.org>
-
- In article <1k1a58INN3d1@dmsoproto.ida.org> rlg@omni (Randy garrett) writes:
- >One piece of evidence advanced for a young universe concerns
- >the depth of dust on the moon. In my younger years, I remember
- >quite a bit of concern about the depth likely to be encountered
- >on the moon. Many people expected 20 - 40 feet of the stuff
- >based on calculated accumulations. Fortunately for Neil
- >Armstrong, there turned out to be much less -- of order
- >a few inches. Anyone know what the accepted reconcilation
- >of the discrepancy is?
-
- From Chris Stassen's FAQ on the age of the earth:
-
- --------------------------------
- 3. Accumulation of meteoritic dust on the moon
-
- This argument: A single measurement of the rate of meteoritic dust
- influx to the earth gave a value in the millions of tons per year.
- While this is negligible compared to the processes of erosion on the
- earth (a shoebox-full per acre per year), there are no such processes
- on the moon. The moon must receive a similar amount of dust (perhaps
- 25% as much per unit surface area due to its lesser gravity), and
- there should be a very large dust layer (about a hundred feet thick)
- if the moon is several billion years old.
-
- Morris says, regarding the dust influx rate:
-
- "The best measurements have been made by Hans Pettersson,
- ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
- who obtained the figure of 14 million tons per year (1)."
- (Morris, 1974, p. 152)
-
- Pettersson stood on a mountain top and collected dust there with a
- device intended for measuring smog levels. He published calculations
- which measured the amount of nickel he collected, assumed that nickel
- was only present in meteoritic dust, and assumed that some percentage
- of meteoritic dust was nickel, to get his final figures (that first
- assumption was wrong and caused his published figures to be a vast
- overestimate).
-
- Pettersson's calculation resulted in the a figure of about 15 million
- tons per year. He believed that estimate to be an over-estimate, and
- indicated in the paper that 5 million tons per year was a much more
- likely figure.
-
- Much more accurate measurements were available, from satellite
- penetration data (no possibility of earthly contamination), by the
- time Morris published _Scientific Creationism_. These more accurate
- measurements give the value of about 18,000 to 25,000 tons per year.
- These measurements agree with levels of meteoritic dust levels trapped
- in sediments on earth. (That is, they are verified by an independent
- cross-check.)
-
- Morris chooses to pick obsolete data with known problems, and call it
- the "best" measurement available. His calculations are based on a
- figure that is nearly three orders of magnitude too high. With the
- proper values, the expected depth of meteoritic dust on the moon is
- less than one foot.
-
- For further information, see (Dalrymple, 1984, pp. 108-111) or
- (Strahler, 1987, pp. 143-144).
-
- This argument also appears in the following creationist literature:
-
- (Baker, 1976, p. 25)
- (Brown, 1989, pp. 17 and 53)
- (Jackson, 1989, pp. 40-41)
- (Jansma, 1985, pp. 62-63)
- (Whitcomb and Morris, 1961, pp. 379-380)
- (Wysong, 1976, pp. 166-168)
-
- --
- Brett J. Vickers
- bvickers@ics.uci.edu
-