We finally know where the moon’s atmosphere comes from
It is easy to imagine the moon as an atmosphere-less hunk of rock orbiting Earth. However, while lacking breathable air, our planet’s loyal natural satellite companion does in fact have a thin and wispy atmosphere
Scientists have long puzzled over the existence of this tenuous atmosphere or “exosphere” and have searched for the main process that sustains it, but new research indicates that this tenuous lunar atmosphere or “exosphere” owes its existence to renewal and replenishment caused by the violent bombardment of space rocks upon the moon.
The team behind the research suggests that the moon’s atmosphere is mainly sustained, and has been for billions of years, by this assault causing a phenomenon called “impact vaporization.”
This process occurs when impacts kick up lunar soil, vaporizing materials that either escape to space or remain suspended over the moon, thus renewing its exosphere.
“We give a definitive answer that meteorite impact vaporization is the dominant process that creates the lunar atmosphere,” team leader Nicole Nie, an assistant professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), said in a statement.
“The moon is close to 4.5 billion years old, and through that time, the surface has been continuously bombarded by meteorites. We show that eventually, a thin atmosphere reaches a steady state because it’s being continuously replenished by small impacts all over the moon.”
The moon’s pitted and scarred surface is a clear and obvious geological reminder that it has been peppered with space rocks throughout its near 4.5 billion-year history.
Early in the moon’s lifetime, the infant solar system was violent and turbulent. As a result, the lunar surface was frequently struck by massive meteorites. As time progressed, collisions between solar system bodies ground many larger space rocks down.
This meant that as the moon aged, the bombardment continued, but the assailants shrank to smaller “micrometeoroids,” particles from space that are smaller than a grain of sand. Yet, these less dramatic impacts were still sufficient to allow impact vaporization to continue and to continuously replenish the moon’s atmosphere.
Scientists first began to suspect that the space-rock assault on the moon was responsible in part for generating the exosphere when NASA‘s Lunar Atmosphere and Dust Environment Explorer (LADEE) investigated the moon’s thin atmosphere, surface conditions, and the environmental influences on the lunar dust in 2013.
This led them to highlight two processes regenerating the exosphere. The first was impact vaporization, the other was “ion sputtering.” This latter process occurs when high-energy charged particles from the sun, known as the “solar wind,” strike the lunar surface and impart energy to atoms.
This also causes those atoms to be flung into the exosphere.
“Based on LADEE’s data, it seemed both processes are playing a role,” Nie explained. “For instance, it showed that during meteorite showers, you see more atoms in the atmosphere, meaning impacts have an effect.
“But it also showed that when the moon is shielded from the sun, such as during an eclipse, there are also changes in the atmosphere’s atoms, meaning the sun also has an impact. So, the results were not clear or quantitative.”
Nie and colleagues wanted to determine which process is primarily responsible for sustaining the moon’s atmosphere. To do this, they turned to lunar soil collected during NASA’s Apollo missions.
The answers are in the dirt
The team was able to touch ten samples of lunar soil, each measuring just 100 milligrams. This amount is so small that Nie estimated it would fit into a single raindrop.
The researchers set about isolating two elements in these samples: potassium and rubidium. Both elements are “volatiles,” meaning they are easily vaporized by both meteorite strikes and by solar sputtering caused by solar wind bombardment.
The team wanted to see the ratios of different “isotopes” of potassium and rubidium. An isotope is a variation of an element that has different numbers of neutrons in its atomic nucleus. That means that isotopes with more neutrons (the number of protons can’t vary when changing the element to another element) are heavier than those with fewer.
The team predicted that light isotopes of potassium and rubidium would be more likely to be suspended in the exosphere of the moon while heavier isotopes fall back to the lunar surface.
However, impact vaporization and ion sputtering should have different effectiveness in pitching isotopes into the lunar atmosphere. That means looking at the amount of heavy isotopes of these two elements in lunar soil and comparing it to the amount of lighter isotopes in the samples should reveal which of these two processes is the more dominant.
“With impact vaporization, most of the atoms would stay in the lunar atmosphere, whereas with ion sputtering, a lot of atoms would be ejected into space,” Nie said.
Nie and colleagues found the soils contained mostly heavy isotopes of both potassium and rubidium. This told them impact vaporization was the dominant process by which atoms are vaporized and uplifted to form the moon’s atmosphere.
They found that 70 percent of the exosphere was generated by meteorite hits and impact vaporization, with 30 percent allotted to the solar winds and ion sputtering.
“The discovery of such a subtle effect is remarkable, thanks to the innovative idea of combining potassium and rubidium isotope measurements along with careful, quantitative modeling,” Justin Hu, lunar soils researcher at Cambridge University, who was not involved in the study, said.
“This discovery goes beyond understanding the moon’s history, as such processes could occur and might be more significant on other moons and asteroids, which are the focus of many planned return missions.”
Nie, too, acknowledges that the team’s findings simply wouldn’t have been achievable were it not for the Apollo program, which drew to a close with Apollo 17 in Dec. 1972.
“Without these Apollo samples, we would not be able to get precise data and measure quantitatively to understand things in more detail,” Nie concluded. “It’s important for us to bring samples back from the moon and other planetary bodies, so we can draw clearer pictures of the solar system’s formation and evolution.”
See more here livescience.com
Please Donate Below To Support Our Ongoing Work To Defend The Scientific Method
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company 
incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Trackback from your site.
Jerry Krause
| #
Hi PSI Readers,
This link (http://smallcomets.physics.uiowa.edu/blackspot.html) seems related to the topic is this article.
Have a good day
Reply
Joe
| #
Why are all the creators on the moon at right angles. Direct impact???? The moon is NOT an organic piece if rock ….it is a space platform
Reply
aaron
| #
and its not swiss cheese either the indoctrination is strong and starts very early
Reply
Howdy
| #
Some can use God given senses, intelligence, intuition, and reasoning, to work out the truth, Aaron.
It comes from within, no other need speak, as is done in indoctrinatory sources
Reply
Howdy
| #
Right angles? you mean the shot was taken directly as the sun’s light hits it? Like a dimpled golf ball that is photographed from a camera providing light from the same source as the image is viewed.
Reply
Howdy
| #
“This process occurs when impacts kick up lunar soil, vaporizing materials that either escape to space or remain suspended over the moon, thus renewing its exosphere.”
One might notice that the old moon walks had no evidence of fine dust in ‘the atmosphere’ or otherwise.
Er, the link to the ‘infant solar system’. I’m really supposed to take that as evidence?
“Is Jupiter’s Great Red Spot an impostor? Giant storm may not be the original one discovered 350 years ago”
If that’s live science, I’ll go and dance with the fairies.
https://www.ancient-origins.net/human-origins-folklore/do-you-dare-enter-fairy-ring-mythical-mushroom-portals-supernatural-003677
Reply
Len Winokur
| #
The reason the old moon walks had no evidence of fine dust in ‘the atmosphere’ or otherwise is that they took place in a film studio here on Earth.
Reply
Howdy
| #
And you know the constituents of said dustless material used at the shoot, and the location of the fake walk too Len?
Direct me please.
Reply
Howdy
| #
I won’t wait for Len, anybody knows that fine, dry surfaces emit dust that hangs in the atmosphere whether one believes in gravity or not. A nuisance in dry climates, and if you’ve worked in the presence of cement dust, you’ll know how long it remains suspended in the atmosphere.
Just brush up on a dry day.
Cork dust hangs in the air and can ignite like petrol, gravity doesn’t mean it instantly settles…
Reply
Herb Rose
| #
Hi Howdy,
Gravity causes all matter to fall at the same rate. The differences we see are due to “wind resistance” where the kinetic energy of air molecules cause light particles, with relatively large surface areas compared to mass, to remain suspended longer. (If not for the kinetic energy of gas molecules (above 0 K) they would be a layer tin the surface.)The lack of atmosphere means that on the moon the rate dust settles would be close to what is expected due to gravity.
Suspension could also occur due to charges on particles being repelled by the charge of the surface.
Herb
Howdy
| #
Doesn’t matter in this context Herb. Fine dust stays in the atmosphere for a long time, even with gravity.
That Len said the lack of dust was because the space walk was recorded on Earth, where gravity is stronger, I’m expected to believe dust would settle instantly on this surface, where it wouldn’t on the Moon?
Not an answer.
J Cuttance
| #
It would have been good to have the constituents of said atmosphere in the piece.
Reply
ecm
| #
Every thing in life that self-propels, has an aura around it. This includes the “living/biological” and non-living such as space objects. An “atmosphere” is just an aura, which is really an exterior extension of the object’s internal energy. To be fair, there is no doubt that this atmosphere is influenced by cosmic forces and hence there is no need for the Global Warming BS.
Reply
Jerry Krause
| #
Hi Herb and any other PSI Readers,
What Herb wrote at 8/14/2024 at 11:54pm could not have been written any better (clearer). Please read what he wrote.
Have a good day
Reply
Jerry Krause
| #
Hi Howdy and any other PSI Readers,
Howdy asked (August 15, 2024 at 4:45 am | #) “I’m expected to believe dust would settle instantly on this surface, where it wouldn’t on the Moon?” Einstein taught us that nothing is INSTANoUS.
Have a good day
Reply
Howdy
| #
Jerry, you’re simply making the subject more convoluted than it needs to be. Keep it simple.
Just as Einstein couldn’t measure the smallest amount of time passing, neither does current science.have the capability. The quote is at best a guess by Einstein. Of course, his ’eminence’ makes it true…
Reply
Jerry Krause
| #
Hi PSI Readers,
Speaking of Einstien I have read somewhere that he stated “All religions, art and sciences are branches of the same tree.” And I asked myself why (h0w) this could be true? And the answer I colluded was that in these three pursuits we are never certain. of what we BELIEVE.
Have a good day
Reply
ecm
| #
Jerry, if I may suggest an additional possibility to: “All religions, art and sciences are branches of the same tree”.
Science is the study of Nature, while Religion is our relationship to Nature. True Art expounds on the feelings we have towards Nature-it can be non-denominational or religious.
Reply
Howdy
| #
Not branches of, but the exact same, though given alternative descriptions. Krishna becomes Jesus, ISIS becomes the Virgin Mary, and so forth.
Have a look at these:
https://listverse.com/2009/04/13/10-christ-like-figures-who-pre-date-jesus/
http://www.mother-god.com/goddess-tara.html
Reply
Jerry Krause
| #
Hi Eco,
Not sure we are on the same page. I believe a fundamental word in Einstein’s statement is ALL. When you focus on NATURE you seem to be limiting the focus to the Physical Universe and not also to the SIPIRT WORLD
Have a good day
Reply
Howdy
| #
Depends on what one sees, feels and knows, Jerry. Of course, the unseen cannot be described without experience.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blind_men_and_an_elephant
Reply
Howdy
| #
The following link also goes into this.
https://new.exchristian.net/2012/06/great-virgin-isis-ancient-mythology-is.html
Reply
Howdy
| #
As usual, the silence is deafening…
Joel
| #
In a world where mythology has long taken precedence over reality, you can actually fool most of the people all of the time.
The climate change mythology exists because so many fell for the lunar landing mythology. The author apparently believes these “researchers” know what they’re talking about. They don’t, it’s all mythology. Time to grow up people!
Reply
Jerry Krause
| #
Hi Joel,
How is that “so many fell for the lunar landing mythology.” but you seem to know “it’s all mythology”?
Have a good day
Reply
Herb Rose
| #
Hi Joel,
If you believe that a conspiracy involving that many people would not be betrayed by some of them, you know nothing about people. A secret shared by more tan two people is no longer a secret
Herb
Reply
aaron
| #
Hi Herb
Who killed Kennedy, who did 911, just 2 examples of many
ALL governments are corrupt liars that use schooling and media to push their lies and propaganda
Reply
Jerry Krause
| #
Hi Howdy and Others,
I have brought this link ((http://smallcomets.physics.uiowa.edu/blackspot.html) to your attentions several time and no one has given any evidence that they have looked at it. Relative to the topic of this article it is critically important. Please look at it and tell me (and others) why it should be ignored.
Have a good day
Reply
Howdy
| #
It’s a story Jerry. Interesting to astronomer types and such, but to me, as it contains no enrichment, no value.
Reply
Jerry Kraise
| #
Hi Howdy,
Is this comment intended to imply you have read anything?
Have a good day
Reply
Howdy
| #
I have a quick peruse. A boring story that goes on and on is what I classify it as.
Reply