Have you ever thought about the chances of the Moon being both 400 times smaller, and 400 times closer than the Sun? What about how Earth revolves at a speed that makes the Moon appear to orbit the other way? Just to make things curiouser, the Moon revolves at a synchronous speed to its orbit, keeping the same face towards Earth at all times. Pretty strange, right? Well some folks think it’s more than strange, and every day, more and more people are becoming suspicious that what we’ve been taught about the Moon in school, might not be entirely true.
Putting crazy coincidences aside, there are some fair arguments circulating about the physical properties of the moon, and ones that are a lot more eloquent than “If the Moon is so far away, why can I see the sky through it?”. And what might these outlandish claims be? Just that the Moon is an alien satellite.
There are a few popular theories about how the Moon came to be trapped in Earths orbit, none of which however are very plausible. Probably the most popular theory is the “Giant Impact Hypothesis”, which suggests a large celestial body collided with a proto-Earth, sending a large mass of materials into Earths orbit. It’s argued that in such an event however, the collision mechanics would cause the mantle of the Moon to be mostly derived of the impactor, even though the composition of the Moons mantle is more similar to that of Earth, just a billion years older.
Another common hypothesis is the ‘Captured Moon’ theory, which suggests that the Moon had formed else where and was later captured by Earths orbit. The problem with this argument is the sheer size of the Moon, which is a whopping %27 of Earth, making our Moon the fifth largest in the Solar system, the only planets with bigger satellites being the gas giants Saturn and Jupiter. How could a planet capture a moon %1 of it’s mass?
Don’t worry, this theory isn’t based solely on the unlikely-hood of our moon, there are some actual pieces of evidence that lead real scientists, not just paranoid free thinkers, to believe that the Moon is not what we are being told it is. One of the more surprising facts about the Moon, is the difference between the composition of the surface and the core: the surface of the Moon, for some reason unknown to modern scientists, consists of denser minerals than the core, contrary to every other terrestrial planet observed. Additionally, the surface is composed of refractory metals, like titanium, which are metals extremely resistant to heat, wear, and other forms of radiation. Additionally, these metals on the surface of the Moon are regularly found to be magnetized, even though the Moon it self has no magnetic field.
Additionally, these moon rocks are regularly found to contain not only rust proof iron, but also uranium-236 and neptunium-237, more commonly known as the waste produced by nuclear reactors. If you thought that was interesting, keep reading, because these radioactive rust proof stones pale in comparison to the composition of the lunar maria. Lunar maria are large basaltic plains, but more on that later, when astronauts attempted to drill into these plains they were met with nothing but defiance. These basaltic plains on the Moon turned out to be composed of illeminite, a titanium rich metal used in the production of deep-sea submarines, and the SR-71 Blackbird, which might be the most famous stealth planes ever.
When we first started exploring the Moon, there were lots of unexplainable observations, but one of my favourites, would have to be the “Mascons”. Mascon is a contraction of mass concentration, these mascons are areas of the moon with extremely increased gravitational fields that form dense disks of material, that always appear centred beneath lunar maria. Lunar maria are the smooth basaltic plains of the Moon, which are believed to have been created by ancient volcanic eruptions. The problem with this explanation however, is that there is no evidence that the Moon has ever been hot enough to form a volcano. So lunar volcanic activity can not be verified as of now, what can be however, is seismic activity. Hundreds of “moonquakes” are recorded every year, which can’t be attributed to meteor strikes, so the other likely possibility for natural seismic activity on the Moon would be plate tectonics, but with out sufficient heat on the moon for volcanic activity, this can not be true.
Scratching your head yet? Well let’s keep going, shall we? The density of Earth is 5.5 grams per cubic centimetre, the density of the Moon is a mere 3.34 grams per centimetre, which NASA scientist Dr. Gordon MacDonald and Nobel chemist Dr. Harold Urey to claim is due to massive voids in the Moon, which has been supported time and time again, due to the simple fact that when struck, the Moon literally rings like a bell. Bogus, right? On November 20th, 1969, the Apollo 12 crew jettisoned their lunar module, causing it to crash into the Moon, and on impact, the Moon reverberated like a bell for over an hour. This effect was replicated by the Apollo 13 crew, this time intentionally, and the results were even more extreme, causing the Moon to quake in the same manner, but for well over 3 hours, completely inconsistent with a homogenous sphere.
There’s lots about the Moon inconsistent with a homogenous sphere, like the fact that it’s not a sphere at all. The far side of the Moon bulges outwards, moving it’s centre of mass 6000 feet closer to Earth than it’s centre of geometry, even though the bulge is on the opposite side. This would cause a wobble, if it wasn’t for the fact the Moons distance, trajectory, and speed are just so amazingly perfect that it doesn’t even appear to spin. On top of this, our moon has the closest to a perfectly circular orbit than any other moons observed, and is the only one observed to be equal parts closer, and smaller than the sun it’s celestial body orbits.
If you’re not already questioning the currently accepted facts of the Moon, don’t fret, I saved the best for last. Up until around 50 years ago, there were flashes of light regularly being observed emanating from the Moon, until the year before we first landed. There have also been many structures identified on the Moon that have zero chance of forming naturally. A approximately 12-mile long bridge like structure has been observed, straddling the crater called Mare Crisium. In the area of the Ukert Crater, Orbiter 3 discovered a large shard ascending from the surface of the Moon over a mile. In the small lunar mare Sinus Medii, there is a tower reaching 5 miles high, both this tower and the aforementioned shard defy all known natural explanations. But my favourite structure on the Moon, are the spires identified by Lunar Orbiter-2, which are lunar obelisks hundreds of feet tall, that just so happen to be arranged in a similar manner to the pyramids of Giza.
So, taking all of these things into account, what do you think? The planet with the most impossible natural satellite is (un)lucky enough to be the only one with verified life? Or our “natural satellite” isn’t so natural after all?