Warning: Missing argument 1 for ShareThisShareButtons\Button_Widget::__construct(), called in /home/theunive/public_html/pt-br/artigos/wp-includes/class-wp-widget-factory.php on line 43 and defined in /home/theunive/public_html/pt-br/artigos/wp-content/plugins/sharethis-share-buttons/php/class-button-widget.php on line 29

Warning: Illegal offset type in /home/theunive/public_html/pt-br/artigos/wp-includes/class-wp-widget-factory.php on line 43

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/theunive/public_html/pt-br/artigos/wp-content/plugins/sharethis-share-buttons/php/class-button-widget.php:29) in /home/theunive/public_html/pt-br/artigos/wp-content/plugins/disable-xml-rpc-pingback/disable-xml-rpc-pingback.php on line 51
Formação da Lua – Teoria do Impacto Desafiada Pelo Nucleo da Lua e Composição Material « The Universal Matrix/DNA – Artigos

Formação da Lua – Teoria do Impacto Desafiada Pelo Nucleo da Lua e Composição Material



This artist’s rendering shows the collision of two planetary bodies. A collision like this is believed to have formed the moon within the first 150 million years after our solar system formed. CREDIT – NASA/JPL-Caltech

O estudo de luas e planetas está sendo retardado devido a um incompreensível equivoco do raciocínio humano.  Eu não posso entender porque os astrônomos preferem procurar o processo de  formação de sistemas naturais de macro e micro dimensões pelo método de inventar eventos nunca vistos em tempo e lugar algum,  ao invés de primeiro projetar o conhecido processo de formação de sistemas naturais em nossa média dimensão para calcular aqueles desconhecidos… como é o caso dos sistemas estelares.  Querem acreditar que a Natureza se “esquece” do Seu método aplicado no passado e tem que inventar novos métodos sempre que vai fabricar um novo sistema natural? Querem acreditar que a lua tenha se formado por um imaginário gigante impacto ao acaso… mesmo sabendo que este sistema solar funciona com a incrivel precisão Newtoniana.

A teoria da Matrix/DNA preferiu o método mais racional e projetou o método pelo qual foi criado um sistema natural ( o sistema celular) por outro sistema natural ( o sistema solar), para calcular como foi a formação do sistema solar, supondo que a Natureza sempre aplica o mesmo e único processo tal como sempre temos visto aqui toda vez que nasce um sistema natural. E o modêlo desta teoria tem acertado mais com as recentes descobertas enquanto a teoria do gigante impacto tem errado. Agora o conhecimento de que a anatomia da Lua é igual a anatomia do planeta Terra indica que o processo de formação dos dois astros deve ter sido o mesmo, e sabemos que a Terra não surgiu de um gigante impacto. Tambem o modelo da Matrix/DNA sugere que todos os corpos astronômicos crescem e enquanto isso os seus núcleos vão crescendo enquanto a camada geológica periférica vai diminuindo. Esta seria a explicação do porque a Lua tem um núcleo muito menor do que seria de esperar pela anatomia geral dos corpos celestes.

Tradução e comentario postado no artigo da Space.com

Louis Charles Morelli · Friday, March, 27

The study of moons and planets is being delayed because of an incomprehensible mistake of human reasoning. I can not understand why astronomers prefer to seek the formation process of natural systems of macro and micro dimensions by the method of inventing untold events in anytime and anywhere, rather than designing the first known process of forming natural systems in our average dimension to calculate those unknown … as is the case of star systems. They want to believe that Nature “forgets” its method applied in the past and have to invent new methods  everytime when will manufacture a new natural system? They want to believe that the moon may have formed by a giant impact imaginary random event … even though this solar system works with incredible Newtonian precision.

The Matrix / DNA Theory preferred the more rational way and and designed the method by which a natural system was created (the cellular system) by another natural system (the solar system), to calculate how was the formation of the solar system, assuming the Nature always apply one and same process as always we have seen here every time a natural system is born. And the recent discoveries had shown that the previsions of this model has been right while the theory of giant impact has been wrong. Now that the knowledge of Moon’s anatomy is equal to Earth’s anatomy indicates that the process of formation of the two bodies must be the same, and we know that the Earth did not arise from a giant impact. Also the model of the Matrix / DNA suggests that all astronomical bodies grows and while their nuclei are growing the peripheral geological layer decreases. This would be the explanation of why the Moon has a much smaller core than would be expected.

Meu segundo comentario postado:

Louis Charles Morelli ·  Top Commenter · ESAN FEI

Rob, Mike and Jeffrey… Those churchmen said something when first time Copernicus said that is not the Sun moving around the Earth: he is crasy, it is batshit, etc. But… yours proved facts against Matrix/DNA Theory are…? I am waiting.


O artigo abaixo tras novas informações sobre a Lua:

Moon’s Iron Core May Reveal Solar System Secrets with X-Ray Scan


– precise knowledge of the structure and composition of the moon’s core is essential for understanding its origin and evolution, which, in turn, would shed light on the birth and development of Earth.

– Based on this seismic data, previous studies estimated the moon had a solid inner core of pure iron and a liquid outer core made of an iron-sulfur alloy, but much about the structure of the lunar core remains controversial.

– in light of these new findings, the researchers suggest the moon’s solid inner core has a diameter of about 310 miles (500 kilometers) and a liquid outer core about 50 miles (80 km) thick. They suggest the inner core is pure gamma iron, while the outer core is composed of iron alloys made up of 3 to 6 percent sulfur by weight.


Wikipedia = Origin of the Moon refers to any of the various explanations for the formation of the Moon, Earth’s natural satellite. The leading theory has been the giant impact hypothesis. However, research continues on this matter, and there are a number of variations and alternatives.[1] Other proposed scenarios include captured body, fission, formed together (condensation theory), planetesimal collisions (formed from asteroid-like bodies), and collision theories.

The most widely accepted explanation for the origin of the Moon involves a collision of two protoplanetary bodies during the early accretional period of Solar System evolution. This “giant impact hypothesis”, which became popular in 1984, satisfies the orbital conditions of the Earth and Moon and can account for the relatively small metallic core of the Moon. Collisions between planetesimals are now recognized to lead to the growth of planetary bodies early in the evolution of the Solar System, and in this framework it is inevitable that large impacts will sometimes occur when the planets are nearly formed.

(continuar pesquisa)


Outro artigo: 

A new view of the moon’s formation


Now, a team of scientists at the University of Maryland has generated a new isotopic fingerprint of the moon that could provide the missing…


Tags: , ,