FAQ
It is currently Wed Aug 23, 2017 2:14 am


Author Message
Marcus MacGregor
Post  Post subject: Mars colliding with Jupiter  |  Posted: Thu Jan 29, 2015 12:37 am

Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2015 12:34 am
Posts: 2

Offline
Hello,
A few years back I had the idea that the topography of Mars could have been largely created by a close encounter with Jupiter. I posted it on several forums and got some great responses. (And some angry trolls, but hey it is the internet so what can you do)

The introduction video to this idea is here:
[youtube]http://youtube.com/watch?v=mGOsw8CLxmE[/youtube]

This is a flyby that tears out the Hellas basin. I found that a great many people thought that it went by the Roche limit. I'd just like to point out ahead of time that Mars has a fairly high density so the Roche limit does not come into play.

I made a video showing the location of some things around Jupiter because of this common confusion.
[youtube]http://youtube.com/watch?v=PJumdRcZcUA[/youtube]

I just made a video showing what I consider to be the most easily grasped evidence of this:
[youtube]http://youtube.com/watch?v=zHGX_ZQwGdA[/youtube]

I have a video planned for the trajectory of the event. I found that many people are convinced that falling into Jupiter or being flung out of the solar system are the only options. I found many planetary scientists I contacted recommended the L4 or L5 lagrangian point as the start of the trajectory. I have decided to adopt this rather than my initial idea of a highly elliptical Mars triggered by a orbital resonance. L4 would accelerate while L5 would decelerate leading to the correct Hamiltonian.

I also have a video planned for the timing of the event. One commenter noted that we would of totally noticed this happening. I guess he was thinking that it was breaking news. We have been watching Mars for quite some time and although it saddens me that I have to make it explicit- This event occurred before the invention of astronomy.

So I'm posting on this forum to see if there is other flaws of this idea that I have not addressed. I want to run it by as many people as possible before I start the laborious task of submission to journals.

So, if you think you have a debunking concept or just a facet of the idea that needs more depth please tell me. It may be something I have worked out already but have not mentioned, but hopefully it might be something that I have missed. I have had this idea for awhile so it appears obvious to me, I understand if it does not appear so to you; I'd like to know why you have a dubious perspective.

If you don't accept the idea but don't have a reason why, perhaps you can share it with someone who can come up with a reason.

If you like the idea and have a piece of supporting evidence I have not mentioned, that would be great too.

If you simply like the idea, I always appreciate a like, share or nice comment. The internet can be a very negative place.

Thank you.


Top
iNow
Post  Post subject: Re: Mars colliding with Jupiter  |  Posted: Thu Jan 29, 2015 2:41 am
User avatar
Original Member
Original Member

Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2011 11:40 pm
Posts: 5672
Location: Iowa

Offline
Hi Marcus - I've seen you post this idea at several forums where it's already been shown to be false and for several reasons, yet nothing appears new in the above.

From the fact that Mars would have to have been able to break away from Jupiters gravity to get where it is today and orbital decay cannot adequately account for the difference (even if you assume a gravitational slingshot), to the fact that the asteroids there now are older than Mars itself, to assuming that low mass / low gravity asteroids could somehow retain air or trigger volcanism on Mars, to the fact that most of your foundational assumptions are trivially false and better explained far more parsimoniously by other models that have the added benefit of having self-consistent and independently validated orbital dynamic models underlying them...

I'll repeat here what you've been told over and over aver again elsewhere... You have considerable skill with graphics and video creation, but the science and conclusions contained within are plainly wrong.

Perhaps we can discuss something else since this dead horse has been sufficiently beaten for several yeas already?

_________________
iNow

"[Time] is one of those concepts that is profoundly resistant to a simple definition." ~C. Sagan


Top
Marcus MacGregor
Post  Post subject: Re: Mars colliding with Jupiter  |  Posted: Thu Jan 29, 2015 4:52 pm

Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2015 12:34 am
Posts: 2

Offline
If one assumes a gravitational slingshot Mars starting from L5, it ends the process with the same orbital energy that it has today.

However if one assumes the date of the Hellas basin is roughly correct, then simulations show the Jupiter was close to Mars's current orbit at the time (aka Nice model). In other words, it fits nicely (pun) with the models you are trying to hold up as a counterexample.

You say trivially false, yet provide no examples. I will reiterate that finding an example of falseness is the purpose of the post.

To clear up you misconceptions, (Thank you for showing me where people miss the point BTW) The asteroids do not hold the air, the air simply continues to exist. When Mars's Roche lobe regains its previous size and shape, the air is drawn back by Mars's gravity. The vulcanism is triggered by Jupiter interfering with Mars's gravity, not by impacts.

Furthermore, no one has come close to providing any sort valid counter-argument. I have been shouted down and left when nobody appeared to have enough knowledge to be useful. That is what you are attempting to do.

"told over and over again" is one troll. Most of his arguments were refuted by other forum members demonstrating his tenuous grasp of the subject.

I understand that you dislike the idea, that fine. Most ideas are initially disliked. I'm hoping to find people would dislike the idea for reasons they can articulate.


Top
marnixR
Post  Post subject: Re: Mars colliding with Jupiter  |  Posted: Thu Jan 29, 2015 5:11 pm
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2011 8:35 pm
Posts: 4830
Location: Cardiff, Wales

Offline
the problem starts when you have to devise a totally new kind of physics to explain what happens in your model

you see, that's what pseudo-science often misses, which is that the game is not "prove me wrong", but in science it's more a matter of the probability between competing theories or explanations

the probability that our current understanding of gravitational physics needs a major rewrite is close to zero, and that's what the major weakness of your theory is : your model is based on shaky assumptions to start with, which makes finding holes in the subsequent reasoning irrelevant

_________________
"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." (Philip K. Dick)
"Someone is WRONG on the internet" (xkcd)


Top
iNow
Post  Post subject: Re: Mars colliding with Jupiter  |  Posted: Thu Jan 29, 2015 10:39 pm
User avatar
Original Member
Original Member

Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2011 11:40 pm
Posts: 5672
Location: Iowa

Offline
Marcus MacGregor wrote:
If one assumes a gravitational slingshot Mars starting from L5...

We can't, though, because Lagrange points change over time.

Marcus MacGregor wrote:
The asteroids do not hold the air, the air simply continues to exist.

It seems that you may fail to grasp how atmospheres actually work. This is nonsensical.

Marcus MacGregor wrote:
no one has come close to providing any sort valid counter-argument. I have been shouted down and left when nobody appeared to have enough knowledge to be useful.

I have to agree with marnix here. For what you propose to be correct, we'd have to assume that our existing understanding of physics, gravitational dynamics, and planetary orbits is completely wrong and needs entirely to be rewritten.

Marcus MacGregor wrote:
I understand that you dislike the idea, that fine. Most ideas are initially disliked.

I have no emotion about your idea. This isn't about liking or disliking it. It's just almost certainly wrong is all.

_________________
iNow

"[Time] is one of those concepts that is profoundly resistant to a simple definition." ~C. Sagan


Top
Ophiolite
Post  Post subject: Re: Mars colliding with Jupiter  |  Posted: Sun Mar 01, 2015 8:13 am
Original Member
Original Member

Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2011 12:00 pm
Posts: 261

Offline
I am curious Marcus as to why you think a video, rather than a tightly argued paper with detailed mathematical analysis, is the right way to present this idea.

I am also puzzled by the fact that, unlike most quality research that introduce novel hypotheses, at no time do you detail the potential problems with your idea, then systematically deal with them. Why not?

Note: I have read your idea in several places and have interacted with you, not necessarily with this user name. Perhaps you have thought of me as a troll.


Top
billvon
Post  Post subject: Re: Mars colliding with Jupiter  |  Posted: Thu Mar 05, 2015 4:57 pm

Joined: Thu Oct 02, 2014 5:23 pm
Posts: 86

Offline
Marcus MacGregor wrote:
I'd just like to point out ahead of time that Mars has a fairly high density so the Roche limit does not come into play.

The Roche limit does not "go away" if the planet has a high density. Dense planets break up inside the Roche limit as readily as less dense planets.

Quote:
Furthermore, no one has come close to providing any sort valid counter-argument.

The counter-argument to explain the Hellas Basin is that it is an impact crater, due to an asteroidal impact during the late heavy bombardment.

From Ozgate:

==========
The surface of Mars looks almost as if two different planets have been sutured together. The northern hemisphere consists of smooth, low-lying plains; the southern hemisphere is mostly rocky highlands. These highlands are heavily cratered and include several basins— vast circular impact craters that formed relatively early in Martian history. . . .

The Hellas Planitia basin is one of the most spectacular features on Mars—a circular crater, 1,300 miles across, with a brightly reflective floor and raised terrain all around it. Planitia is a Latin term often applied to Martian basins: It simply means "low plain/' The bottom of the Hellas basin is no exception, lying an average nine miles below the surrounding highlands.

Hellas has been known to astronomers for over a century—it is easily spotted as a bright circular feature through a small telescope. But it took close-up images from the Mariner space probes to reveal that Hellas is actually a crater formed by a massive meteorite impact. The impact site is circled by a rim of material that towers 1.25 miles above the surrounding highlands, which themselves extend for nearly 2,000 miles on every side.. . .

It seems that the basins are among the oldest features on Mars, and date from a time when large, partially formed planetoids were still flying around the inner solar system. The sheer size of the craters, as well as their appearance, suggests that they were formed before the amount of meteorite bombardment in the solar system suddenly tailed off about 4 billion years ago


Top
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Print view

Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
Jump to:   


Delete all board cookies | The team | All times are UTC


This free forum is proudly hosted by ProphpBB | phpBB software | Report Abuse | Privacy