ShopDreamUp AI ArtDreamUp
Deviation Actions
Suggested Deviants
Suggested Collections
You Might Like…
Featured in Groups
Description
More of my astronomical art can be viewed in my DA "Sci Illo" gallery:
[link]
Unlike my "Exoplanet" sketchcards, this scene depicts an event that may have occurred in our own Solar System over 4.5 billion years ago.
Many are aware of William K. Hatmann's theory that the Earth/Moon system may have been born as the result of a collision between a Proto-Earth and a Mars sized planet. The result of a glancing blow was that the impactor's crust and some of that of the Proto-Earth went into orbit about the newly coalessed planet. This formed the Earth's Moon. The heavy iron core of the impactor was aglomerated to the core of the Proto-Earth. The result was a stable dynamic system in which the Earth developed a strong magnetic field that shielded its atmosphere (acquired later) from the solar wind. The Moon's gravitational influence in the form of tides slowed down the Earth's rotation and minimized the wandering of it poles. This made the Earth the perfect abode of life.
I have never encountered the hypothesis that something very similiar may have happed to the planet Venus. Earth's so-called "twin" is a volcanic hell with a suffocating atmosphere and without a means of easily convecting interior heat. Venus may have a thicker crust than the Earth. It has no dynamic metal core.
An apparently unrelated fact is that the neighboring planet Mercury appears to have no crust and is the denuded core of a once larger body. It has been proposed that a collision with another planet blasted Mercury's crust away.
In an application of simple logic, I ask why should a third unknown body be put into the equation to explain the conditions of Venus and Mercury?
It possible that a Proto-Mercury originating further out from the Sun than Venus, collided with a Proto-Venus? Had this been a glancing blow, Mercury might have lost its crust to Venus in the way that cars in an auto crash trade paint? This would have decelerated Mercury and dropped it into an orbit closer to the Sun than Venus. Such a blow could have literally flipped Venus over pole to pole and given it the ridiculously slow retrograde rotation that it experiences today.
Some astronomer, in some academic institution should crunch the numbers through a supercomputer. Its worth a shot!
This image depicts a hypothetical collision between Proto-Venus and Proto-Mercury. Had relative velocities and angles of incidence been a little different, Mercury might have contributed to a moon of Venus. Had this happened, Venus might have retained its later acquired oceans and become a haven for life.
Venus just might have been a true twin of Earth.
BTW: the two bright stars on the left side of the picture represnt the Proto-Earth and its impactor as separate bodies.
text & art (c) John P. Alexander
[link]
Unlike my "Exoplanet" sketchcards, this scene depicts an event that may have occurred in our own Solar System over 4.5 billion years ago.
Many are aware of William K. Hatmann's theory that the Earth/Moon system may have been born as the result of a collision between a Proto-Earth and a Mars sized planet. The result of a glancing blow was that the impactor's crust and some of that of the Proto-Earth went into orbit about the newly coalessed planet. This formed the Earth's Moon. The heavy iron core of the impactor was aglomerated to the core of the Proto-Earth. The result was a stable dynamic system in which the Earth developed a strong magnetic field that shielded its atmosphere (acquired later) from the solar wind. The Moon's gravitational influence in the form of tides slowed down the Earth's rotation and minimized the wandering of it poles. This made the Earth the perfect abode of life.
I have never encountered the hypothesis that something very similiar may have happed to the planet Venus. Earth's so-called "twin" is a volcanic hell with a suffocating atmosphere and without a means of easily convecting interior heat. Venus may have a thicker crust than the Earth. It has no dynamic metal core.
An apparently unrelated fact is that the neighboring planet Mercury appears to have no crust and is the denuded core of a once larger body. It has been proposed that a collision with another planet blasted Mercury's crust away.
In an application of simple logic, I ask why should a third unknown body be put into the equation to explain the conditions of Venus and Mercury?
It possible that a Proto-Mercury originating further out from the Sun than Venus, collided with a Proto-Venus? Had this been a glancing blow, Mercury might have lost its crust to Venus in the way that cars in an auto crash trade paint? This would have decelerated Mercury and dropped it into an orbit closer to the Sun than Venus. Such a blow could have literally flipped Venus over pole to pole and given it the ridiculously slow retrograde rotation that it experiences today.
Some astronomer, in some academic institution should crunch the numbers through a supercomputer. Its worth a shot!
This image depicts a hypothetical collision between Proto-Venus and Proto-Mercury. Had relative velocities and angles of incidence been a little different, Mercury might have contributed to a moon of Venus. Had this happened, Venus might have retained its later acquired oceans and become a haven for life.
Venus just might have been a true twin of Earth.
BTW: the two bright stars on the left side of the picture represnt the Proto-Earth and its impactor as separate bodies.
text & art (c) John P. Alexander
Image size
517x381px 142.2 KB
© 2012 - 2024 LEXLOTHOR
Comments3
Join the community to add your comment. Already a deviant? Log In
I thought at first this was based on Velikovsky's ideas. No, your idea is a lot more plausible than that. Sadly, though, I read the other day that MESSENGER's data suggests that the traditional impact theory for Mercury's formation *probably* isn't the case, based on Mercury's crustal content. Apparently, it's more likely that Mercury's outer layers were simply incinerated by the Proto-Sun. A pity. The idea of Mercury as the heart of a dead world always appealed to me.