Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
G1mby
Jun 8, 2014

Bug Squash posted:

I don't think I disagree with anything you just posted, my issue is with the claim that the giant impact, assuming it happened, is nessesary for a magnetic field to form on a rocky planet, for the reason that the planet would be solid otherwise.

The fact that Venus has a liquid interior, but no evidence of a giant impact, seems to break this chain of reason.

(Note that Venus doesn't have a strong magnetic field due to how slowly it rotates and some other effects. I think this is irrelevant to the discussion, but feel free to disagree)

(Also, it could be that giant impacts are actually common but usually leave no evidence and earth is only odd in that it got left with a big mood. If that's the case then it's just part of normal planetary formation and doesn't have much to say about how common life is)

I seem to remember a simulation somewhere suggesting that Venus's slow rotation could be evidence of a somewhat smaller impact that Earth, where the impact acted to slow the rotation

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply