Letter | Published:

Origin of the Moon in a giant impact near the end of the Earth's formation

Nature volume 412, pages 708712 (16 August 2001) | Download Citation

Subjects

Abstract

The Moon is generally believed to have formed from debris ejected by a large off-centre collision with the early Earth1,2. The impact orientation and size are constrained by the angular momentum contained in both the Earth's spin and the Moon's orbit, a quantity that has been nearly conserved over the past 4.5 billion years. Simulations of potential moon-forming impacts now achieve resolutions sufficient to study the production of bound debris. However, identifying impacts capable of yielding the Earth–Moon system has proved difficult3,4,5,6. Previous works4,5 found that forming the Moon with an appropriate impact angular momentum required the impact to occur when the Earth was only about half formed, a more restrictive and problematic model than that originally envisaged. Here we report a class of impacts that yield an iron-poor Moon, as well as the current masses and angular momentum of the Earth–Moon system. This class of impacts involves a smaller—and thus more likely—object than previously considered viable, and suggests that the Moon formed near the very end of Earth's accumulation.

Access optionsAccess options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

References

  1. 1.

    & The origin of the Moon. Lunar Sci. 7, 120–122 (1976).

  2. 2.

    & Satellite-sized planetesimals and lunar origin. Icarus 24, 504–515 (1975).

  3. 3.

    The origin of the Moon and the single impact hypothesis V. Icarus 126, 126–137 (1997).

  4. 4.

    in Origin of the Earth and Moon (eds Canup, R. M. & Righter, K.) 133–144 (Univ. Arizona Press, Tucson, 2000).

  5. 5.

    From interstellar gas to the Earth–Moon system. Meteor. Planet. Sci. 36, 9–22 (2001).

  6. 6.

    , & A scaling law for satellite-forming impacts. Icarus 150, 288–296 (2001).

  7. 7.

    & in Origin of the Earth and Moon (eds Canup, R. M. & Righter, K.) 397–409 (Univ. Arizona Press, Tucson, 2000).

  8. 8.

    , & The origin of the Moon and the single impact hypothesis I. Icarus 66, 515–535 (1986).

  9. 9.

    , & The origin of the Moon and the single impact hypothesis II. Icarus 71, 30–45 (1987).

  10. 10.

    , & The origin of the Moon and the single impact hypothesis III. Icarus 81, 113–131 (1989).

  11. 11.

    & The origin of the Moon and the single impact hypothesis IV. Icarus 92, 204–216 (1991).

  12. 12.

    & Giant impact theory of the Moon's origin: first 3-D hydrocode results. Lunar Sci. 20, 685–686 (1989).

  13. 13.

    A numerical approach to the testing of the fission hypothesis. Astron. J. 82, 1013–1024 (1977).

  14. 14.

    in Origin of the Earth and Moon (eds Canup, R. M. & Righter, K.) 217–223 (Univ. Arizona Press, Tucson, 2000).

  15. 15.

    Metallic equations of state for hypervelocity impact. Report No. GA-3216, July 18 (General Atomic, San Diego, California, 1962).

  16. 16.

    & Outcomes of planet-scale collisions. Lunar Sci. [CD-ROM] 32, (2001).

  17. 17.

    & Impact vapor plume expansion with realistic geometry and equation of state. Lunar Sci. 28, 935 (1997).

  18. 18.

    A new and improved equation of state for impact computations. Lunar Sci. 31, 1903 (2000).

  19. 19.

    & Size, density, and structure of comet Shoemaker-Levy 9 inferred from the physics of tidal breakup. Icarus 121, 225–248 (1996).

  20. 20.

    , & Formation of the Moon from an impact-generated disk. Nature 389, 353–357 (1997).

  21. 21.

    , & in Origin of the Earth and Moon (eds Canup, R. M. & Righter, K.) 145–163 (Univ. Arizona Press, Tucson, 2000).

  22. 22.

    , & Evolution of a circumterrestrial disk and formation of a single Moon. Icarus 148, 419–436 (2001).

  23. 23.

    in Origin and Evolution of Planetary and Satellite Atmospheres (eds Atreya, S. K., Pollack, J. B. & Matthews, M. S.) 137–164 (Univ. Arizona Press, Tucson, 1989).

  24. 24.

    , , & Dynamics of circumstellar disks. Astrophys. J. 502, 342–371 (1998).

  25. 25.

    & TREESPH—A unification of SPH with the hierarchical tree method. Astrophys. J. Suppl. 70, 419–446 (1989).

  26. 26.

    in Proc. NATO Adv. Res. Workshop on Numerical Modelling of Nonlinear Stellar Pulsations (ed. Buchler, J. R.) 1–54 (Kluwer Academic, Boston, 1990).

Download references

Acknowledgements

We wish to thank Southwest Research Institute's Internal Research program for its support of development efforts for the methods utilized here, D. Terrell for securing a portion of the computational time, and P. Tamblyn for aid with some of the analysis software. A review by A. Halliday and comments provided by W. Ward, C. Agnor, D. Korycansky and R. Mihran helped to improve the paper. This research was supported by the National Science Foundation and NASA.

Author information

Affiliations

  1. *Department of Space Studies, Southwest Research Institute, 1050 Walnut Street, Suite 426, Boulder, Colorado 80302, USA

    • Robin M. Canup
  2. †Department of Earth Sciences, University of California, Santa Cruz, California 95064, USA

    • Erik Asphaug

Authors

  1. Search for Robin M. Canup in:

  2. Search for Erik Asphaug in:

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Robin M. Canup.

About this article

Publication history

Received

Accepted

Published

DOI

https://doi.org/10.1038/35089010

Further reading

Comments

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.