Article | Published:

A multiple-impact origin for the Moon

Nature Geoscience volume 10, pages 8994 (2017) | Download Citation

Abstract

The hypothesis of lunar origin by a single giant impact can explain some aspects of the Earth–Moon system. However, it is difficult to reconcile giant-impact models with the compositional similarity of the Earth and Moon without violating angular momentum constraints. Furthermore, successful giant-impact scenarios require very specific conditions such that they have a low probability of occurring. Here we present numerical simulations suggesting that the Moon could instead be the product of a succession of a variety of smaller collisions. In this scenario, each collision forms a debris disk around the proto-Earth that then accretes to form a moonlet. The moonlets tidally advance outward, and may coalesce to form the Moon. We find that sub-lunar moonlets are a common result of impacts expected onto the proto-Earth in the early Solar System and find that the planetary rotation is limited by impact angular momentum drain. We conclude that, assuming efficient merger of moonlets, a multiple-impact scenario can account for the formation of the Earth–Moon system with its present properties.

  • Subscribe to Nature Geoscience for full access:

    $59

    Subscribe

Additional access options:

Already a subscriber?  Log in  now or  Register  for online access.

References

  1. 1.

    Simulations of a late lunar-forming impact. Icarus 168, 433–456 (2004).

  2. 2.

    , , & Identification of the giant impactor Theia in lunar rocks. Science 344, 1146–1150 (2014).

  3. 3.

    , , , & The proto-Earth as a significant source of lunar material. Nat. Geosci. 5, 251–255 (2012).

  4. 4.

    , , & Lunar tungsten isotopic evidence for the late veneer. Nature 520, 534–537 (2015).

  5. 5.

    & Equilibration in the aftermath of the lunar-forming giant impact. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 262, 438–449 (2007).

  6. 6.

    Forming a moon with an Earth-like composition via a giant impact. Science 338, 1052–1055 (2012).

  7. 7.

    & Making the Moon from a fast-spinning Earth: a giant impact followed by resonant despinning. Science 338, 1047–1052 (2012).

  8. 8.

    & Early evolution of the Earth–Moon system with a fast-spinning Earth. Icarus 256, 138–146 (2015).

  9. 9.

    & Lunar and terrestrial planet formation in the grand tack scenario. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A 372, 20130174 (2014).

  10. 10.

    & The feeding zones of terrestrial planets and insights into moon formation. Icarus 252, 161–174 (2015).

  11. 11.

    et al. Highly siderophile elements in Earth’s mantle as a clock for the Moon-forming impact. Nature 508, 84–87 (2014).

  12. 12.

    , & A primordial origin for the compositional similarity between the Earth and the Moon. Nature 520, 212–215 (2015).

  13. 13.

    , , & in 45th Lunar Planet. Sci. Conf. 2085 (Lunar and Planetary Institute, 2014);

  14. 14.

    Flaws in the giant impact hypothesis of lunar origin. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 95, 208–214 (1989).

  15. 15.

    & Forming the lunar farside highlands by accretion of a companion moon. Nature 476, 69–72 (2011).

  16. 16.

    , & On the character and consequences of large impacts in the late stage of terrestrial planet formation. Icarus 142, 219–237 (1999).

  17. 17.

    & Collisions between gravity-dominated bodies. ii. The diversity of impact outcomes during the end stage of planet formation. Astrophys. J. 751, 32 (2012).

  18. 18.

    & in 47th Lunar Planet. Sci. Conf. 2856 (Lunar and Planetary Institute, 2014);

  19. 19.

    & Potassium isotopic evidence for a high-energy giant impact origin of the Moon. Nature 538, 487–490 (2016).

  20. 20.

    & Accretion of the moon from non-canonical discs. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A 372, 20130256 (2014).

  21. 21.

    & Investigation of the initial state of the moon-forming disk: bridging SPH simulations and hydrostatic models. Icarus 233, 259–267 (2014).

  22. 22.

    , , & A hit-and-run giant impact scenario. Icarus 221, 296–299 (2012).

  23. 23.

    , & 182W evidence for long-term preservation of early mantle differentiation products. Science 335, 1065–1069 (2012).

  24. 24.

    Early differentiation and volatile accretion recorded in deep-mantle neon and xenon. Nature 486, 101–104 (2012).

  25. 25.

    & Melting and mixing states of the Earth’s mantle after the Moon-forming impact. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 427, 286–295 (2015).

  26. 26.

    et al. Water in evolved lunar rocks: evidence for multiple reservoirs. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 188, 244–260 (2016).

  27. 27.

    , , & Building the terrestrial planets: constrained accretion in the inner solar system. Icarus 203, 644–662 (2009).

  28. 28.

    Lunar-forming collisions with pre-impact rotation. Icarus 196, 518–538 (2008).

  29. 29.

    Dynamics of lunar formation. Annu. Rev. Astron. Astrophys. 42, 441–475 (2004).

  30. 30.

    , & Evolution of a terrestrial multiple-moon system. Astron. J. 117, 603 (1999).

  31. 31.

    & Collisionless encounters and the origin of the lunar inclination. Nature 527, 492–494 (2015).

  32. 32.

    , & Lunar accretion from an impact-generated disk. Nature 389, 353–357 (1997).

  33. 33.

    The cosmological simulation code gadget-2. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 364, 1105–1134 (2005).

  34. 34.

    A hydrocode equation of state for SiO2. Meteorit. Planet. Sci. 42, 2079–2098 (2007).

  35. 35.

    , & The recent formation of Saturn’s moonlets from viscous spreading of the main rings. Nature 465, 752–754 (2010).

  36. 36.

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

  37. 37.

    , & Formation of terrestrial planets from protoplanets. i. Statistics of basic dynamical properties. Astrophys. J. 642, 1131 (2006).

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank S. Stewart and R. Citron for providing guidance on the computational code, as well as A. Mastrobuono-Battisti for providing the data used for the Monte Carlo simulations. This project was supported by the Minerva Center for Life Under Extreme Planetary Conditions as well as by the I-CORE Program of the PBC and ISF (Center No. 1829/12). R.R. is grateful to the Israel Ministry of Science, Technology and Space for their Shulamit Aloni fellowship. H.B.P. also acknowledges support from the Israel-US bi-national science foundation, BSF grant number 2012384, and the European union career integration grant ‘GRAND’.

Author information

Affiliations

  1. Weizmann Institute of Science, Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, Rehovot 76100, Israel

    • Raluca Rufu
    •  & Oded Aharonson
  2. Technion Israel Institute of Technology, Physics Department, Haifa 32000, Israel

    • Hagai B. Perets

Authors

  1. Search for Raluca Rufu in:

  2. Search for Oded Aharonson in:

  3. Search for Hagai B. Perets in:

Contributions

R.R. performed the SPH simulations and their analysis with guidance by O.A. H.B.P. suggested the multiple-impact idea. All authors contributed to discussions, interpretations and writing.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Raluca Rufu.

Supplementary information

PDF files

  1. 1.

    Supplementary Information

    Supplementary Information

Videos

  1. 1.

    Supplementary Information

    Supplementary Information

Text files

  1. 1.

    Supplementary Information

    Supplementary Information

About this article

Publication history

Received

Accepted

Published

DOI

https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo2866

Rights and permissions

To obtain permission to re-use content from this article visit RightsLink.