Astronomy Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for astronomers and astrophysicists. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

Given that the Earth and Moon are often said in the literature to have very similar geochemistry, what is the current theory as to how the Earth's Moon formed?

share|improve this question

The current accepted theory is known as the Giant Impact Hypothesis, where according to this NASA webpage "Origin of the Earth and Moon" (Taylor) a Mars sized object collided into the early Earth.

This theory allows explanations of (from the link above):

The chemical makeup:

The giant impact hypothesis is consistent with our ideas for how planets were assembled and explains some important features of the Earth-Moon system, such as why the Moon has only a tiny metallic core.

and in terms of orbits:

To account for the amount of angular momentum in the Earth-Moon system, Cameron estimated that the object would need to be about 10% the mass of Earth, about the size of Mars. (Angular momentum is the measure of motion of objects in curved paths, including both rotation and orbital motion. For the Earth and Moon this means the spin of each planet plus the orbital motion of the Moon around the Earth.)


Image source

However, recently, there has been some revisions to this theory.

According to NASA's page "NASA Lunar Scientists Develop New Theory on Earth and Moon Formation", based on concerns that the Mars-sized would likely to have had a different composition to the Earth (inconsistent with the current similarities in geochemistry).

The new hypothesis is (from the link above):

After colliding, the two similar-sized bodies then re-collided, forming an early Earth surrounded by a disk of material that combined to form the moon. The re-collision and subsequent merger left the two bodies with the similar chemical compositions seen today.

This is also discussed in "Huge Moon-Forming Collision Theory Gets New Spin" (Wall, 2012), basing the revised hypothesis on the rotation rate, which is theorised to have been very fast, from the article:

Earth's day had been just two to three hours long at the time of the impact, Cuk and Stewart calculate, the planet could well have thrown off enough material to form the moon (which is 1.2 percent as massive as Earth).

Further discussion, based on the geochemical makeup is discussed in "Geochemical Constraints on the Origin of the Earth and Moon" (Jones and Palme) conclude that:

Although none of these observations actually disproves the giant impact hypothesis, we find it disquieting that the obvious consequences expected of a giant impact are not observed to be fulfilled.

So, there is still some question as to precisely how the Moon was formed.

share|improve this answer

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.