Study Suggests Venus May Have Pulled a Former Moon Into Itself
publishers 9articles 9first reported 24 Sep, 09:15 UTCdeveloping since 24 Sep · 3 editions
Venus may once have had a moon that was gradually pulled inward, broken apart and consumed by the planet, according to a recent study led by University of California, Riverside astrophysicist Steven Kane.
Venus is similar to Earth in mass, size and structure, but unlike Earth it has no natural satellite. Earlier explanations proposed that a Venusian moon either never formed or was destroyed in a major collision. The new research offers another possibility based on Venus’ gravity and unusually slow rotation.
Venus takes 243 Earth days to complete one rotation, longer than its year. A planet’s rotation affects whether tidal forces drive a satellite outward or draw it inward. Earth’s faster rotation is causing its moon to recede by about 1.5 inches per year, while the study suggests Venus’ slow spin could have caused a moon to spiral toward the planet.
The researchers tested the mechanism with computer simulations, first checking their model by reproducing the evolution of Earth’s moon. They then varied Venus’ rotation period, the hypothetical moon’s orbit and a lunar mass ranging from 0.01 to 10 times the mass of Earth’s moon. Under many simulated conditions, the satellite moved inward until it fragmented and fell into Venus. In some scenarios involving a much faster Venus rotation and an Earth-moon-sized satellite, a moon survived for as long as 4.5 billion years.
The findings present a possible explanation for Venus’ lack of a moon rather than evidence that such a moon definitely existed.
HOW THIS STORY WAS MADE
Written from 8 articles, 1 with the publisher's own text; 8 independent newsrooms once syndicated copies count as one; this version written 6 h after the record first saw the story; the editor kept it as written.
- Publishers
- 9
- Source articles
- 9
- Given to the writer
- 8, 1 with the article's own text
- Independent newsrooms
- 8
- This version written
- 6 h after the record first saw the story
- Second model (editor)
- kept as written
- Publication gate
- passed
- Human review
- none
Written by a language model from the sources above, then checked by a second model that may only cut, attribute or correct. How it works →