General Discussion Undecided where to post - do it here. |
Reply to Thread New Thread |
![]() |
#7 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#8 |
|
As pies in the sky go, some asteroids do look pretty tasty. A lot are unconsolidated piles of rubble left over from the beginning of the solar system. Many, though, are pieces of small planets that bashed into each other over the past few billion years. These, in particular, will be high on Planetary Resources’ shopping list because the planet-forming processes of mineral-melting and subsequent stratification into core, mantle and crust will have sorted their contents in ways that can concentrate valuable materials into exploitable ores. On Earth, for example, platinum and its allied elements, though rare at the surface, are reckoned more common in the planet’s metal-rich core. The same was probably true of the planets shattered to make asteroids. Platinum, iridium and the rest are expensive precisely because they are rare. Make them common, by digging them out of the heart of a shattered planet, and they will become cheap. I guess they're loosely defining planets again (Pluto isn't one any more), I'd like to know how big a planet must be to differentiate heavy elements. The current theory for the asteroids was a failed planet - a planet failed to form due to Jupiter's gravity (why Jupiter formed first is another matter), now they're saying a massive collision occurred at the asteroid belt between planets? Is it possible the "Earth" was one of those colliding planets and was pushed here with its plentiful water?
|
![]() |
![]() |
#9 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#11 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#15 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#19 |
|
|
![]() |
Reply to Thread New Thread |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|