To: stormer
Interesting... Most of those impacts seem to be missing the central uplift of the “fried egg” (or else it is obscured by dust and debris) - perhaps due to differing substrate materials at the point of impact...
14 posted on
12/20/2009 10:06:26 AM PST by
Zeppo
("Happy Pony is on - and I'm NOT missing Happy Pony")
To: Zeppo
Interesting observation. Here's an example from Ganymede - the central mounts seem to be evident. I could only speculate as to any of a number of variables. Substrate, energy at impact, and gravity would seem to be the main culprits.
19 posted on
12/20/2009 10:29:28 AM PST by
stormer
To: Zeppo
I also wonder if there is any vertical exaggeration in the original image that would make the central mounts appear more profound (not uncommon to demonstrate morphology).
21 posted on
12/20/2009 10:32:56 AM PST by
stormer
To: Zeppo
The real key to why the fried egg effect, is whether the area was covered in water, as it is now.
24 posted on
12/20/2009 12:24:22 PM PST by
UCANSEE2
(<I>)
To: Zeppo
Most of those impacts seem to be missing the central uplift...perhaps due to differing substrate materials at the point of impact... The Moon has a very small iron core(in proportion to Earth). Mars also has a small core and it seems to be solid rather then molten. I expect that might explain the difference in appearance as an impact on Earth's crust would look more like a stone dropped into water (and frozen immediately) as opposed to a bullet fired into a rock surface.
Regards,
GtG
29 posted on
12/20/2009 1:17:07 PM PST by
Gandalf_The_Gray
(I live in my own little world, I like it 'cuz they know me here.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson