Talk:Giordano Bruno (crater)

A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on June 18, 2018.

Astronomy: Moon / Solar System Low‑importance

	Astronomy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Astronomy, which collaborates on articles related to Astronomy on Wikipedia.AstronomyWikipedia:WikiProject AstronomyTemplate:WikiProject AstronomyAstronomy articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Moon task force (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by Solar System task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Untitled[edit]

This article states that the formation event coincides with the Taurids meteor shower; stating that it occurs late June, but it's actually late October..? Edit: Part of the shower does take place in June, known as the "Beta Taurids" so I will update as this.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.120.105.3 (talk) 10:27, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

would that be 25th of June in the New Style calendar? User:y23

This is an interesting article(ette), but it doesn't explain the name. Was Giordano Bruno one of the monks, or someone else? Finlay McWalter 22:02, 28 Sep 2003 (UTC)

ah, User:Michael Hardy fix it - thanks! Finlay McWalter 08:08, 29 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Is there any evidence of the crater's age besides the observations of June 18, 1178? In other words, if we ignore that account is there any way to estimate when the impact occurred?

The spectacular meteor shower Paul Withers describes would have occurred regardless of whether anyone was looking at the moon when the meteor hit. Presumably, had this happened after humans started keeping records, this shower would have been recorded somewhere. The fact that it wasn't (or at least that we have found no such records) suggests that the crater is at least 4,000 years old. Is such an age consistent with observations?

Sincell (2001) suggests any time within the last 350 million years, and that samples are needed to get a better fix. — RJH (talk) 17:47, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The 1178 AD impact theory[edit]

Several things about this theory and counter-argument stand out to me. First, if the impact kicks up 10 million tons of debris, that doesn't mean that all 10 million tons will impact Earth. Meteors and debris are not that accurate. Second, if nevertheless some of this debris causes a meteor shower lasing a week, that doesn't necessarily mean a civilization will witness it. Lunar and Martian meteors have been found in Antarctica several times, so the fact is that polar impacts from debris are possible.

Third, my real question is in Gervase's account here: "This phenomenon was repeated a dozen times or more". If we take that to mean many impacts in a row (possibly from a comet that broke up past its Roche limit like at Jupiter in 1994), where is the string of craters near Bruno crater? If it happened quickly enough, then all the fragments would've impacted the same point, making the crater deeper and deeper. Perhaps the crater is misleadingly large because of this, causing normal calculations to result in excessive debris.

Fourth, is there vibrational data taken from the corner reflectors on the Moon that supported an impact right around 1200 AD?

DrZygote214 (talk) 21:47, 4 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

++parent[edit]

Agree with he parent here. Most of this article's tone seems to debunk the eyewitness account, citing a single study from 2001 by a Univ. of Arizona grad student. While it's possible the eyewitnesses might have been in just the right place at the right time, that hypothesis doesn't explain a dozen of these events. Perhaps the Formation section of the article could be rephrased to state the various theories in a more factual way.

Dmccarty2 (talk) 21:06, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]