Thread: Researchers find that Earth does not need a moon to maintain complex life

Moscow - A new study, using computational models, is suggesting our planet could still develop life if we did not have an accompanying satellite.


Researchers find that Earth does not need a moon to maintain complex life - by Andrew Moran


Which is good news in the search for life elsewhere as a (large) moon was always thought essential for higher forms of life to develop.

Which is good news in the search for life elsewhere as a (large) moon was always thought essential for higher forms of life to develop.

Do you have any references to back this up (people always thought moon was essential)?

As the article states, the study was done in Russia and NASA finds the idea intriguing.

If you look at Mars which doesn't really have a moon but just two tiny lumps of rock, it seems stable enough.

It is always dangerous to point to what happens in our locale and say that that is the role model for the rest of the universe.

Life,in my view,doesn't need much to sustain it.
The moon affects earth,as we know,but i cant see any rational explanation as to why life needs the effects of a moon to sustain life per say.meaning as in,the seasons,or gravitational effects..etc.Life adapted to its environment.Maybe life on other worlds can breathe methane..we just cant say..Basically im saying life can adapt to whatever its environment

Originally Posted by Cyberia

As the article states, the study was done in Russia and NASA finds the idea intriguing.

If you look at Mars which doesn't really have a moon but just two tiny lumps of rock, it seems stable enough.

It is always dangerous to point to what happens in our locale and say that that is the role model for the rest of the universe.

Hmm, if you follow the original links, the research was done by Jason Barnes at the University of Idaho which is located in Moscow, Idaho.

The Odds for Life on a Moonless Earth
Obliquity Variations of a Moonless Earth
Who Needs a Moon? - ScienceNOW