Asteroid that formed moon's Imbrium Basin may have been protoplanet-sized

July 20, 2016, Brown University
Grooves and gashes associated with the Imbrium Basin on the moon have long been puzzling. New research shows how some of these features were formed and uses them to estimate the size of the Imbrium impactor. The study suggests it was big enough to be considered a protoplanet. Credit: NASA/Northeast Planetary Data Center/Brown University

Around 3.8 billion years ago, an asteroid more than 150 miles across, roughly equal to the length of New Jersey, slammed into the Moon and created the Imbrium Basin—the right eye of the fabled Man in the Moon. This new size estimate, published in the journal Nature, suggests an Imbrium impactor that was two times larger in diameter and 10 times more massive than previous estimates.

"We show that Imbrium was likely formed by an absolutely enormous object, large enough to be classified as a protoplanet," said Pete Schultz, professor of earth, environmental and planetary sciences at Brown University. "This is the first estimate for the Imbrium impactor's size that is based largely on the we see on the Moon."

Previous estimates, Schultz said, were based solely on computer models and yielded a size estimate of only about 50 miles in diameter.

These new findings help to explain some of the puzzling geological features that surround the Imbrium Basin. The work also suggests—based on the sizes of other impact basins in the Moon, Mars and Mercury—that the early solar system was likely well stocked with protoplanet-sized asteroids.

Imbrium sculpture

The Imbrium Basin—seen from Earth as a dark patch in the northwestern quadrant of the Moon's face—measures about 750 miles across. The basin is surrounded by grooves and gashes, large enough to be seen with even small telescopes from Earth, created by rocks blasted out of the crater when it was formed. These features, known as the Imbrium Sculpture, radiate out from the center of the basin like spokes on a wheel, but are concentrated on the basin's southeast side. That suggests that the impactor traveled from the northwest, impacting at an oblique angle rather than straight on.

But in addition to features radiating from the basin's center, there is a second set of grooves with a different alignment. These appear to come from a region to the northwest, along the trajectory from which the impactor came.

Drawing on impact experiments using the NASA Vertical Gun Range, researchers have been able to estimate the size of the asteroid that created the moon's Imbrium Basin. Images from laboratory impacts capture the crumbling impactor in flight following a high-speed impact into a cylinder using the Ames Vertical Gun Range. On the moon, bits of the crumbling impactor made grooves across the moon's surface. The trajectories of the grooves were used to estimate the size of the impactor. Credit: Schultz Lab/Brown University

"This second set of grooves was a real mystery," Schultz said. "No one was quite sure where they came from."

Through hypervelocity impact experiments performed using the Vertical Gun Range at the NASA Ames Research Center, Schultz was able to show that those grooves were likely formed by chunks of the impactor that sheared off on initial contact with the surface. The grooves created by those chunks enabled Schultz to estimate the size of the impactor.

Laboratory impacts

The Vertical Gun Range employs a 14-foot cannon that fires small projectiles at up to 16,000 miles per hour, while impact plates and high-speed cameras record the ballistic dynamics. During his experiments with low-angle impacts, Schultz noticed that impactors tend to start breaking apart when they first make contact with the surface. That point of initial contact is actually behind or "up-range" of the final crater, where the bulk of the impactor digs into the surface. The chunks that break off up-range of the final crater continue to travel at a high rate of speed, scouring and grooving the surface.

"The key point is that the grooves made by these chunks aren't radial to the crater," Schultz said. "They come from the region of first contact. We see the same thing in our experiments that we see on the Moon—grooves pointing up-range, rather than the crater."

After seeing these features in the lab, Schultz worked with David Crawford of the Sandia National Laboratories to generate computer models showing that the same kind of physics would also happen at the colossal scales of a lunar impact.

With an understanding of how those grooves were created, Schultz could use them to find the Imbrium impact point. And because the fragments would have broken off from the either side of the impactor, the groove trajectories could be used to estimate the impactor's size.

Comparison of scours produced by the impactor in experiments (above) and those produced in a computational model of a 100 km diameter asteroid (red pattern, below). Physical processes affecting the fate of the projectile observed in the laboratory experiments at high speeds also apply at much larger scale. Credit: Peter Schultz

Those calculations yielded an estimated diameter of 250 kilometers or 150 miles across, large enough for the object to be classified as a protoplanet.

"That's actually a low-end estimate," Schultz said. "It's possible that it could have been as large as 300 kilometers."

"Lost giants" and the Late Heavy Bombardment

Schultz and his colleagues used similar methods to estimate the sizes of impactors related to several other basins on the Moon created by oblique impacts. Those estimates—for the Moscoviense and Orientale basins on the Moon's far side—yielded impactor sizes of 100 and 110 kilometers across respectively, larger than some previous estimates.

Combining these new estimates with the fact that there are even larger impact basins on the Moon and other planets, Schultz concludes that protoplanet-sized asteroids may have been common in the early solar system.

"The large basins we see on the Moon and elsewhere are the record of lost giants," Schultz said.

The research has several other significant implications, he said. The surviving fragments from these impactors would have littered the ancient surface of the Moon, slowly becoming mixed with native soil and rock. That could help explain why samples returned from the Apollo missions had such a high meteoritic content. That is particularly true of Apollo 16, which landed downrange from the Imbrium impact.

Trajectories of debris ejected from the Imbrium impact basin on the Moon determined by the orientations of grooves and elongate secondary craters (along with locations of the Apollo landing sites). One set does not converge; rather, they form parallel trends that correspond to the fragments originating from different portions of the Imbrium asteroid, rather than ejecta from the Moon. Credit: Peter Schultz

Furthermore, Schultz's work suggests fragments from these giants could account for a many of the impacts that occurred during a period called the Late Heavy Bombardment, which occurred from about 3.8 billion years ago to around 4 billion years, when scientists think most of the craters we see on the Moon and Mercury were formed.

The impact models Schultz and Crawford developed suggest that thousands of the chunks that crumbled off of the Imbrium impactor and others would have broken and kept going, escaping the Moon's gravity and flying off into space. On subsequent orbits around the sun, those chunks would have crossed the Earth and Moon orbits again and again, creating a strong possibility of subsequent impacts. Some of those objects would have been a kilometer or two across, large enough to create 20-kilometer craters.

"These chips off the old blocks could have contributed significantly to the impact record we see on the Moon and other terrestrial planets," Schultz said.

Schultz also said he continues to be amazed by what we can learn just by looking up at the Moon.

"The Moon still holds clues that can affect our interpretation of the entire solar system," he said. "Its scarred face can tell us quite a lot about what was happening in our neighborhood 3.8 billion years ago."

Explore further: What smacks into Ceres stays on Ceres, research suggests

More information: Origin and implications of non-radial Imbrium Sculpture on the Moon, Nature,

Related Stories

Asteroid strikes cause the Moon's surface to smooth

July 18, 2012

The lunar surface is marred by impact craters, remnants of the collisions that have occurred over the past 4.5 billion years. The Orientale basin, the Moon's most recently formed sizeable crater, stands out from the rest. ...

How a giant impact formed asteroid Vesta's 'belt'

November 3, 2014

When NASA's Dawn spacecraft visited the asteroid Vesta in 2011, it showed that deep grooves that circle the asteroid's equator like a cosmic belt were probably caused by a massive impact on Vesta's south pole. Now, using ...

New research casts doubt on the late heavy bombardment

January 6, 2012

Was the early solar system bombarded with lots of big impacts? This is a question that has puzzled scientists for over 35 years. And it’s not just an academic one. We know from rocks on Earth that life began to evolve ...

Crashing comets may explain mysterious lunar swirls

June 1, 2015

Brown University researchers have produced new evidence that lunar swirls—wispy bright regions scattered on the moon's surface—were created by several comet collisions over the last 100 million years.

GRAIL mission puts a new face on the moon

November 7, 2013

( —Scientists using data from the lunar-orbiting twins of NASA's Gravity Recovery and Interior Laboratory (GRAIL) mission are gaining new insight into how the face of the moon received its rugged good looks. A ...

Recommended for you

Infant exoplanet weighed by Hipparcos and Gaia

August 21, 2018

The mass of a very young exoplanet has been revealed for the first time using data from ESA's star mapping spacecraft Gaia and its predecessor, the quarter-century retired Hipparcos satellite.

Ice confirmed at the Moon's poles

August 21, 2018

In the darkest and coldest parts of its polar regions, a team of scientists has directly observed definitive evidence of water ice on the Moon's surface. These ice deposits are patchily distributed and could possibly be ancient. ...


Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

3.5 / 5 (2) Jul 20, 2016
If that's the case how large were the objects that, one, created South Pole and Aiken Basins (yes, SP-Aitken is two separate basins) and two, created Procellarum?
2 / 5 (8) Jul 20, 2016
Another ad hoc patch to explain what would otherwise be obvious if plasma processes were considered.
3.8 / 5 (4) Jul 20, 2016
The work also suggests—based on the sizes of other impact basins in the Moon, Mars and Mercury—that the early solar system was likely well stocked with protoplanet-sized asteroids.

It could do that. or it could make the late bombardment problematic, since non-Moon impacts are dated from the Moon record, and that goes back to precisely the Apollo sample dating. Which record has been suggested been contaminated by the last impact of Imbrium, something that thee data now seem to test well. (A larger, glancing angle impactor now tied to "trajectories of debris ejected", see the last image.)

But I will need to read the paper.

@Shootist: The estimate of the single impactor South Pole-Aitken basin stays the same, but there are several impact models. [ https://en.wikipe...en_basin ] A perpendicular hypervelocity impactor would typically have 1/20th the radius of the crater, or 100 km.
3 / 5 (3) Jul 21, 2016
Exploring from afar. Had they gone with Project Orion in the early 1960's instead of Apollo, they'd have bases there already and could explore up close. Imagine being able to lift and transport enough material to build an entire base in one go? If they ever decide to do this with rickety old chemical rocket technology, it'll take HUNDREDS of missions to establish a base. Figure on $10 trillion and 50 years, at a minimum.
4.2 / 5 (5) Jul 21, 2016
@rrander. Orion was based on fission bombs for pulse engines. You would never get permission to start from ground.
4.2 / 5 (5) Jul 21, 2016
Another ad hoc patch to explain what would otherwise be obvious if plasma processes were considered.

Another unsupportable "cause it looks like" pseudo-scientific troll comment from the Acolyte of the Electric Universe. Hey Acolyte, are you aware that your hero claimed that the craters on the Moon were the result of bubbles in the magma? Of course, he ignored the moon completely when he described Venus exchanging atmosphere with the earth:

Philip Plait explains in BAD Astronomy (Wiley, 2002), this "means that Venus would have to be closer than 1,000 kilometers (600 miles) from the surface of the Earth" (p. 181). Such an encounter would have sterilized Earth's biosphere and flung the Moon into interplanetary space. Neither happened and, in fact, ancient lunar calendars and other records show that the Moon's orbit has not changed significantly in the past 5,800 years.

Of course, the Acolyte can explain this right?
3.7 / 5 (3) Jul 24, 2016
Once a person is invested in a delusion, it must be defended. This requires an approach quite the opposite of scientific methodology - to discover or create validation in every observation, or to re -interpret every experiment or reality to align with the delusion. It's not science, it's antiscience.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.