Twisted Sister: Twin Planets Earth and Venus Were "Separated at Birth"

But they're definitely not identical; Venus today might portend an Earth ravaged by climate change















Share on Tumblr

"These differences are not just [due] to Venus being closer to the sun," Oxford's Taylor says. "We now know that the lack of a protective magnetic field and the differing planetary rotation rates also play a role in ensuring that many of the atmospheric processes we observe on Earth occur at a much faster rate on Venus. Our new data make it possible to construct a scenario in which Venus started out like the earth [did]—possibly including a habitable environment, billions of years ago—and then evolved to the state we see now."

Jumbotron image: ESA/VIRTIS-VenusX/INAF-IASF/Obs. de Paris-LESIA (P. Drossart, Obs. de Paris-LESIA)



6 Comments

Add Comment
View
  1. 1. prenderman 04:03 PM 11/30/07

    The subheadline is a joke, right?

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  2. 2. wonderwhy 12:24 AM 12/9/07

    No magnetic field, but a twin Earth? Core? Land mass? How do you justify the headline?

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  3. 3. Guardian54 12:24 AM 12/10/07

    1. Venus and Earth form.
    2. Venus hit by giant rock, slowing spin.
    3. Venus unable to cool down with slow spin, lose water
    4. core stops dynamo work, magnetism disappears
    5. Current day

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  4. 4. Guardian54 12:25 AM 12/10/07

    Oh, and also, a kid abused almost to death since birth isn't gonna be the same as an identical twin treated well with a good education

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  5. 5. jtdwyer in reply to David Cota 04:09 AM 12/18/10

    Good comment! Once again I agree, but with a few suggestions:
    3 - Despite the obvious accumulated evidence of Lunar impacts, I doubt that the moon's gravitational field (without a heavy core) is strong enough to attract most impact events headed towards the Earth. I think that a small body object directed to the Earth-moon systems at high relative velocity would most likely hit the larger Earth with its much greater gravitational effect. Keep in mind that, relative to any approaching object, the moon is nearest to the object less than half of the time and, as mentioned, the much more massive iron core Earth's gravitational effect is much greater.

    In addition, the Solar wind's affect on Venus' atmosphere, observed to be stripping away both its hydrogen and oxygen, currently observed to produce a comet-like coma extending to the Earth's orbit, may have contributed to Earth a significant amount of the elemental components of our water. While Venus may have rarely been aligned with the Sun and Earth such that its coma could have delivered oxygen and hydrogen into the Earth's magnetosphere, those elements would be much more massive and less energetic than the radical particles contained within the Solar wind. This is just an interesting possibility I don't think has been considered...

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  6. 6. Percival 05:48 PM 4/18/13

    I'd still like to now why Venus has such high winds. One would think that friction with the surface would damp them down after a few million years. What keeps them going?

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
Leave this field empty

Add a Comment

You must sign in or register as a ScientificAmerican.com member to submit a comment.
Click one of the buttons below to register using an existing Social Account.

More from Scientific American

See what we're tweeting about

Scientific American Editors

More »

Free Newsletters


Get the best from Scientific American in your inbox

Solve Innovation Challenges

Powered By: Innocentive

  SA Digital

Latest from SA Blog Network

  SA Digital

Science Jobs of the Week

Email this Article

Twisted Sister: Twin Planets Earth and Venus Were "Separated at Birth"

X
Scientific American Magazine

Subscribe Today

Save 66% off the cover price and get a free gift!

Learn More >>

X

Please Log In

Forgot: Password

X

Account Linking

Welcome, . Do you have an existing ScientificAmerican.com account?

Yes, please link my existing account with for quick, secure access.



Forgot Password?

No, I would like to create a new account with my profile information.

Create Account
X

Report Abuse

Are you sure?

X

Institutional Access

It has been identified that the institution you are trying to access this article from has institutional site license access to Scientific American on nature.com. To access this article in its entirety through site license access, click below.

Site license access
X

Error

X

Share this Article

X