Moon Not Made of Cheese, Physicist Explains

Theoretical physicist Sean Carroll at the ScienceWriters2011 conference in Flagstaff on October 17 explained why we need not sample the moon to know it's not made of cheese. Steve Mirsky reports

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

“How do you know the moon is not made of green cheese?”

Theoretical physicist Sean Carroll at the ScienceWriters2011 conference in Flagstaff on October 17th.

“Well, we know the mass of the moon, the density and so forth, but don’t think that you fully understand the properties of lunar green cheese, this is very dense cheese. How do you know it’s not made of green cheese?


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


“The answer is that it’s absurd to think the moon is made of green cheese.

“And the formalization of that absurdity is that we are allowed to use other things we know about the universe when judging the plausibility of a hypothesis…we have a theoretical understanding of how the solar system works and how planets are formed that precludes the possibility that the moon is made of green cheese….

“This is not a proof, there is no metaphysical proof, like you can proof a statement in logic or math that the moon is not made of green cheese. But science nevertheless passes judgments on claims based on how well they fit in with the rest of our theoretical understanding.”

—Steve Mirsky

[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe