Another "Supermoon?"

One would think that full moon being a "Super" should denote something wondrous. Oh, it will be really Super tomorrow night(08.10.2014). But it really won't be that super. Any full moon that occurs during the top ten percent of perigee(closest to earth in this case). The gag is on the media. This full moon is barely outside the 90th percentile. Why label something when you do not possess enough knowledge to use the label?

Of course humans have to catalog everything. I will not be watching..although we are predicted to have a very good sky for viewing. Go and read the space.com article. It is good for elucidation and a few chuckles.

We will likely never see a real Supermoon--unless the earth-moon system destabilizes due to some cosmic impactor, or at least a close call--but the Supermoons I would find wondrous would be those early moon passes of, say, 4 billions years ago. The earth-moon system was at pretty roughly 0.5 its current mean distance.

Now we can get sort of sciencey. According to Newton's Law of Gravitation(inverse square of the distance between mass centers) the earth-moon system should be stable, but there is another factor in play. Tidal forces. Both of the terrestrial and oceanic types. This generates friction between the two masses. Why? Because the earth is not precisely elastic, and that transfers angular momentum from the earth to the moon, resulting in both the moon's recession over time and the slowing of its speed relative to the earth..which is slowing down as well. Those full moons would have been something to see.

The moon will be biggish, but let us not call it "Super" as it does not technically meet the criteria.

I should note here that the above explanation of the history of the earth-moon system is really lacking in detail. I think that anymore detail would result in seizures and irritable bowels.