I know that’s a bit much to expect, but let’s be honest: it’s not the biggest question we have, at least not yet.
What we do know is that there are a lot of planets out there, including the Moon and planets orbiting around other stars.
So what’s the difference?
The difference is that in our solar system, there are planets, asteroids, comets and other objects that we’ve identified as rocky planets, such as Jupiter, Saturn and Uranus.
On Earth, those planets and other bodies are called rocky planets because they’re made of rock.
If we add the other objects we’ve named, like comets, planets and asteroids, the number rises to 4.
But the moon, we know, is made up of water ice.
And that’s because it is the only object in our Solar System that has water ice, according to NASA.
It’s been this way for billions of years.
The water in the Earth’s oceans is actually carbon dioxide, a molecule that forms when carbon dioxide is exposed to sunlight.
When the carbon dioxide in the oceans is heated, the water turns into carbonic acid, which turns into methane.
As we add water to the Earth, the carbonic acids break down, releasing methane and carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.
In fact, methane is the most abundant greenhouse gas on Earth, accounting for roughly half of all greenhouse gases.
Methane is also responsible for much of the warming that we see in our climate.
At the same time, the moon is made of water, so it has enough energy to absorb much of that warming.
Water is a good store of energy.
How much water is in the Moon?
As of now, NASA has not been able to answer this question definitively, but scientists have been guessing.
A new study by scientists at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center has concluded that there is enough water in Earth’s crust to last for billions and billions of decades.
Scientists say this is enough to make up for the fact that the Earth is mostly made of ice and that there isn’t enough of it to make any kind of difference to the climate of the Earth.
NASA has been working on this problem for more than 60 years.
In 2007, NASA published a study that determined that the crust of the moon’s surface could support an ocean for a billion years.
But it wasn’t until 2014 that scientists were able to measure that the water is not only sufficient to hold water for a trillion years, but it is also enough to store a lot more water than the previous estimates.
The results are published in the journal Science.
What can we learn from this?NASA has used the same method to determine how much water there is on the Moon.
In 2008, NASA’s John Grunsfeld and colleagues estimated that there was about one third of the water on the surface of the Moon, and they used the methods of gravitational modeling to calculate that the Moon was roughly 1.8 times more massive than Earth.
The new estimate of water on Earth is closer to half the size of the previous estimate.
So while we still don’t know how much of Earth’s surface is covered by water, scientists say we can expect to be able to get a more precise estimate of the amount of water there, based on new measurements.
What’s the significance of the finding?
The study has important implications for future exploration of the lunar surface.
Because it is much smaller than Earth, water on Moon is likely to be relatively stable.
Even though there are billions of tons of water in our oceans, water is a relatively small part of the overall mass of water.
It’s also important that scientists keep an eye on the moon because it has a large amount of surface that could potentially be used to help detect potential ice in the ocean.
The moon is also tidally locked, meaning it is constantly rotating around the Earth and the sun.
That means it remains a relatively cold object even after a lunar winter, and there are many possible ways that we could detect ice in an ice layer.
Why isn’t the moon full of water?NASA is also working on a mission called Deep Impact that would explore the surface with a robotic spacecraft.
However, there is a question about whether the spacecraft could safely land on the lunar poles.
If we could, would we want to do that?