Author Topic: Why have they never returned to the moon?  (Read 8713 times)

Offline Inanimate Carbon Rod

  • Mars
  • ***
  • Posts: 271
    • evilscience
Why have they never returned to the moon?
« on: October 11, 2012, 07:40:08 PM »


Apparently, the answer of lack of political will and funding aren't really the correct answer.

The correct answer is, as we all know:


I fear for the future of humanity, I really do.
Formerly Supermeerkat. Like you care.

Offline Kiwi

  • Mars
  • ***
  • Posts: 448
Re: Why have they never returned to the moon?
« Reply #1 on: October 12, 2012, 08:45:16 AM »
I fear for the future of humanity, I really do.

Oh Gawd, what a load of nonsense!  Me too.  I sat through the whole 0:10:34 of emotive drivel and felt sorry for any poor sods who might believe it.

For a start, the writer seems to believe that UFO means alien spacecraft and really pushes that idea. Since I started watching the sky when Halley's comet was last here in 1986 I have seen a few UFOs, but they all eventually became IFOs and none of them were alien spacecraft.

I'd love to see the actual Nasa report mentioned, and maybe we could find it.

It doesn't surprise me that oddball things have been "seen on the moon" when in fact they could be closer to earth or even in our atmosphere.  This "UFO" might look to some people as if it's orbiting the moon: http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap090206.html

Also, the moon could be partly in shadow and a piece of sunlit space rock transits it, close to earth, so it looks as if there's a "luminous orb" just above the moon.  Iron meteors crashing onto the moon also might produce light shows from sparks or sunlit dust, and if so, meteor showers could produce many light shows.

It's no secret that the Apollo 11 crew tried, without success, to view some transient lunar phenomena (TLPs) above Aristarchus, but they weren't looking for UFOs or alien spacecraft.

To indicate the "reliability" of the programme, at 0:03:30 we are told:
"One of the UFO hotspots on the lunar surface is the Plato crater, where literally dozens of luminous orbs have been reported by astronomers."

And to illustrate Plato, they take a full-moon view of the Tyco area and put a ring around a dark spot I can't identify, but may be near the crater Lexell A, about 37 degrees south and 1 degree west. 
Screenshot.

The trouble is, Plato is a much bigger walled plain 101 km diameter with a dark floor, and can be easily seen in binoculars. It is at 51.6 degrees north and 9.3 degrees west, even further north than Lexell A is south.

Oh, my!  One near the top of the moon's disc and the other near the bottom, as viewed from earth.

Later on, they tell us about mysterious tracks in the lunar dust, and show us Rima Hyginus, a 220 km long shallow valley, partially formed by a chain of craters, with a larger crater near its centre, called Hyginus, which is 10.6 km wide and 770 meters deep.

Alien tractor tracks, indeed. :D


« Last Edit: October 12, 2012, 10:48:00 AM by Kiwi »
Don't criticize what you can't understand. — Bob Dylan, “The Times They Are A-Changin'” (1963)
Some people think they are thinking when they are really rearranging their prejudices and superstitions. — Edward R. Murrow (1908–65)

Offline Count Zero

  • Mars
  • ***
  • Posts: 366
  • Pad 39A July 14,1969
Re: Why have they never returned to the moon?
« Reply #2 on: October 12, 2012, 04:32:25 PM »
Ow, my brain!
"What makes one step a giant leap is all the steps before."

Offline Echnaton

  • Saturn
  • ****
  • Posts: 1490
Re: Why have they never returned to the moon?
« Reply #3 on: October 12, 2012, 08:30:42 PM »
I was just about to play the clip and the stereo hooked up to my computer started clicking. It was the same sound it makes when turning on.  Probably a failed capacitor.  It is now completely silent, won't even play the radio.  Guess I'm off the Best Buy this weekend so I'll have a stereo that is under warranty before I try again.
The sun shone, having no alternative, on the nothing new. —Samuel Beckett

Offline ka9q

  • Neptune
  • ****
  • Posts: 3013
Re: Why have they never returned to the moon?
« Reply #4 on: October 12, 2012, 08:52:39 PM »
I think Apollo deniers and UFO believers (especially those who claim we got all our higher technology from UFO aliens) have something in common: an unwillingness to believe in the resourcefulness of the human species. They see technologies and accomplishments they can't begin to understand, for whatever reason, and rather than concede that other humans are a lot more talented, educated and motivated than they are, they simply deny that whatever it is could have been done by humans. Either it wasn't done at all (e.g., Apollo was faked) or, for technology they can't deny, we got it all from aliens.

Offline BILLR

  • Mercury
  • *
  • Posts: 19
Re: Why have they never returned to the moon?
« Reply #5 on: October 13, 2012, 02:41:46 AM »
We agree! Case in point, we were force fed this dribble about the pyramids. Produced by forced labour and slaves. Turns out they constructed by well trained and educated egyptians.(Granted.....such a project must have involved alot of abusive behavior......just like today.)

Offline Kiwi

  • Mars
  • ***
  • Posts: 448
Re: Why have they never returned to the moon?
« Reply #6 on: October 14, 2012, 06:31:49 AM »
It's no secret that the Apollo 11 crew tried, without success, to view some transient lunar phenomena (TLPs) above Aristarchus, but they weren't looking for UFOs or alien spacecraft.

Oops, I made a mistake by misinterpreting what a 1970 book says about the search for TLPs.  One of the original transcripts states that they did indeed see them.

To show that we knew about the TLP search in 1970, here are the details from the book:
First on the Moon - A Voyage with Neil Armstrong, Michael Collins, Edwin E.  Aldrin Jr, written with Gene Farmer and Dora Jane Hamblin, epilogue by Arthur C.  Clark.  Michael Joseph Ltd, London (1970), pages 196-197.
Quote
196>
<GET 76:57:07>
Houston (McCandless): Roger. And we've got an observation you can make if you have some time up there. There have been some lunar transient events reported in the vicinity of [the crater] Aristarchus.

Aldrin: Roger. We just went into spacecraft darkness. Until then – why, we couldn't see a thing down below us, but now with earthshine the visibility is – oh, pretty fair. I'm looking back behind me now.  I can see the corona from where the sun has just set, and we'll get out the map and see what we can find out around Aristarchus.

Houston (McCandless): Okay, Aristarchus is angle Echo 9 on your ATO chart. It's about 394 miles north of track, however, at your present altitude, which is about 167 nautical miles. It ought to be over – that is, within view of your horizon, 23 degrees north, 47 west, and take a look and see if you see anything worth noting up there. Over.

Aldrin: Houston, eleven. It might help us a little bit if you could give us a time of crossing of 45 west... and then we'll know when to start searching for Aristarchus.

Houston (McCandless): Roger, you'll be crossing 45 west at 77:04:10 or about forty seconds from now. Over. Thirty seconds from now.

Aldrin: Houston, when a star sets up here there's just no doubt about it. One instant it's there and the next instant it's just completely gone.

Houston (McCandless): Roger, we copy.

Aldrin: Seems to me since we know orbits so precisely and know where the stars are so precisely and the time setting of a star or a planet to a very fine degree – that this might be a pretty good means of measuring the altitude of the horizon.

Houston (McCandless): Roger.

Armstrong: Hey, Houston. I'm looking north up toward Aristarchus now, and I can't really tell at that distance whether I really am looking at Aristarchus, but there's an area there that is considerably more illuminated than the surrounding area. It just has – seems to have a slight amount of fluorescence to it.

Houston (McCandless): Roger, eleven. We copy.

Aldrin: Looking out the same area now... well, at least there is one
<196

197>
wall of the crater that seems to be more illuminated than the others... I am not sure that I am really identifying any phosphorescence, but that definitely is lighter than anything else in the neighborhood.

Houston (McCandless): Can you discern any difference in color of the illumination and is that an inner or an outer wall from the crater? Over.

Aldrin: I judge an inner wall in the crater.

Collins: No, there doesn't appear to be any color involved in it, Bruce.

And here is a composite I assembled from three of the original transcripts of the transmissions:
Quote
76:57:07   Capcom: Roger. And we've got an observation you can make if you have some time up there. There's been some lunar transient events reported in the vicinity of Aristarchus. Over.
76:57:28   Aldrin: Roger. We just went into spacecraft darkness. Until then, why, we couldn't see a thing down below us. But now, with earthshine, the visibility is pretty fair. Looking back behind me, now, I can see the corona from where the Sun has just set. And we'll get out the map and see what we can find around Aristarchus
76:57:54   Armstrong: We're coming upon Aristarchus right now - -
76:57:55   Capcom: - - Okay. Aristarchus is at angle Echo 9 on your ATO chart. It's about 394 miles north of track. However, at your present altitude, which is about 167 nautical miles, it ought to be over - that is within view of your horizon: 23 degrees north, 47 west. Take a look and see if you see anything worth noting up there. Over.
76:58:34   Armstrong: Both looking.
76:58:36   Capcom: Roger. Out.
76:58:xx   PAO: That was Buzz Aldrin discussing the earth shine.
77:03:01   Aldrin: Houston, 11. It might help us a little bit if you could give us a time of crossing of 45 west.
77:03:09   Capcom: Say again, please, 11.
77:03:23   Aldrin: You might give us a time of crossing of 45 west, and then we'll know when to start searching for Aristarchus.
77:03:32   Capcom: Roger. You'll be crossing 45 west at 77:04:10 or about 40 seconds from now. Over. Thirty seconds from now.
77:03:45   Aldrin: Okay.
77:04:50   Capcom: Apollo 11, when we lose the S-Band, we'd like to get Omni Charlie from you. And update my last, that 77:04 was the time when Aristarchus should become visible over your horizon. 77:12 is point of closest approach south of it. Over.
77:05:14   Aldrin: Okay. That sounds better because we just went by Copernicus a little bit ago.
77:05:18   Capcom: Roger. We show you at about 27 degrees longitude right now.
77:05:25   Aldrin: Righto.
77:07:07   Aldrin: Houston, when a star sets up here, there's no doubt about it. One instant it's there, and the next instant it's just completely gone.
77:07:16   Capcom: Roger. We copy.
77:09:21   Capcom: Apollo 11, this is Houston. We request you use Omni Charlie at this time. Over.
77:09:29   Aldrin: Okay. Going to Omni Charlie.
77:09:32   Capcom: Roger. Out.
77:11:57   Aldrin: Houston, Apollo 11.
77:12:01   Capcom: Apollo 11, this is Houston. Go ahead.
77:12:06   Aldrin: Roger. Seems to me since we know orbits so precisely, and know where the stars are so precisely, and the time of setting of a star or a planet to so very fine a degree, that this might be a pretty good means of measuring the altitude of the horizon ...
77:12:32   Capcom: Roger.
77:12:51   Collins: Hey, Houston. I'm looking north up toward Aristarchus now, and I can't really tell at that distance whether I am really looking at Aristarchus, but there's an area that is considerably more illuminated than the surrounding area. It just has - seems to have a slight amount of fluorescence to it. A crater can be seen, and the area around the crater is quite bright.

77:13:--   ** Sighting of an illumination in the Aristarchus region. First time a lunar transient event sighted by an observer in space.

77:13:30   Capcom: Roger, 11. We copy.
77:14:23   Aldrin: Houston, Apollo 11. Looking up at the same area now and it does seem to be reflecting some of the earthshine. I'm not sure whether it was worked out to be about zero phase to - Well, at least there is one wall of the crater that seems to be more illuminated than the others, and that one - if we are lining up with the Earth correctly, does seem to put it about at zero phase. That area is definitely lighter than anything else that I could see out this window. I am not sure that I am really identifying any phosphorescence, but that definitely is lighter than anything else in the neighborhood.
77:15:15   Capcom: 11, this is Houston. Can you discern any difference in color of the illumination, and is that an inner or an outer wall from the crater? Over.
77:15:34   Collins: Roger. That's an inner wall of the crater.
77:15:43   Collins: No, there doesn't appear to be any color involved in it, Bruce.
77:15:47   Capcom: Roger. You said inner wall. Would that be the inner edge of the northern surface?
77:16:00   Collins: I guess it would be the inner edge of the west-northwest part, the part that would be more nearly normal if you were looking at it from the Earth.
77:16:20   Capcom: 11, Houston. Have you used the monocular on this? Over.
77:16:28   Aldrin: Stand by one.
77:17:59   Aldrin: Roger. Like you to know this quest for science has caused me to lose my E-memory program, it's in here somewhere, but I can't find it.
77:18:08   Capcom: 11, this is Houston. We're - we're hearing only a partial Comm. Say again please.
77:18:20   Armstrong: I think ...
77:18:41   Armstrong: Houston, we will give it a try if we have the opportunity on next - when we are not in the middle of lunch, and trying to find the monocular.
77:18:51   Capcom: Roger. Copied you that time. Expect in the next REV you will probably be getting ready for LOI-2.
77:19:09   Capcom: So, let's wind this up, and since we've got some other things to talk to you about in a few minutes. Over.
77:19:19   Aldrin: Okay.

Note: Some of these early transcripts had errors in the identification of speakers (Armstrong/Collins above) and exactly what was said, so should not be relied on completely.

Ouch -- I can picture the UFO and conspiracy folk saying, "See, they did see something alien up there!"

Well, indeed they did: The Moon.

« Last Edit: October 14, 2012, 06:47:50 AM by Kiwi »
Don't criticize what you can't understand. — Bob Dylan, “The Times They Are A-Changin'” (1963)
Some people think they are thinking when they are really rearranging their prejudices and superstitions. — Edward R. Murrow (1908–65)

Offline smartcooky

  • Uranus
  • ****
  • Posts: 1868
Re: Why have they never returned to the moon?
« Reply #7 on: October 14, 2012, 02:31:40 PM »
I thought TLP of various kinds has been reported for hundreds of years, going right back to the Canterbury Monks in 1178 AD?
► What you can assert without evidence, I can dismiss without evidence
► When you argue with idiots you risk being dragged down to their level and beaten with experience.
► Conspiracism is a shortcut to the illusion of erudition

Offline Inanimate Carbon Rod

  • Mars
  • ***
  • Posts: 271
    • evilscience
Re: Why have they never returned to the moon?
« Reply #8 on: October 14, 2012, 06:07:29 PM »
I thought TLP of various kinds has been reported for hundreds of years, going right back to the Canterbury Monks in 1178 AD?

That I didn't know. Do you have any links?
Formerly Supermeerkat. Like you care.

Offline Echnaton

  • Saturn
  • ****
  • Posts: 1490
The sun shone, having no alternative, on the nothing new. —Samuel Beckett

Offline smartcooky

  • Uranus
  • ****
  • Posts: 1868
Re: Why have they never returned to the moon?
« Reply #10 on: October 14, 2012, 08:05:53 PM »
Originally, the 1178 Canterbury Monks story was theorised as them having observed the formation of the crater Giordano Bruno, but recent research has show that crater to be much older than 900 or so years.

Current thinking is that what the monks saw was a bolide coming straight at them that just happened to have been lined up with the moon; a case of right place at the right time. That so many of them saw it supports the view that something amazing did happen, but the fact that they were the only ones who saw it probably discounts any idea that it actually happened on the moon; i.e. to reports from other cultures that kept good records and would have been able to see it clearly.

 
► What you can assert without evidence, I can dismiss without evidence
► When you argue with idiots you risk being dragged down to their level and beaten with experience.
► Conspiracism is a shortcut to the illusion of erudition

Offline smartcooky

  • Uranus
  • ****
  • Posts: 1868
Re: Why have they never returned to the moon?
« Reply #11 on: October 15, 2012, 12:35:34 AM »
and now this...

Quote
Researchers analysed samples of soil collected from the Moon by the Apollo missions and found it contained water in the form of compounds called hydroxyls.

The water was most likely formed on the surface of the Moon by the constant stream of charged particles ejected from the Sun known as "solar wind", the scientists said.

The traditional view that the Moon was entirely dry has been proven incorrect in recent years, with growing evidence that icy drops of water can be found on its surface.

In 2009, a Nasa satellite slammed into a crater and threw up a plume which scientists found contained an unexpectedly high amount of ice, and small amounts of water have also been found in powder and rock in the Moon's outer layer.

But although the discoveries have proven the existence of water, the problem which has continued to baffle scientists is where it came from.

Now a new paper by researchers from the University of Tennessee suggests the water was produced on the Moon's surface rather than being delivered there by a comet or other piece of space debris.

Solar wind is a flow of particles continually flowing away from the Sun. The Earth's magnetic field deflects them away from our planet, but the Moon has no such protection.

Researchers analysed the soil samples and found that they had similar chemical properties to charged hydrogen particles found in the solar wind.

The findings suggest the hydrogen was brought to the surface of the Moon in the solar wind, and then combined with oxygen to form hydroxyls, compounds similar to water which contain one hydrogen and one oxygen atom. These were then stored in the soil.

Youxue Zhang, one of the researchers, said: "Our work shows that the 'water' component, the hydroxyl, is widespread in lunar materials, although not in the form of ice or liquid water that can easily be used in a future manned lunar base."

Lead author Yang Liu added: "This also means that water likely exists on Mercury and on asteroids such as Vesta or Eros further within our solar system. These planetary bodies have very different environments, but all have the potential to produce water."

In an accompanying comment article in the Nature Geoscience Journal Dr Marc Chaussidon of the Université de Lorraine in France wrote that the findings were "opening the door to another source of water for inner Solar System bodies".

Source: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/9607901/Water-particles-found-on-surface-of-the-moon-scientists-say.html

Many years ago, one of the proposed causes of TLP was the impact of small meteorites on the surface. However, that was essentially ruled out because the dust thrown up by impacts would fall back to the surface immediately, and would make such an impact a short-lived phenomena, while TLP tended to last minutes rather than seconds.

Now, that theory might have to be revisited if such impacts would cause frozen water to sublimate into gas.
► What you can assert without evidence, I can dismiss without evidence
► When you argue with idiots you risk being dragged down to their level and beaten with experience.
► Conspiracism is a shortcut to the illusion of erudition

Offline ka9q

  • Neptune
  • ****
  • Posts: 3013
Re: Why have they never returned to the moon?
« Reply #12 on: October 15, 2012, 01:20:47 AM »
I remember hearing about transient lunar phenomenon during Apollo's time. The thinking was that they were volcanic in origin. Given what we now know about the moon (there hasn't been any volcanism for billions of years) what was the conclusion? Were the TLP real or imaginary, like Lowell's canals?

The one kind of transient phenomenon that makes sense is an impact, but I'd expect those to occur at random over the whole surface, not repeatedly in one place like Aristarchus.

Offline smartcooky

  • Uranus
  • ****
  • Posts: 1868
Re: Why have they never returned to the moon?
« Reply #13 on: October 15, 2012, 01:32:38 AM »
Another theory was "last gasp" outgassing..

http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009ApJ...707.1506C

► What you can assert without evidence, I can dismiss without evidence
► When you argue with idiots you risk being dragged down to their level and beaten with experience.
► Conspiracism is a shortcut to the illusion of erudition

Offline smartcooky

  • Uranus
  • ****
  • Posts: 1868
Re: Why have they never returned to the moon?
« Reply #14 on: October 15, 2012, 01:56:20 AM »
Another theory was proposed in the mid 1990s

The possibility exists of areas on the moon (crater walls rocks etc) whose position and angles are such that they remain in shadow for years at a time, and that they harbour "frosts"; accumulation of ices. These areas are not restricted to the poles. Images from the LRO and Kaguya have been combined to show areas of permanent shadow are at latitudes as low 58°

http://www.nature.com/news/ice-may-lurk-in-shadows-beyond-moon-s-poles-1.11501

There is also a real possibility that there is sub-surface ice on the moon, so a meteoric impact could be a candidate cause for TLP


All in all, IMO, a scientific explanation (or rather, several scientific explanations) for TLP is very much "back on the table".
► What you can assert without evidence, I can dismiss without evidence
► When you argue with idiots you risk being dragged down to their level and beaten with experience.
► Conspiracism is a shortcut to the illusion of erudition