There should be some new amateur color images of our super-moon getting posted and otherwise picked up by the Google image archive. Don't bother to share any of this with our colorblind NASA, DARPA, ASU and JPL, because any such color enhanced images are supposed to be fakes and otherwise entirely PhotoShop created by the most untrustworthy individuals that artificially colored it to suit.
http://www.deepskycolors.com/archive...ull-color.html
http://www.coronaborealis.org/images...moon_color.png

In addition to all the usual heavier elements as typically hard as well as mostly of paramagnetic stuff that our moon has to offer, it seems our moon offers a treasure trove of a few diamagnetic elements plus numerous low density elements that can be easily mined and exploited (some of which like 3He/He3 are extremely valuable), or simply left for the natural process to sublime, vent and forever lose track of, especially the case when there is so little if any option of these lofty elements within such a hard and crystal dry environment of seldom if ever binding with most other elements.

Sodium = 3.818e-26 kg per Na atom

Moon 9r = 1564200000 cm = 1.6e28 cm3

1.6e28 * 16 = 2.56e29 atoms of sodium surrounding our moon.

2.56e29 * 3.818e-26 = 9.77e3 kg of sodium surrounding our moon

-

Solar wind blown tail = 900,000 km (9e10 cm) averaging 4r and 12/cm3

4r = 695200000 cm = 1.52e18 cm2

1.52e18 x 9e10 = 1.37e29 cm3

1.37e29 x 12 = 16.44e29 Na

16.44e29 x 3.818e-26 = 63e3 kg or 63 tonnes of sodium contained within that solar wind blown tail of sodium.

According to the best available science, there's a sodium/Na cloud worth 9 tonnes as surrounding our moon out to 9r and perhaps at least another 63 tonnes as trailing away from our moon, of sodium that has to be continually replenished.

The extremely hot daytime and hard vacuum of that lunar surface and of its mostly physically dark and paramagnetic basalt bedrock/crust, gives off its sodium element quite easily. No doubt that deep within the lunar crust, its sodium is still getting melted/boiled (as well as via the surface heat of day) and those vapors are made available as to eventually surface and escape into the surrounding hard vacuum of space.

A 9r cloud of sodium surrounds our moon, and if it were averaging perhaps as much as 32/cm3, whereas that greater cloud density represents perhaps 18 tonnes, plus it maintains yet another 900,000 km tapered tail of solar wind blown sodium averaging perhaps as great as 16/cm3 (84 tonnes). Anyone want to offer a swag as to how many million tonnes of sodium loss is required per billion years, or even per million years?

If our moon stopped subliming and venting its sodium(Na); how many months or years would it take the solar wind to blow those lofty 9 tonne remainders of Na away?

Of course, in addition to the ongoing loss of Na, there's also the ongoing loss of its hydrogen, helium and a few other lofty elements of insufficient atomic mass that are not exactly going to be all that insignificant when quantified over any long period of time. Assuming that moon is venting and/or subliming less than ever, whereas each million prior years is likely offering 1% greater loss. In other words, for the last couple billion years that moon of ours has to have lost a great deal of its original mass despite all of the asteroids, meteors and those physical particles of sufficient density encountering our moon and/or as having been electrostatically attracted to our highly charged moon that gives off gamma.

Even using a highly conservative outgassing estimate of only a thousand tonnes per month or 12,000 tonnes per year, is still twelve thousand billion tonnes(12e15 kg) loss per GY, and if the ongoing influx of sufficiently heavy elements sticking with that moon amounted to 10,000 tonnes/year would not cover the losses and otherwise would only suggest as to yet another great deal of surface dust that our NASA/Apollo era found no such objective evidence of, because all of their Apollo landing sites encountered hardly any surface depth of loose physical deposits to contend with, much less of any mineral/element colors or even of any UV reactive element colors/hues other than inert monochromatic stuff that reflected so much better than any remote science from satellites or from terrestrial based observations could have predicted, and even their Kodak film performed without any hit of having been exposed to such an unprotected extreme environment, yet their efforts to record anything other than Earth above the naked and physically dark surface of that moon proved that the photographic and optical laws of physics were acting quite different while on the moon, and thereby needed corrective photographic doctoring (aka PhotoShop) efforts just to give us a look-see of our planet as photographed from the monochromatic surface of that moon via an unfiltered optical and standard kodak film technology, as though our moon still offered some weird transparent kind of protective and/or UV blocking atmosphere.

"Many elements that are rare on Earth can be found aplenty on the moon. Satellite imaging has shown that the top 10 centimetres of regolith (moon soil) at the south pole of the moon appears to hold about 100 times the concentration of gold of the richest mines in the world, according to a recent paper coauthored by Dale Boucher, the CEO of Deltion Innovations, based in Sudbury, Ont."
"There is a business case now for mining (on the moon) as an economic activity," said Boucher.

I hate having to say that I told you so, especially for the thousandth time, suggesting that we need to be exploiting our moon. At least within the moon it is not only habitat failsafe and temperate cozy to our likings, but it's likely a host to mineral brines, and thereby no shortage of water.