![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I was reading in the bathroom when I ran across an item written by
Phil on Sun, 28 Sep 2003 13:39:56 GMT, which said: Hello Jonathan .... Of course! It was also suggested to post an inquiry in this newgroup. You asked this question in alt.astronomy and I know you read the replies. Didn't you trust them? It does seem a more appropriate group. Besides, it's really none of our business if you didn't trust the answers from there. IIRC, there really wasn't very much about the earth that was distinguishable from the moon. I'm right now looking at a 16 x 20 laserprint of "Earthrise," taken from lunar orbit. The earth's image is ~5" diameter, solid blue, and heavily obscured by cloud patterns; perhaps 1/4 to 1/3 of the planet's "surface" is visible. In the upper right quadrant is a large patch of brown, the only apparent land. The shoreline contours and apparent isolation make it seem like it could be Australia. If it is, though, then either Africa or Antarctica, perhaps both, have disappeared. OTOH, since there's no other land visible, I'm hard-pressed to think it could be anything else but Australia. ------------- Beady's 11th Law of Social Harmonics: "Your spouse is precisely the kind of person someone like you would choose to marry." |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In message , John
Beaderstadt writes I was reading in the bathroom when I ran across an item written by Phil on Sun, 28 Sep 2003 13:39:56 GMT, which said: Hello Jonathan .... Of course! It was also suggested to post an inquiry in this newgroup. You asked this question in alt.astronomy and I know you read the replies. Didn't you trust them? It does seem a more appropriate group. Besides, it's really none of our business if you didn't trust the answers from there. IIRC, there really wasn't very much about the earth that was distinguishable from the moon. I think I was a bit tetchy this morning. Apologies to Phil and others. But I'm not convinced you can see much of the continents from the Moon (let alone the Great Wall of China :-) There's just too much cloud over most of the Earth. There may well be descriptions in the Apollo Lunar Surface Journals and elsewhere to prove me wrong, though. -- "Forty millions of miles it was from us, more than forty millions of miles of void" Remove spam and invalid from address to reply. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
From John Beaderstadt:
Phil on Sun, 28 Sep 2003 13:39:56 GMT, which said: Hello Jonathan .... Of course! It was also suggested to post an inquiry in this newgroup. You asked this question in alt.astronomy and I know you read the replies. Didn't you trust them? It does seem a more appropriate group. Besides, it's really none of our business if you didn't trust the answers from there. IIRC, there really wasn't very much about the earth that was distinguishable from the moon. Q: "When the first moon landing accurred in July, 1969, and the astronauts looked back towards Earth, what continents did they see?" An interesting point made in the astronomy forum is how high in the lunar "sky" the Earth was. For an astronaut standing at the North or South Pole of the Moon (+/-90degLat) the Earth is found right on the horizon. But standing at the lunar equator at 0-Lat/0-Long, the Earth is found straight overhead. With Tranquility Base at 1degN/23degE, Neil and Buzz had to get their eyeballs angled ~66deg upward to see anything of the Big Blue Marble. The point that might get missed by the astronomy forum is how difficult it can be to look up that high when helmeted in a restrictive spacesuit. Also, as stated by someone in that forum: "In the lunar sky Earth was at an altitude of about 60 degrees due west at the instant Armstrong set foot on the Moon." That's ~10% worth of "fudge factor" (by the simple calculation I cranked out). Repost: You asked this question in alt.astronomy and I know you read the replies. Didn't you trust them? So Phil might be tempted to respond with that classic oxymoronic phrase popularized by Ronald Reagan: "Trust, but verify"! * As an aside, it would be great to take this ALSJ table of landing site coordinates: http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/alsjcoords.html ....and add a column to list how high the Earth was in the lunar sky. * And this thread is a great place to retell Gene Cernan's story about this photo from Apollo 17 capturing Jack Schmitt, the US flag, and the Earth high up in the lunar sky: http://science.ksc.nasa.gov/history/...ges/721200.GIF The way I remember Cernan relating the story, the Earth was too high up to capture it all while holding his camera in any normal way, so he held the camera between his knees and clicked this amazing shot. Cernan can be seen by looking closely at the reflection in Jack's visor. With a higher resolution scan of this photo we could zoom in for a better look. But the basic point is that it was a steep angle up, and 17 had the lowest angle of all six landing sites. ~ CT |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Successful European DELTA mission concludes with Soyuz landing | Jacques van Oene | Space Station | 0 | May 1st 04 12:25 PM |
Brad Guth is...... | Tarapia Tapioco | Space Station | 19 | February 18th 04 04:03 PM |
The New NASA Mission Has Been Grossly Mischaracterized. | Dan Hanson | Policy | 25 | January 26th 04 07:42 PM |
I'm Writing Fiction about the Moon: Some Basic Questions! | k2director | Policy | 45 | January 19th 04 04:33 AM |