Near Earth Objects - a resource for the 21st century

On Sep 19, 6:18 am, Eric Chomko wrote:
On Sep 17, 7:34 pm, BradGuth wrote:



On Sep 17, 11:58 am, Eric Chomko wrote:

On Sep 16, 2:42 pm, BradGuth wrote:

On Sep 16, 9:00 am, Eric Chomko wrote:

On Sep 15, 9:44 pm, BradGuth wrote:

On Sep 15, 1:35 pm, Eric Chomko wrote:

On Sep 14, 11:54 am, BradGuth wrote:

Why isn't our Selene/moon considered as a "Near Earth Object"?

Is there some other moon in ratio to it's planet that's nearer or more
substantial? (I don't think so)

Mostly because LD (lunar distance) is known and used as a measurement
for actual NEOs that do not have as stable orbits as does the moon.

So, you're saying that LD is reason enough to exclude or forever
banish our Selene/moon.

LD means Lunar Distance, which is a more convenient measurement to use
rather than AU for Astronomical Unit when deal with values closer to
250K miles vs. 93M miles. 1 LD roughly equals
0.0026881 AUs.

Fine and dandy, but so what, even if our moon were eventually
relocated as to halo station-keeping itself at Earth L-1, would your
world come to the end of the rope?

No.

Excellent, as we can at least agree that having our moon at Earth L1
is not imposing any kind of a terrestrial death sense, because we may
need to make that relocation happen in order to buy Earth a few more
thousands of years before our sun expands and overtakes our current
orbit.

Moving the moon is impractical and unnecessary.

Speaking for yourself?


Is there some other moon that's orbiting as nearby or as physically
robust in ratio to its planet? (by my reckoning, not by any long shot)

There are other natural objects that come between the earth and the
moon that we call NEOs. But they don;t have to be that close in order
to be classified as an NEO. Take a look at the JPL NEO web page for
more information.

I agree 100%, but why does that exclude or banish our Selene/moon from
being systematically pillaged and plundered for all it's worth, or
otherwise taboo/banish any notions of ever utilizing the Selene/moon
L1 for the greater good of humanity and the process of salvaging of
our frail environment?

I believe it will take Earth resources to make the moon valuable. You
have it backwards.

I don't think so. Our physically dark Salene/moon offers loads of
nifty stuff from raw thorium to He3, and it has essentially unlimited
renewable energy to boot. The moon's thick and robust crust even has
260 ppm more h2o than Mars has to offer,

The moon has more water than Mars? Well we never found any sort of
water on the moon but we have on Mars. So, I believe you are mistaken.

Moon = 260,000 ppb

Mars = zero ppb (according to the best science thus far)



and that's not including
whatever's sequestered within the relatively low density core of
Selene. The Selene/moon L1 by itself is worthy of yet another good
trillion bucks worth of profit per year. The moon is also offering a
good pincushion destination for terminating those other pesky NEOs
that could otherwise eventually impact Earth, and how much is that
worth?

The earth's atmosphere does more to deflect NEOs than does the light
colored moon.

Our physically dark as coal Selene/moon has received far more than our
fair share of impacts, and it would be relatively easy to divert
meteors and asteroids as to encountering our moon instead of Earth.

~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG

For the likes of our resident MI5/CIA spook/mole William Mook, I’d
like to further share that our Selene/moon is actually a pretty darn
good NEA to start off with, thereby no need of going after anything
else, or otherwise having to wait around until something interesting
comes our way.

Here’s one perfectly nifty eye-candy example with its contrast and
color or hue saturation cranked way up, but otherwise it’s not having
been artificially colored.
http://www.coronaborealis.org/images...moon_color.png

A somewhat less contrast and hue saturated example via NASA:
http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap060216.html
http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/image/0602...chedler_35.jpg

And it seems there are may other honest amateur/private obtained
examples that can be peer replicated as often as you like, of images
that do a damn fine job of depicting our mineral color/hue rich and
otherwise physically dark as coal Selene/moon, though usually not
nearly as having been so contrast and hue saturation pushed. Of
course these terrestrial obtained images are not having nearly as good
of unobstructed and crystal clear look-see as for the HDTV images from
the JAXA/Selene mission, or from any number of equally or better
quality color imaging technology satellites, and otherwise of all
those previous Kodak color slide film methods with their ultimate best
of optics that our NASA/Apollo has always had at their disposal.
Shouldn’t have been deprived of such a naturally rich color/hue
environment.

Even Hubble (though somewhat poorly suited) could have been giving us
those accurate color/hue saturation images from nearly day-one,
although of older and certainly via newer instruments would also
include the UV and IR albedo worth of hues that are clearly outside of
the human visual spectrum, and thus having to be artificially
colorized on behalf of our visually impaired interpretation.

Color/hue saturation is essentially the human visual observationology
science form of mass spectrometry, of basically indicating what those
secondary/recoil photons given off by our Selene/moon has to say about
the sorts of raw surface deposits and local minerals, even though most
everything has been extremely dusty and nearly sooty lampblack coated
to the point of looking as though on average as being dark as or
darker than terrestrial coal, as such does not make those natural
mineral color/hue factors invisible. In fact, with a polarized
optical element of recording such a physically dark surface should
only have enhanced those mineral color/hue saturations.

Oddly those JAXA/KAGUYA Selene images are being continually PhotoShop
processed in order to remove all signs of the natural mineral color/
hue saturation of our physically dark as coal moon, and especially of
their having been eliminating the secondary bluish black-light affect
from all of that intense solar UV. Them Japs as NASA puppets and
brown-nosed minions must think we’re all really dumbfounded village
idiots, snookered past the point of no return.

The closer you can get that camera to those raw surface minerals, the
more distinctive the contrast and those color/hue saturations should
have become, such as what a given Apollo EVA by rights should have
experienced, especially with their polarized optical element on those
otherwise full visual bandpass lens outfitted cameras loaded with all
of that rad-hard Kodak film. Of course Messenger's cameras and mirror
optics are far superior in their color/hue spectrum bandwidth and
dynamic range to boot, and yet Mercury keeps looking so unusually
grayish pastel, and rather oddly our moon is invisible next to Earth
as imaged within the same FOV via Messenger.

~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG