|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
New LRO pic A14 different Sun Angle
On Aug 25, 2:38*pm, "Dr.Colon Oscopy"
wrote: http://lroc.sese.asu.edu/news/upload...otated...***** WOW............Doc http://lroc.sese.asu.edu/news/upload..._annotated.png That's actually getting to be an old LRO image that leaves us with more questions than answers. The USAF could have easily done ten fold better as of decades ago. btw, have you ever actually looked at those original Apollo metric mapping images? The ongoing LRO mission and much of its nifty science potential seems to be either malfunctioning or having been mostly excluded from public review. Apparently our moon has only recently become entirely colorless; meaning there’s essentially no minerals or anything but an entirely inert light gray substance that’s as highly reflective (near whiteout) as depicted by several of those Apollo missions. In fact, via LRO it seems we’ve obtained next to nothing of any secondary fluorescence data (natural or false colorized) whatsoever, which means the moon has also become entirely nonreactive, including no sign of any sodium on the surface or within the extremely thin and highly ionized atmosphere. http://directory.eoportal.org/presen...129/13466.html By way of digital image stacking, the full 66 db in dynamic range of those LRO cameras can be easily exploited, such as within just five quick images can exploit 60 db when limited as to their 12 db A/D conversion. Instead it seems we get to see 8 or less db worth of their dynamic range, and nothing of mineral secondary/recoil fluorescence data. Perhaps this ongoing lack of public funded science disclosure is good news, because it could mean that our moon is in fact entirely worthless, not having even 1% of those common minerals or otherwise hiding any molecule of water, brine or much less any chance of ice that makes up Earth, because supposedly it’s all pretty much inert and thus perfectly safe to be orbiting around or even directly upon for months and even years on end. In fact, apparently while in orbit of our inert moon it’s also relatively cool if not cold and devoid of any significant bad kinds of radiation (not even any secondary IR to fret about) just like those Apollo missions reported, though oddly those recent ISRO and CNSA missions had each been roasting their CPUs to death and otherwise unable to survive their encounter along with so much other secondary radiation and perhaps even from all of that sodium that used to surround our moon (I wonder where all of that sodium went). Apparently all of those meteor deposits and secondary shards of such meteors and lunar basalt are as equally light/neutral gray and otherwise passive and thus inert/colorless (w/o mineral fluorescence), as well as the LRO capability of UV and visible color imaging data has either been inactive or having failed. All we’ve got thus far is a growing inventory of LROC monochrome images, and rather oddly pastel (minimal dynamic range) at that, because those naturally shaded areas are in fact 100% pitch black, meaning zero secondary reflectance from the surrounding local terrain (Apollo imaged as offering an average 0.7+ albedo and thus never experiencing any deep shadows) or even zilch illuminated via earthshine. In stead, it’s almost as though the surface is actually on average nearly as dark as coal, if not darker than coal on behalf of those exposed basalt ridges that are simply too extremely vertical and thus clear of any significant dust.. Apparently the 575 orbits per month and eventually cruising at 50 km above all of that inert and colorless surface that’s so unusually mascon populated can not seem to deliver the advertised 0.5 meter resolution. Otherwise there’s nothing of gamma or X-ray spectrometry (aka gamma/neutron) detections of anything, or even IR thermal imaging as calibrated to common standards that can help specify those complex surface temperatures to within 0.1 K, whereas even their UV camera seems to have been on the frits. In all, the LRO w/o SAR and multiple other kinds of remote observationology science, means that we still can’t seem to tell how deeply dust covered, reactive and/or electrostatic charged that crystal dry and thermally complex that surface actually is, much less if there’s anything the least bit unusual to behold other than the remains of various public funded Apollo, Soviet, JAXA, ISRO and CNSA technology that’s technically worthless because none of it survived long enough to give the general public (that’s paying for everything) anything interactive to work with. Not to forget, we’re still lacking any science as to the zero delta-V and extreme vacuum of the Earth-moon L1 (Selene L1), as such is yet another 50+ year old mystery that’s every bit as science deficient as is any hard/objective expertise pertaining to its extreme vacuum or any objective test of raw ice existing/coexisting within this 1 AU illuminated space of Selene L1, for whatever given short amount of time such ice would survive. Silly me, as here I’d thought having objective knowledge of ice existing/coexisting within such an extreme vacuum and otherwise solar illuminated realm of space, and of course as well as situated upon our extremely nearby and unusual moon, was important fundamental basics of physics and science. It’s almost as though all we’ve ever accomplished was getting a number robotic hardware items onto that physically dark as coal surface, and at that is seems little of it functioned or survived according to plan. Now we have our spendy and belated LRO mission with only limited results, and our moon that has suddenly become entirely inert, colorless and otherwise harmless to boot. What gives? Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet” |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
New LRO pic A14 different Sun Angle
"BradGuth" babbled:
Observationologist? Is it Mars or is it or venus LOL look again second post in this thread LOL LOL LOL LOL.................Doc There's nothing new or all that objective as to proving EVAs were human or robotic. Remember, I've never once insisted that Apollo technology didn't manage to get onto the lunar surface. BTW, via LRO where's Venus? (it has more than one camera, and as such is perfectly capable of looking at and above the horizon) Of course during the entire LRO trek around Earth, to the moon and getting itself into its close orbit was perhaps at least several hundred opportunities of recording our physically dark moon along with the planet Venus within the same FOV. So, what's the official excuse (s) this time? +++++ Uh, it's not a mission priority? T.B. So what? It's a zero infringement upon any other science, plus otherwise a 100% PR benefit, by showing us how a truly good and spendy camera along with its quality lens can capture the extent of such nifty dynamic range, as well as in vibrant hues/colors, and the obviously much brighter item of Venus along with those deep mineral and fluorescence colors of our naked and physically dark moon would give us a much better idea of what that crystal dry and dusty surface of our moon has to offer. Even including Jupiter, Saturn or Mars would be impressive as all get out, especially when depicted along with our physically dark moon that's so unavoidably reactive to the UV. Are you suggesting those LRO cameras are not as good as advertised, and that we've paid dearly for? ++++++ I'm suggesting you're an idiot who doesn't know what he's talking about. I'd go into detail why that's patently obvious, but a clearly unbalanced goof like you only rates a couple sentences of my posting time. T.B. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
New LRO pic A14 different Sun Angle
On Aug 28, 1:38*pm, "The Mighty T.B."
wrote: "BradGuth" babbled: Observationologist? Is it Mars or is it or venus LOL look again second post in this thread LOL LOL LOL LOL.................Doc There's nothing new or all that objective as to proving EVAs were human or robotic. Remember, I've never once insisted that Apollo technology didn't manage to get onto the lunar surface. BTW, via LRO where's Venus? (it has more than one camera, and as such is perfectly capable of looking at and above the horizon) Of course during the entire LRO trek around Earth, to the moon and getting itself into its close orbit was perhaps at least several hundred opportunities of recording our physically dark moon along with the planet Venus within the same FOV. So, what's the official excuse (s) this time? +++++ Uh, it's not a mission priority? T.B. So what? *It's a zero infringement upon any other science, plus otherwise a 100% PR benefit, by showing us how a truly good and spendy camera along with its quality lens can capture the extent of such nifty dynamic range, as well as in vibrant hues/colors, and the obviously much brighter item of Venus along with those deep mineral and fluorescence colors of our naked and physically dark moon would give us a much better idea of what that crystal dry and dusty surface of our moon has to offer. Even including Jupiter, Saturn or Mars would be impressive as all get out, especially when depicted along with our physically dark moon that's so unavoidably reactive to the UV. Are you suggesting those LRO cameras are not as good as advertised, and that we've paid dearly for? ++++++ I'm suggesting you're an idiot who doesn't know what he's talking about. I'd go into detail why that's patently obvious, but a clearly unbalanced goof like you only rates a couple sentences of my posting time. T.B. So in other words, once again I'm right. The planet Venus is still very much taboo/nondisclosure rated because it's so freaking bright, and especially vibrant to that of an unfiltered Kodak eye (film or CCD) that's including our physically dark Selene/moon in the same FOV. You silly folks really do not like being called the obfuscating kind of liars that you are. You do realize what kind of terrific dynamic range and color/hue spectral range or scope those nifty cameras of LRO have, don't you? ~ BG |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
New LRO pic A14 different Sun Angle
"Dr.Colon Oscopy" wrote in message ... http://lroc.sese.asu.edu/news/upload..._annotated.png WOW............Doc That's awesome. Jeff -- "Take heart amid the deepening gloom that your dog is finally getting enough cheese" - Deteriorata - National Lampoon |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
New LRO pic A14 different Sun Angle
On Sep 1, 1:19*pm, "Jeff Findley" wrote:
"Dr.Colon Oscopy" wrote in message ...http://lroc.sese.asu.edu/news/upload...41LE_annotated... WOW............Doc That's awesome. Jeff WOW what? (machines only? 5th grade PhotoShop?) Still no fly-by-rocket lander, and laws of physics different on the moon? ~ BG |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
New LRO pic A14 different Sun Angle
On Aug 25, 2:38*pm, "Dr.Colon Oscopy"
wrote: http://lroc.sese.asu.edu/news/upload...otated...***** WOW............Doc Where exactly are the LRO color/hue saturated images of those lunar surface minerals? Where are those false colorized UV images? How can the naked surface of that physically dark moon not be the least bit UV reactive? When is the terrific SAR imaging ever going to be shared? How the heck are those gamma/proton readings going? Where's all the sodium hiding? How about the 1200 w/m2 of IR energy coming back off the solar illuminated surface? ~ BG |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
New LRO pic A14 different Sun Angle
On Sep 7, 5:43*pm, BradGuth wrote:
On Aug 25, 2:38*pm, "Dr.Colon Oscopy" wrote: http://lroc.sese.asu.edu/news/upload...notated...**** WOW............Doc Where exactly are the LRO color/hue saturated images of those lunar surface minerals? Where are those false colorized UV images? How can the naked surface of that physically dark moon not be the least bit UV reactive? When is the terrific SAR imaging ever going to be shared? How the heck are those gamma/proton readings going? Where's all the sodium hiding? How about the 1200 w/m2 of IR energy coming back off the solar illuminated surface? When are we going to get to see the other 99.9% of our public funded science. ~ BG |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Yet another angle on the beginning... | G=EMC^2 Glazier[_1_] | Misc | 0 | February 1st 09 01:44 PM |
Yet another angle on the beginning... | G=EMC^2 Glazier[_1_] | Misc | 1 | January 31st 09 11:50 PM |
Why Don't Comets Angle in and Hit the Sun? | G=EMC^2 Glazier[_1_] | Misc | 22 | March 22nd 07 01:43 AM |
Sun angle and spysats | Allen Thomson | Technology | 5 | December 6th 04 04:00 AM |
meteor from a different angle? | Jonathan Silverlight | UK Astronomy | 4 | August 12th 04 08:38 PM |