Go Back   IceInSpace > Images > Solar System
Register FAQ Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
  #1  
Old 17-09-2008, 08:02 PM
Nuri
Registered User

Nuri is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Sydney
Posts: 58
A thought: If the HST can photograph the light of a firefly on the moon...

...you'd think that some scientist with HST access would think about photographing the lunar vehicles/equipment left behind by the Apollo missions.... just to prove a point

What do you recon?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 17-09-2008, 08:17 PM
firstlight's Avatar
firstlight (Tony)
You can't have everything

firstlight is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Acacia Ridge, Queensland
Posts: 1,503
My understanding that there is still not enough resolution to image such small detail even on our close companion. Even if it could, do you think the conspiracy theorists would believe that the images were doctored?

There is no winning with empty heads
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 17-09-2008, 08:54 PM
AlexN's Avatar
AlexN
Widefield wuss

AlexN is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Caboolture, Australia
Posts: 6,994
indeed...

When they say that hubble could capture the light of a firefly on the moon, I think they are refering to the amount of light at that distance. As far as Im aware, that does not mean that they could image "a firefly" 380,000kms away. resoloution and sensitivity to light are definitely mutually exclusive in this respect.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 17-09-2008, 08:55 PM
Chrissyo's Avatar
Chrissyo (Chris)
Is always sleepy

Chrissyo is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Sunshine Coast, Australia
Posts: 410
No, the Hubble cannot resolve even the largest pieces of Apollo equipment left on the Moon - not even close.

Keep in mind that there is a difference between resolving and detecting an object. For example - we can see the stars with our naked eyes - but even the world's biggest telescopes have trouble resolving some of the closer/larger ones into disks.

As a final thought - even if Hubble COULD detect the Apollo equipment, I doubt anyone would see it as a good use of its time. And keep in mind that conspiracy theorists have been denying the mountains of evidence in favour of the moon landings for ages - they would just turn around claim that the Hubble pictures are fake too, or that the equipment was placed by unmanned means. We already have images of the Apollo's 11 and 15 landing sites taken by Clementine and Selene that show the diffuse surface disturbance due to the LMs descent/ascent - but nope, that doesn't count for the conspiracy theorists.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 17-09-2008, 10:15 PM
TrevorW
Registered User

TrevorW is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Western Australia
Posts: 8,265
Its like the BiG Bang theory I overheard some lady on the train the other day saying this theory was rubbish yet she confessed to being a creationist. You cannot explain the colour red to someone that's blind no matter how hard you try. Even with all our intellegence to some, ignorance is bliss!!!
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 18-09-2008, 07:46 AM
gmbfilter (Geoff)
Geoff

gmbfilter is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: South Tacoma NSW
Posts: 571
The photos could be still faked, I could do it myself..almost

You cant believe photos of anything.
I keep saying that to my ex.

Would have been much cheaper.
Actually that proves it I guess.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +10. The time is now 06:21 AM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.8.7 | Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Advertisement
Bintel
Advertisement