It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

What is this subject summed up? (Moon is hollow) and the dark side of it

page: 1
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 17 2016 @ 03:35 PM
link   
Basically I've read a year ago that they believe the moon is hollow & that when it was hit by asteroids it would hit then produce a loud echoing on the inside

Same as when the moon landing it created an echo in the interior of the moon. Anyone else believe this to be true ?

& the dark side summed up do y'all think anything even exists on the other side or possibly just our imaginations? Heard it isn't even dark on that side that light still covers it from the sun, some expirement with a basketball and a flashlight proved it.




posted on Oct, 17 2016 @ 03:38 PM
link   
a reply to: Zeimten

1 - the moon is not hollow

2 - please posit how the moon can exist WITHOUT a ` far side `



posted on Oct, 17 2016 @ 03:39 PM
link   


To start off with.

Yes the "dark side" gets light, its just called dark because it was not seen until we went to space.
Its not hollow, to go over why that is we would need to get into fancy science talk



posted on Oct, 17 2016 @ 03:49 PM
link   
a reply to: ignorant_ape

2. Of cours it has a far side I never said it doesn't have one. I'm just simply asking a quick opinion if you truely think anything even exists of "sci-Fi" existence over there.



Was all



posted on Oct, 17 2016 @ 03:49 PM
link   
a reply to: Zeimten

Question everything.



posted on Oct, 17 2016 @ 03:59 PM
link   
All we know for sure is that it is made of cheese.



posted on Oct, 17 2016 @ 06:31 PM
link   
a reply to: Zeimten

The moon isn't quite hollow, but it's more of a honeycomb structure just like our planet. There are subterranean civilizations on both.

I can't offer any mainstream science proof. But mainstream science cannot prove this is not the case.



posted on Oct, 17 2016 @ 06:33 PM
link   
a reply to: AgarthaSeed

So that's where all the unicorns went!



posted on Oct, 17 2016 @ 06:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zeimten
Basically I've read a year ago that they believe the moon is hollow


Who exactly is "they"?


& the dark side summed up do y'all think anything even exists on the other side


Well, it has been photographed, it has been seen by human eyes, so why shouldn't it exist?


Heard it isn't even dark on that side that light still covers it from the sun,


Who said the other side was dark?



posted on Oct, 17 2016 @ 06:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: AshFan
All we know for sure is that it is made of cheese.


Very true!




posted on Oct, 17 2016 @ 08:56 PM
link   
a reply to: hellobruce


Who said the other side was dark?


pink floyd



posted on Oct, 18 2016 @ 06:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: hellobruce

originally posted by: AshFan
All we know for sure is that it is made of cheese.


Very true!



+1 for posting the best moon documentary



posted on Oct, 18 2016 @ 09:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: Zeimten
Basically I've read a year ago that they believe the moon is hollow & that when it was hit by asteroids it would hit then produce a loud echoing on the inside

Same as when the moon landing it created an echo in the interior of the moon. Anyone else believe this to be true ?


No.

When you say that you read that the Moon is hollow, you were probably reading the inaccurate myth that came out of a NASA geologist saying that he Moon "rang like a bell" when they did seismology a experiment in 1972 by crashing piece of space craft on one part of the Moon and seeing how a seismograph registered that crash on another part of the Moon.

It IS true that the resulting vibration was said to "ring like a bell", but that was simply a metaphor used for describing the longer-than-expected time of vibration after they crashed the old spacecraft into the moon. When the Moon vibrates (from moonquakes and from spent spacecraft crashing back to it) the seismic vibrations last for a longer period of time than originally expected -- hours rather than minutes. That longer vibration period is what they meant when they said it "rang like a bell".

They knew that seismic wave vibrations on Earth dampen within minutes, but those on the Moon do not, which was an unexpected find at the time. However, the explanation for this is not due to the Moon being hollow -- it's due to the Moon not being as cracked or as broken in general than Earth.

This article explains it:

Moonquakes

Excerpt:

On Earth, vibrations from quakes usually die away in only half a minute. The reason has to do with chemical weathering, Neal explains: "Water weakens stone, expanding the structure of different minerals. When energy propagates across such a compressible structure, it acts like a foam sponge--it deadens the vibrations." Even the biggest earthquakes stop shaking in less than 2 minutes.

The moon, however, is dry, cool and mostly rigid, like a chunk of stone or iron. So moonquakes set it vibrating like a tuning fork. Even if a moonquake isn't intense, "it just keeps going and going," Neal says. And for a lunar habitat, that persistence could be more significant than a moonquake's magnitude.

This is what they meant when they said "it rang like a bell". You can also say "it rang like a tuning fork". Bells and tuning forks that are not cracked will vibrate for a longer period of time than one that is cracked.


So no. If you read that the Moon was hollow because it rings like a bell, then the source of information you were reading could have been wrong. Many laymen who don't understand the Moon's geology have made the same mistake by coming to the wrong conclusion about NASA saying that the Moon "rang like a bell".



& the dark side summed up do y'all think anything even exists on the other side or possibly just our imaginations? Heard it isn't even dark on that side that light still covers it from the sun, some expirement with a basketball and a flashlight proved it.


Of course the far side gets light. Who (among people who have even a basic understanding of the moon that they could have learned in school) says it doesn't?

The moon rotates once every ~28 days, so all parts of the Moon get ~14 days of "daylight" and ~14 days of "night". When we see only a 1/4 moon (when half of the part that faces us is lit up), there is half of the far side that is also lit up. When the moon is in the New Moon phase (when the side facing us is totally dark) the far side is 100% lit.

I mean, when the Moon isn't full (not totally lit) when seen from Earth, what do you think is lit/not lit on the side you can't see? You can do the experiment with the basketball and flashlight you mentioned if you need to, but just simply that when half of the side facing us is lit, the half of the side not facing us is also lit. Similarly when a sliver of the side face us is lit (say 1/8 of the near side, for example), then 7/8 of the far side must also be lit.


As for there being things on the far side, many different countries have fully photographed it (Russia, Japan, China, and the U.S.), and none of those photos have shown evidence of anything unnatural about it.


edit on 2016-10-18 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 22 2016 @ 06:12 PM
link   
Yeah, Wallace for president!
oops.
They did seismic tests on the moon, it rang like a bell. The lander had those big padded feet because they estimated several feet of dust, the big pads were to stop it sinking.
I guess they were all surprised when the lander bounced, and there was only a few inches of dust.
1/3 the diameter of earth yet only 1/6 gravity?
The same honeycomb structure?
Our core is mostly liquid, no evidence of that on the moon....
2 totally different bodies, absolutely not related to each other.
Think about that.



posted on Oct, 22 2016 @ 06:18 PM
link   
a reply to: playswithmachines



The lander had those big padded feet because they estimated several feet of dust, the big pads were to stop it sinking.

You know that there were unmanned landers before Apollo, right?



1/3 the diameter of earth yet only 1/6 gravity?
Do you know how the relationship between diameter and volume works? Do you know how surface gravity is calculated?



posted on Oct, 22 2016 @ 06:26 PM
link   
The dark side is not dark of course, it gets as much sunlight as we do, only we can't see it because our moon is tide locked. This could happen if the most massive (i.e. not hollow) part of the moon ended up facing our planet. The forces would be strong enough to stop it's (natural?) rotation.
That is what tide-locked means.
There is a proposal to place a large telescope there since it will be shielded from the noise generated by Earth, and will have an atmosphere free view of space.

That in itself would be a good reason to go back there, but i suspect we are in quarantine, of sorts.



posted on Oct, 22 2016 @ 06:30 PM
link   
a reply to: playswithmachines


That is what tide-locked means.

The term is tidally locked. And it has nothing to do with mass distribution of either body. Nor is it a unique circumstance. It will occur whenever bodies orbit within sufficient proximity.

edit on 10/22/2016 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 22 2016 @ 06:32 PM
link   
Surface gravity depends on the denseness of matter under your feet.
And calculus on the volume would give less than linear results i grant you, but still.

52 years later & we are now crashing stuff on Mars that could be put to better use building hospitals & schools here on Earth.

Darpa lost not one, but two secret spyplanes in the same month.They could have paid my wages for 100 years, LOL

Am i surprised at mankind's ineptitude?

They say the moon is a natural satellite, and it's the same age as the earth.
I say, prove it.



posted on Oct, 22 2016 @ 06:33 PM
link   
a reply to: playswithmachines




They say the moon is a natural satellite, and it's the same age as the earth. I say, prove it.

To you? That would be an exercise in futility.



posted on Oct, 23 2016 @ 01:35 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

Well carbon dating is a waste of time, i guess caesium dating ditto unreliable.
I'm willing to look at some proof, but the moon's geology is mostly speculation, right?
So what happened to the Moon's molten core, i guess it cooled off much faster than Earth, not having an atmosphere to speak of.So it should be solid iron & have a relatively high density, and equally high gravity.....
Is there credible proof that it's 4.5 billion years old, same as the Earth?
The moon also has an abundance of silicon, titanium, gold, barium, helium-3 and other interesting minerals.
Everything in fact, to build incredibly strong structures with, and tons of fusion fuel to power them with.

I daresay they park the saucers inside these days......

ETA if the moon's core was iron, it would have one hell of a magnetic field.
edit on 23-10-2016 by playswithmachines because: Addenum



new topics

top topics



 
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join