|
reply posted on 2-10-2006 @ 01:23 PM by violet
|
Originally posted by johnlear
Originally posted by violet
Mr. Lear
Can you explain how the images of the North Polar region of the moon, have the appearance of flat-sufraced areas, beneath the moon's rocky, cratered
outer surface? Is it that parts of the image are missing?
I just thought they were interesting.
North Polar region moon
clem1-l-u-5-dim-basemap-v1.0/cl_3015 - polar
Close-up
clem1-l-u-5-dim-basemap-v1.0/cl_3014
Image Source: JPL Nasa
There are also some other images, that have small blacked out areas, near the bright spots on the latest lick images that were just posted.
blacked out areas
Thanks
Anything more recent than Lunar Orbiter pictures has been carefully airbrushed. Please don't waste your time trying to see anything on any photos
later than Lunar Orbiter photos and particularly Clementine photos which was a Navy project and has been thoroughly, thoroughly airbrushed.
Oh !
What year did the Lunar Orbitor take your pictures ?
Thanks.
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 2-10-2006 @ 01:26 PM by zorgon
|
Originally posted by johnlear
If the depth of Copernicus was 12,500 feet and you measured from the floor to the approximate top of the rim on a photo of Copernicus and got
approximately 80 millimeters...
Thanks for the math.... I will work on that "ruler" today. I have seen different dimesions though 1 site says 90 feet diam... thats a lot of
discrepancy... you would think they could get that part right with modern technology 
The 60 feet is a non NASA source I think I will stick with that one until we can send an indepentdant survey crew up there.
So they call that the Lunar Lander? Ummm errr okay it does sorta look like one ... 
Didn't know we had a Lunar Lander in 1946... 
[edit on 2-10-2006 by zorgon]
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 2-10-2006 @ 02:03 PM by Apass
|
Originally posted by zorgon
The 60 feet is a non NASA source I think I will stick with that one until we can send an indepentdant survey crew up there.
You could take a picture of the moon and do the math yourself!
Here's a full moon picture
The full moon has about 919 pixels diameter.
Copernicus crater has around 23 pixels diameter.
The moon's diameter is about 3476 km. So...Copernicus crater diameter is 23/919 * 3476 km = 86.99km.
If the crater diameter is 22 pixels then the diameter is 83.21km and if it is 24 pixels then 90.77km
If you like...you can redo the math with a higher resolution image.
edited to fix the quotes
[edit on 2/10/06 by Apass]
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 2-10-2006 @ 02:51 PM by zorgon
|
|
copyright & usage
|
|
AboveTopSecret.com is advertising supported.
|
reply posted on 2-10-2006 @ 03:07 PM by Apass
|
My first impression is that it is not the same region imaged in the two photos. Any source for them? Any context pictures for them?
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 2-10-2006 @ 03:17 PM by SearchEngine
|
It's the Archimedes Crater. If you are looking at a full
picture of the moon it is northwest of the center of the picture.
Another nice find Zorgon.
So the second Lick picture is from 1946? And we don't have a date for when the first one was taken right?
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 2-10-2006 @ 03:24 PM by Apass
|
Ok...but still, any sources for that? How can we be sure that it is the same region imaged? All I see are two photos with no context at all. And no
other explanation (like where were find, who found them and so on...)
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 2-10-2006 @ 03:28 PM by johnlear
|
Originally posted by SearchEngine
It's the Archimedes Crater. If you are looking at a full
picture of the moon it is northwest of the center of the picture.
Another nice find Zorgon.
So the second Lick picture is from 1946? And we don't have a date for when the first one was taken right?
Correct.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 2-10-2006 @ 03:41 PM by SearchEngine
|
Apass,
The first picture zorgon referenced is from the Lick Observatory photo that John Lear shared with us (lick001). The second photo could be found in any
Lunar Atlas, such as here:
www.lpi.usra.edu...
You can go to List Of Feature Names and look up the crater name. You get the same picture as the second one posted by Zorgon.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 2-10-2006 @ 03:54 PM by SteveR
|
Hang on a minute
Sorry to rain on the parade, but those Lick pictures show a whole side of the moon. Please remember that the diameter, is 1/4 of Earth. You
can not, I repeat, can not see buildings in that picture even if they were there. Not that I don't beleive there are any.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
AboveTopSecret.com is advertising supported.
|
reply posted on 2-10-2006 @ 03:55 PM by John Nada
|
There's some interesting pictures in this thread, but I'm sure if you stripped the Earth down to its bare rocks and viewed it from space we'd see
just as many weird structures. It's bound to happen after being battered in space for millions of years, or am I totally wrong in this assumption?
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 2-10-2006 @ 04:00 PM by SearchEngine
|
Originally posted by SteveR
Sorry to rain on the parade, but those Lick pictures show a whole side of the moon. Please remember that the diameter, is 1/4 of Earth. You
can not, I repeat, can not see buildings in that picture even if they were there. Not that I don't beleive there are any.
Nobody has said anything about buildings  just some terrain differences
so far. Comparing lick001 to a lunar atlas or lick002 brings up some
differences...
[edit on 2-10-2006 by SearchEngine]
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 2-10-2006 @ 04:04 PM by SteveR
|
Apollo shot of Earth, 440 pixels wide. Moon diameter 0.27 of Earth. 27% of 440 = 119 pixels.
Basic calculations to get an approximate idea.. but we have this:
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 2-10-2006 @ 04:16 PM by Apass
|
OK, I got it! But here's what happens
This is the original photo taken from the lick picture rotated left by 15 degrees:
And now cropped and zoomed 200% to show basicly the same area as the second picture
So you see...there is nothing wrong in the picture.
Edited to add for reference the original second picture
[edit on 2/10/06 by Apass]
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 2-10-2006 @ 04:24 PM by SteveR
|
To continue from my previous post..
Here are 'vehicle tracks'...... section to scale with the south end of madagascar!
For reference.
I rest my case.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 2-10-2006 @ 04:32 PM by Apass
|
To continue your line of arguing SteveR:
This is a city (a 470% zoomed portion of an image)
And this is the original image
Here's the full size version
|
copyright & usage
|
|
AboveTopSecret.com is advertising supported.
|
reply posted on 2-10-2006 @ 04:37 PM by zorgon
|
Originally posted by Apass
My first impression is that it is not the same region imaged in the two photos. Any source for them? Any context pictures for them?
Ah the fishes bite 
I am glad you asked that one
Actually I was a waitin fer ya...
Take a looky here....
Yes it IS archimedes crater in both images
The Case of the Vanishing Crater
No tell me THIS isn't something going on...
Either its a MAJOR coverup... or craters are sinking into the Moon
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 2-10-2006 @ 04:39 PM by zorgon
|
Originally posted by John Nada or am I totally wrong in this assumption?
Yup 
Oh yeah... forgot no one liners.... The weather is really nice in Vegas today....
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 2-10-2006 @ 04:45 PM by John Nada
|
Originally posted by zorgon
Originally posted by John Nada or am I totally wrong in this assumption?
Yup
How so?
Oh yeah... forgot no one liners.... *looks for the shape of angelina Jolie's butt in Moon pictures*
mmmmm....
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 2-10-2006 @ 04:54 PM by mythatsabigprobe
|
Originally posted by SteveR
Apollo shot of Earth, 440 pixels wide. Moon diameter 0.27 of Earth. 27% of 440 = 119 pixels.
Good thought, but the apollo piccie was taken with a regular lens and the lick shot was taken through a 40" telescope. You'd probably see earth's
highways and beaches with a 40" telescope on the moon. I'm not sure about buildings, but we can clearly see small craters that are only a couple of
miles across.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
