posted on Dec, 18 2007 @ 11:51 AM
Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
Wasn't it you who said that, when speaking in an arena outside your personal expertise, there are terms used that can create misunderstanding? I
would posit that the use of the term "ballistic" is merely a loosely applied adjective to a quantum scale phenomenon.
Indeed. If I remember correctly, the original controversy in that regard was due to my statement that the abundance of He3 on the Moon is a proof of
the absense of an atmosphere there. What I heard back was that the atmosphere might be there but has "different ballistic properties". I am sorry if
my recollection is incorrect, but that's what I remember.
Now, my argument was/is that the "different ballistic properties" of the lunar atmosphere are an invalid statement. It would actually have
sense if the author stipulated that the gas in the alleged atmosphere is helium hence it's more "transparent" to cosmic rays, but it's
still silly on the face value. In addition, lighter gases would escape the Moon even faster than oxygen!
Bottom line, it's not about hair-splitting. You told us you plan to mine He3 on the Moon and I sincerely wish you best of luck. I might as well
comment on the adjacent physics facts for your own benefit. Seriously.