Why Mars?

I wanna go to the moon. I'll mine that H3 and bring new energies to the earth. I don't even need a return flight. Lets go!

I don't think we need the government to lead the way. NASA and other countries space agencies have pioneered well, and have brought us many amazing advances. Then, the public aka corporations take those lessons and follow those new paths and bring the benefits/technology to the rest of us. Not because its neat and the thing to do, but to make a profit.
So...to go to the moon, and make use of its resources...we will have to see the profit...I mean money.
The space tourism thing has a toe hold...but its not enough. Energy is.

One more plus side to it being a business venture...if governemts get up there and start making claims (which if I recal is illeagal due to the space treaty of 1967 which focused mainly on weapons, but also banned states from claiming a celestial resource - www.unoosa.org... ) then we have governments fighting over resourses ... not a good idea.

I would much rather see corporations fighting in courts over resources then armed conflict in space over energy resources.

Lastly, it must be an international venture, as to benefit the global community. (also a requirement by the existing space treaty)

We need the First Intenational Space Corporation!!!



Of course then reality sets in ... it takes alot of work to recover the tonnage of H3 needed sustain our power needs...usefull info = en.wikipedia.org...

And these guys are already after it...maybe we should jump on their bandwagon...they plan to be mining by 2030
www.energia.ru...

Originally posted by Soylent Green Is People
reply to post by Arken

 

Here is a strip taken of Tycho crater. The is a "zoomable" image. Resolution is about 60 cm per pixel.
wms.lroc.asu.edu...

Here are some descriptions of what is visible in the long strip image:
Tycho Region

Only a little strip of a 85 KM wide crater... (one of the mostn interesting craters on the moon, "quote" NASA) and half of that image is in the dark.
Misfortuned NASA!!!

Why not all the surface of Tycho Crater in High Resolution, like Rio?

Maybe we finally want to see ALLthe Moon surface in High Resolution and not littles dark flats strips.
Or Nasa is still stopped to the Galileo Galilei "Sidereo Nuncius" age and his little telescope of 1609?

Or... or... NASA take us like stupids?
Maybe this one!
Hmmm.....

Thanks however.

Originally posted by Arken
Only a little strip of a 85 KM wide crater... (one of the mostn interesting craters on the moon, "quote" NASA) and half of that image is in the dark.
Misfortuned NASA!!!

The LROC takes the images in strips. If you want the raw images, you are going to get strips.
Tycho is a big crater -- too big for one strip. If you want to see the whole crater in hi-res, you need to look at more than one strip.

LROC is an active mission. Hopefully at some point a good browser map will be created that stitches the hi-res strips together for the user to make viewing easier. Sort of like Google Moon -- but Google Moon at the moment uses mostly images from Clementine.

we have those hi-def cottony pics from all the other probes.

the ones that show the moon like a perfect christmas snow scene.


i think we are the ones being probed!

Originally posted by Soylent Green Is People

Originally posted by Arken
Only a little strip of a 85 KM wide crater... (one of the mostn interesting craters on the moon, "quote" NASA) and half of that image is in the dark.
Misfortuned NASA!!!

The LROC takes the images in strips. If you want the raw images, you are going to get strips.
Tycho is a big crater -- too big for one strip. If you want to see the whole crater in hi-res, you need to look at more than one strip.

LROC is an active mission. Hopefully at some point a good browser map will be created that stitches the hi-res strips together for the user to make viewing easier. Sort of like Google Moon -- but Google Moon at the moment uses mostly images from Clementine.

edit on 9/24/2010 by Soylent Green Is People because: speellling

Thanks.

But why NASA don't share publicly, and world wide, ALL its images of LROC mission in HIGH RESOLUTION?
Why Only one photo per month of a little strip of the moon? They still have a polaroid camera on board?
Poor Nasa....

Originally posted by Arken
But why NASA don't share publicly, and world wide, ALL its images of LROC mission in HIGH RESOLUTION?
Why Only one photo per month of a little strip of the moon? They still have a polaroid camera on board?

Poor Nasa....

What are you talking about?

wms.lroc.asu.edu...

There you have all the 147 066 pictures from the narrow angle camera and 78 837 pictures from the wide angle camera, public and ready for you to check out and download in full 16bit raw and unaltered flavor.

Have a look at the image search too wms.lroc.asu.edu...

And a map showing where pictures have been taken so far wms.lroc.asu.edu...

This shows how many pictures of Tycho have been taken, btw. The red squares show pics taken with NAC, blue squares with WAC.
img522.imageshack.us...
Feel free to search for them in the database and do whatever you want with them

reply to post by Arken


Arken, Here is a picture of the Eiffel tower. Notice that I have only linked to one image. By your "logic", that means that it is the only picture available. OMG! The Government must be covering up every other picture of the Eiffel Tower! What are they hiding?! I know! I know! It must be Space Aliens!

Originally posted by Arken

Originally posted by Soylent Green Is People

Originally posted by Arken
Only a little strip of a 85 KM wide crater... (one of the mostn interesting craters on the moon, "quote" NASA) and half of that image is in the dark.
Misfortuned NASA!!!

The LROC takes the images in strips. If you want the raw images, you are going to get strips.
Tycho is a big crater -- too big for one strip. If you want to see the whole crater in hi-res, you need to look at more than one strip.

LROC is an active mission. Hopefully at some point a good browser map will be created that stitches the hi-res strips together for the user to make viewing easier. Sort of like Google Moon -- but Google Moon at the moment uses mostly images from Clementine.

Thanks.

But why NASA don't share publicly, and world wide, ALL its images of LROC mission in HIGH RESOLUTION?
Why Only one photo per month of a little strip of the moon? They still have a polaroid camera on board?

Poor Nasa....

The answer to your question is in my quote you provided, but here it is again...

The LROC takes the images in strips. If you want the raw images, you are going to get strips.
Tycho is a big crater -- too big for one strip. If you want to see the whole crater in hi-res, you need to look at more than one strip.

Originally posted by Saint Exupery
reply to post by CynicalM

 

OK, here is a photo of the lunar surface with a resolution of 80 microns (0.00008 meters), taken by the Apollo Lunar Surface Close-Up Camera. The frame is 7.6 × 8.3 cm. Here are the rest of the 4-dozen or so stereo pairs taken at this resolution.

Happy now, or do you need the entire Moon to be mapped at this level?

I'm glad you pointed those photos out, it helps to strengthen my post. I am looking for a nice, wide panorama of the moon, just like they did on Mars. Not a camera pointed real close to an 8cm spot. Why the big secret?

Originally posted by realeyes

Originally posted by Saint Exupery
reply to post by CynicalM

 

OK, here is a photo of the lunar surface with a resolution of 80 microns (0.00008 meters), taken by the Apollo Lunar Surface Close-Up Camera. The frame is 7.6 × 8.3 cm. Here are the rest of the 4-dozen or so stereo pairs taken at this resolution.

Happy now, or do you need the entire Moon to be mapped at this level?

I'm glad you pointed those photos out, it helps to strengthen my post. I am looking for a nice, wide panorama of the moon, just like they did on Mars. Not a camera pointed real close to an 8cm spot. Why the big secret?

Well, Saint Exupery was responding to the person who wanted to see close-ups, so he gave him examples of close-ups.

You, on the other hand, want panoramas. Here is a website that offers a variety of panoramas from various Apollo missions. These are 360-degree panoramas stitched together from a bunch of Apollo photos -- i.e., each panorama is comprised of a bunch of individual photos (just like the Mars panoramas you mentioned):
Moon Panoramas

If you want to see hi-resolution versions of each individual photo that made up those panoramas, they can be found in the "Apollo Image Gallery" link below (broken down by the individual Apollo missions, listed in the upper left corner of the page). Usually, the word "Pan" is in the image title, and all the shots in any particular panorama were usually taken consecutively, so they should not be too hard to find.:
Apollo Image Gallery

The images listed on each individual mission page are just a sampling of the "better" images -- the pan images are probably all there. ALL Apollo images can be found by clicking "Full Hasselblad Magazines" -- However, not all of those images have the helpful descriptions the others have

Here's another website with higher-res Apollo images (once on the page, click on "Image Libraries" from the menu of the left):
Apollo Lunar Surface Journal

I was hoping for a real image. Not a faked moon landing image like the ones you linked to. But to be honest, the Mars image may be fake as well, just better photoshop skills. This image here cannot be real. It would indicate 2 light sources and we know that there is only one, the Sun. To prove this, just observe the detail in the astronaut's suit, meanwhile the back portion of his helmet (top) has a highlight on it, If this was true then the front of him wouldn't be so visible, it would be in shadow. Any decent photographer can look at this and make the connection.

Originally posted by realeyes
I was hoping for a real image. Not a faked moon landing image like the ones you linked to. But to be honest, the Mars image may be fake as well, just better photoshop skills.

I have a feeling no matter what image I show, you will claim "Fake!"

You seem to be headed towards the logical fallacy of "proving a negative". You seem to want me to prove that an image isn't fake.

This image here cannot be real. It would indicate 2 light sources and we know that there is only one, the Sun. To prove this, just observe the detail in the astronaut's suit, meanwhile the back portion of his helmet (top) has a highlight on it, If this was true then the front of him wouldn't be so visible, it would be in shadow.

Any decent photographer can look at this and make the connection.

The moon has a high albedo. Just think about how much light it reflects back to Earth during a full Moon (e.g., you can read by that light)...

...And the Moon is 240,000 miles away; consider how much that light would be reflected on a spacesuit that is on the surface.

Any decent photographer can look at this and make the connection.