It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by wildespace
Originally posted by Soylent Green Is People
reply to post by wildespace
OK -- I must have misunderstood you.
You are right in saying that it would be nice in general to have a ground-based telescope that is good enough to see the equipment on the Moon. However, there really is no huge need to do that specific task, considering we can get a better view from the LRO.
edit on 9/6/2012 by Soylent Green Is People because: speellling, and. grammar
Well, if you look at the article the-colossus.com... there are many other applications, such as seeing the discs of stars, better detection of exoplanets, studying black holes, and definitely much more.
Originally posted by TeslaandLyne
The Hubble can't see behind it or into the Sun.
Moon telescopes probably need one at either pole and as we know the moon
sweeps around to all locations in the sky and can't go through the Sun just
like the Hubble.
There are many sizes of telescopes and perhaps some optimal size might be
good for starters. A mobile telescope might be good planted at the edge of
the shadow. Lots of possibilities but if Mars rovers are any statement for
rovers I don't think that dainty thing could carry a telescope.
Since getting into Earth orbit is crucial for weight reasons there is little difference
perhaps in Moon and Mars rover capabilities.
Originally posted by wmd_2008
The Hubble orbits the Earth the Earth orbits the sun there is NO advantage to a telescope on the Moon