reply to post by DJW001
Would you care to explain?
I'm absolutely not saying I understand what 'light' is, nobody does. We do understand how it behaves, well enough at least to utilise it in some
pretty amazing devices, but there is much still unknown. I'm leaning to all EM radiation, electricity, magnetism, light, heat, being different
configurations of an Aether, the Aether having a density of unimaginable proportions, sufficient to transfer information or energy at an infinite
number of frequencies simultaneously, across the vastness of space. We can soon move more into philosophy than science, but sticking with accepted
science, I think the OP made a valid observation about the light levels on the Moon, and what I have read, by way mainly of NASA documents, indicates
all their preparations for the Moon landing were made with the low levels of light in mind. Nowhere do they talk about the blindingly bright
conditions you would expect on the surface, even with the Sun at a low elevation as there is no dense atmosphere to 'soften' the morning Sun.
Rather than getting into QED, I'm looking more for accepted scientific processes that would allow a longitudinal EM wave (in an Aether) to interact
in the ionosphere to produce the transverse waves.
If a lens is used to rerconstruct the wavefront, then we would need a lens in the ionosphere, so what have we got to work with? Ionospheric boundary
layers, Gausian plasma lensing?
And to bring the wavelengths to visible? Compton shifting? Fluorescent re-emissions?
Anyway, with the OPs original question in mind, I think it worth looking at some NASA items, one about the video cameras that indicates they had
great difficulty getting a good picture, and they eventually had to go with some classified technology to do that, technology intended for very low
light level imaging.
At the time the SEC tube had a DOD security classification as befitted such a device. Since
there were no other device that could possibly meet the Apollo TV camera mission requirement
to operate unattended at both lunar day and lunar night and survive all phases of the Apollo mis-
sion, the DOD was asked to allow Westinghouse to use the SEC tube for the Apollo TV Camera
From: Apollo Television.(12 meg pdf)
A couple of papers on the low light surface conditions. Maybe they were in bright sunlight some times, but I haven't found any papers about problems
with bright light conditions.
NASA CONTRACT NAS 9-14413. FINAL REPORT. APOLLO EXPERIME]NT S-211. LOW BRIGfHTNESS, ASTRONOMICAL...(pdf)
An Investigation of Earthshine Lighting Conditions for Lunar-Surface Operations.(pdf)
Also, though not about Lunar surfce brightness, there were some Gemini reports about the Gemini Gegenschein experiments where they described the
astronauts being in TOTAL darkness for hours during the experiments, with the camera fastened to a window bracket and covered with a 'tent' to keep
stray light out. They said that light somehow still got in and affected the experiment, even though the astronauts could visibly detect no light at
So, fully dark adapted, when they removed the window tent, you would think they could have seen the stars, but not a word in the report about that. I
haven't been able to access the full document, but searching GEMINI V EXPERIMENTS ON ZODIACAL LIGHT AND GEGENSCHEIN brings up a lot of hits, maybe
the full version is available somewhere not behind a paywall.
Anyway, NASA could sure save me a lot of head scratching if they'd just take an image of the Moon, or Sun through an ND filter, from the ISS, but I
still think they never will, because they can't.