Chinese Satellite Captures a Cool View of Earth from Lunar Orbit

a reply to: OneBigMonkeyToo

Nice stuff..

Peace

so can they see stars outside of Earth?

China's space program is suspect at best.

their first space walk was a joke.

a reply to: musicismagic

so can they see stars outside of Earth?

Yes.

This video was taken by the crew of Expedition 31 on board the International Space Station

S+F

This is kind of incredible. Images of the Earth and Moon, taken by a small Saudi camera on a small 45 kg Chinese satellite in lunar orbit (Longjiang-2/DSLWP-B), as part of the Chang'e-4 relay satellite launch. twitter.com...

Well incredible ok , but when I was a little boy there was actually a man on the moon , or was it a dream. Living in 2018 I would have expect something more than image enhanced with CGI of earth seen from the moon (at least the 8 year old kid in me that believed in the exploration of space).

When will there be men on the moon (again?) ?

a reply to: frenchfries

In regard to space exploration there is more than that happening , new discoveries and missions have opened our eyes to the Universe and its wonders more now than anytime I can remember.

The coming decades will see us return to the Moon and have a permanent prescience there , there is much money to be made from the resources available on the Moon and new technologies will eventually make it viable to recover them.

a reply to: gortex

Well I really wish I could share that optimism when it comes to manned space-exploration. Return to moon would be awesome. But well I think it will probably result in sending more drones/satellites. Already in the 80's there was talk about a manned moonstation. Nuclear powered vessels. 'Terraforming' Venus by reducing co2 with genetically modified algea. 20 years later basically nothing. Don't get me wrong I appreciate the esthetically nice often cgi enhanced pictures. But well it's just that 'picture'. A manned base on the moon would be a sign that humanity could do anything.

I hope for the best but have become very critical when it comes to space exploration.

a reply to: frenchfries

Personally I'm not that bothered about manned missions although I would like to see boots on the ground on Mars , we need to go back to the Moon if we are to successfully have a presence on Mars so if the political will is there we will return to the Moon.
Sadly over the years politicians have preferred to invest heavily in military advancement than put the money into something that eventually will safeguard the future of mankind , politicians are short sighted.

a reply to: gortex

Sadly over the years politicians have preferred to invest heavily in military advancement than put the money into something that eventually will safeguard the future of mankind , politicians are short sighted.

Well even than , I can't understand that there isn't a base on the moon. From a military point of view it would be a tremendous strategical advance to have a base on the moon. For instance it's quite easy to shoot moonrocks into orbit or to the earth. Would make an tremendous impact u=.5mv^2 right... The take off of the saturn iv was impressive the takeoff of the eagle on the moon seemed easy. But not a single nation has a base on the moon , even the Russians weren't and aren't that interested. Also there is a lot of money going into black projects.

So something just doesn't add up. Then again , it's ATS.... Tinfoil hats allowed.

According to some experts in aviation skunkworks we are on the moon and beyond

That pic with the red arrows denoting the poles and equater , that picture from the supposedly moon is way more than 5.1 degrees off from the extended Earth equator. I have 5.3 degrees as the extreme

Appearance wise, I see at least twice that, shooting from the hip but I do slopes by degrees for a living meeting county stock tank dam requirements.......I got 15 from the hip...in that shot!

I would have fabricated that pic differently if it was my project given from the LYING department, ya see, I'm real old, and been seeing the globe proportions ....and just naturally spot this stuff.... You should have seen me running the interior finish woodwork crew next door to H Ross Perot's home on Strait Lane in Dallas

a reply to: frenchfries

There are a lot of problems with manned bases on the moon. The 2 biggest problems off the top of the head are safety and the costs.

In 2005, NASA concluded it would take around $100 billion to build the spacecrafts and rockets to get crews of 4 to the moon (HERE), and that doesn't even include the actual lunar outpost(s). A newer 2015 report says it could be as cheap as $10 billion if they buy from private spaceflight companies (HERE). But even that lower estimate doesn't include the costs of lunar outposts/"bases", which the 2nd article claims would cost around $40 billion for a single permanent outpost.

To put those numbers into perspective, NASA's entire 2017 budget was only $19.6 billion (HERE). And that number included a $600 million increase over the previous year. And it helps to remember that these numbers don't include the yearly maintenance costs for the spacecrafts or the base.

Then there's the safety issue. I won't go into the usual concerns like radiation or the concerns for the astronaut health. But instead, there's the issue of meteorite collisions on the Moon's surface. It's been discovered that there are far more collisions happening on the Moon's surface than was previously estimated. In 2016 it was observed that at least 33% more impacts had happened on the moon's surface than what was expected, with at least 222 such impacts just in the previous 7 years (HERE and HERE).

But the more alarming stat in those articles is the observation of around 47,000 new surface disturbances in that same time period. These could be from small impacts, debris from the 222 previously mentioned craters, or who knows what else. Either way, these collisions and/or debris could cause havoc to a moon bases, as you can probably guess.

originally posted by: GBP/JPY
According to some experts in aviation skunkworks we are on the moon and beyond

A lot of people say a lot of things, doesn't mean they're true.

That pic with the red arrows denoting the poles and equater , that picture from the supposedly moon is way more than 5.1 degrees off from the extended Earth equator. I have 5.3 degrees as the extreme

The one I posted? You might need to help me out here...

Anyone figure out what land mass we are looking at in that photo??

I can’t seem to recognize it

a reply to: six67seven

The terminator is running across Africa.

a reply to: gortex
Beautiful!! Too bad there is so much division on its surface. And those flat Earth crazies!! How can they continue to believe such nonsense. In motion you see a almost round ball spinning not a pancake rotating!!!! LOL

originally posted by: six67seven
Anyone figure out what land mass we are looking at in that photo??

I can’t seem to recognize it

Africa and the Arabian peninsula.
Earth here is very similar to the famous "blue marble" shot from Apollo mission:

a reply to: enlightenedservant

Well 100 biljon isn't that much , there is so much more blackbudget. I mean look at it as an investment , Aren't there minerals on the moon. Couldn't it lead to new tech. Also what is money when it comes to human advancement. The whole point is it that humanity would eventually benefit from space exploration. Also if safety is an issue , it's a good way to test a space shield to test lazers and whatever. To examine the effects on low gravity , examine effects on radiation and even more.

The point is that in the end it will lead to a completely new industry. But well if it is all to expensive then mars is completely out of the question.

So What is left for Nasa is sending toy drones to mars. making some pictures of rocks and some pictures from the earth from a distance enhanced with CGI. So what's the point ? Juggling data , and muzings about live on mars. Calling it 'big science'

Real space exploration is taking risks. Like the men in the 70's did , they knew they could die but did their job. The whole apollo program has become a joke , people start to question the moon landings. I can't blame them because the point of the Apollo program's was it to explore space. But in all those years nothing really meaningful happened. Low orbit is now manned spaceflight at it best. So understand me that I can't be enthousiastic if I see another 'picture' of earth. I rather see men on the moon , or for that matter mars being inhabited and terra formed. But I wont see that happen for reasons that become more and more clear for those who can see.

originally posted by: ZombieZygote

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: ZombieZygote

Yeah. Now what? We've been lied to. Now what? Rebellion?

You never explained the absurd size of North America in that "satellite" picture,

Got the originals handy? You don't believe in satellites?

Originals? Of Earth? Like these two photos are supposed to be? Which one is the real one? Pick please.

It isn't a matter of "believing in" satellites, the burden of proof is on the party making the claim. With non CGI photos.

The bottom picture is a composite, taken by Suomi NPP. Suomi NPP orbits at a height of about 515 miles. This is not high enough to see the entire hemisphere of earth. The formula for the percentage of hemisphere visible is 1-(r/r+x)), where r is the radius of the Earth and x is the observer’s height above the surface. In this case, only about 11.5% of the hemisphere is visible, giving a wide angle effect, exaggerating the apparent size of the landmass under the satellite.

The upper picture was taken by the GOES weather satellite, which was in a geostationary orbit at an altitude of about 22,300 miles. Using the previous formula, we can calculate that the entire hemisphere is visible to the satellite. Thus, the upper image is the more accurate representation, free from distortion due to the altitude.

a reply to: nataylor

Thank you for that elegant explanation!!



Peace

a reply to: OneBigMonkeyToo

Hey, yes draw the arc on the pic from red arrows.....the equatorial plane there....

Interpolate specially in your mind's eye....where the camera view would bisect the angle....hey bro onebigmonkey.....go locate the equator on that continent real quick.....maybe very little of Africa is below the equator



Edditt.....I am wrong, the equator is way down at the bottom of Africa.....the entire top lobe is way above