stuff on the moon

[cap'n spanky]

not sure which section to ask this BUT>>> anyone EVER taken any photos (from this planet) of the stuff left by us on the moon (eg the lunar rover or the legs of the eagle) ??????

[darth vader]

Is this a "proving they never went there" type question? There is a vaild reason why they can't get pictures that accurate but i don't know the technicals......

[cap'n spanky]

no, i just wondered if : 1, it was possible... and 2, if anyone actually managed to find anything... so you reckon it's not technically possible? Even with the sophisticated tracking motors on telescopes etc?

[sft42]

I would have thought if the HUbble can take photos of stuff millions of miles away then a quick holiday snap of our own little moon wouldn't have been a problem....unless of course there's not much to see that is.

[kags]

Even the highest resolution camera equipment on Hubble would not be able to detect the objects left on the moon.

[Gef]

I agree with kags.

[cap'n spanky]

apart from the physical location of the hubble, why could it see millions of light year but not to our own moon which is, by comparison, a mere stones throw away?

[darth vader]

it's all to do with the relative size and resolution -as Kags says the hubble would get a good picture of the moon but nowhere near enough resolution to detect objects (thanks Kags i thought this was the reason but there are so many
-ve vibes on AB these days i thought i wouldn't post without being sure). If you find this hard to believe cap'n, then consider the perspective of a satellite, which is powerful enough to read a newspaper in someone's hand (apparently). the satellite is only a few (50-100?) miles up however, so consider how much more powerful it would have to get, to get the same level of detail on the moon which is 3 million (or 5 million?) miles away. The only way (IMHO) to get the detail you require would be to send a hubble-type probe close to the moon and i guess they don't want to waste all the money that would be required to do so, for such a trivial task (in their opinion). Anyway aren't the Yanks planning to resurrect the moon landing program again? you'll be able to get all the pics you want then

[bernardo]

Darth Vader has the correct answer bu the wrong figures. The Moon is 239,000 miles away, so getting a photo of something whis (say) 4 metres long on the moon at a distance of 400 million metres would be like getting a photo of something a tenth of a millimetre long (the thickness of an A4 sheet of paper) at a distance of 10,000 metres. In other words, it would be like photographing someone six miles away and expecting to be able to see every individual strand of hair on their head.

[darth vader]

@r$e. a quarter of a million then. what's 3 million? speed of light? no that's 300,0000. better pop a new question on AB......

[darth vader]

300,000 (b4 you all rant - a typo)

[Phantaxus]

I sure I read about plans to send a moon mapping probe there that will have the resolution to resolve the objects left on the moon. I think Japan was doing it. Its main purpose is a geological survey.

[darth vader]

...and also to cock a snoot at the yanks should the moon landings be a fib perhaps?

[anthomson]

Not quite a photo, but I believe mirrors (well actually prisms) were left on the surface of the moon by Apollo astronauts. It is supposedly possible for anyone, pocessing suitable equipment, to reflect a laser back to Earth using these prisms.

[tomd]

they are actually using these from a observatory in the south, it was on that program on 5

[IanPat]

O J Simpson had some photos , but they chased him across the desert in a helicopter , and then after they dragged him out of his RV...........