Dark Side of the moon
Discussion
TUS373 said:
So....if the minerals on the surface of the moon are charcoal coloured and only reflect 5% of light, then technically both sides of the moon are dark?
Watching this story with great interest and I hope that is gets more TV coverage in the future.
The technical term is "low albedo" i.e it has a low reflective index.Watching this story with great interest and I hope that is gets more TV coverage in the future.
The predominant colour on the moon is a charcoal grey - but it is not the only colour. Famously, the Apollo 17 astronauts came across orange coloured "soil" on one of their moon walks -
Edited by Eric Mc on Thursday 3rd January 22:02
Agreed. This is fascinating stuff yet it gets less than 0.001% of the airtime on news compared to Corbyn saying 'stupid woman' under his breath. Looking what they have done now, in the 1960s, and the time inbetween is to me at least nothing less than amazing.
Eric - what is the OU course you referred to? Is it a module of a degree course? Never heard of the term you used but sounds like what ladies get in their 50s.
Eric - what is the OU course you referred to? Is it a module of a degree course? Never heard of the term you used but sounds like what ladies get in their 50s.
Eric Mc said:
It's not 100% charcoal grey anywhere.
However, there are also lots of microscopic glass shards in lunar regolith which can refract and reflect light in odd ways. It's also a real bugger as it makes lunar dust extremely abrasive.
Here's a cross section of lunar regolith from one of the mare regions and you can see the variety of materials that are contained in this stuff -
That image is awesome, the last time I saw anything like that was back in the eighties whilst tripping on acid. However, there are also lots of microscopic glass shards in lunar regolith which can refract and reflect light in odd ways. It's also a real bugger as it makes lunar dust extremely abrasive.
Here's a cross section of lunar regolith from one of the mare regions and you can see the variety of materials that are contained in this stuff -
When I look at that image I can see so many different things - do you know if it is available to buy as a poster?
Gerald Scarfe surely took some inspiration from images like that - it's amazing! I can hardly stop myself seeing messed up images of animals, people, faces, pokemon etc.
What is it exactly? Is it a close up of a grain of moon dust?
It's stunning - I want that framed on my wall.
Thanks
You can even change the colours by rotating the image - as the glass shards act as polarising filters. The OU course I did allowed you access to rotating versions of images like this so you could see how the polarising effect worked.
This is the OU course I did two years ago. It was free at the time and very interesting -
https://www.futurelearn.com/courses/moons
It looks like it's starting up again in February.
This is the OU course I did two years ago. It was free at the time and very interesting -
https://www.futurelearn.com/courses/moons
It looks like it's starting up again in February.
How colours look in pictures is often very much down to processing techniques (nowadays digital but down to emulsions and chemicals in the days of colour film).
On the Apollo missions, the astronauts carried around with them a reference stand called a Gnomon on which there was a colour chart. This was so that that the processing labs back on earth had known colour references they could use when trying to get a good representation of the true colours of lunar dust, rocks, etc.
On the Apollo missions, the astronauts carried around with them a reference stand called a Gnomon on which there was a colour chart. This was so that that the processing labs back on earth had known colour references they could use when trying to get a good representation of the true colours of lunar dust, rocks, etc.
I like the Jaxa (Japanese space agency) images from about ten years ago -
Their images show how dark the surface of the moon is.
Regarding the Apollo pictures, on the surface the astronauts used specially adapted Hasselblad large format film cameras, which gave excellent image quality.
Their images show how dark the surface of the moon is.
Regarding the Apollo pictures, on the surface the astronauts used specially adapted Hasselblad large format film cameras, which gave excellent image quality.
They even stitched some images together to make an earthrise movie -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H1KWtG66lEQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H1KWtG66lEQ
Edited by Eric Mc on Friday 4th January 11:52
[quote=Eric Mc]I like the Jaxa (Japanese space agency) images from about ten years ago -
Their images show how dark the surface of the moon is.
Regarding the Apollo pictures, on the surface the astronauts used specially adapted Hasselblad large format film cameras, which gave excellent image quality. Thank goodness imaging technology has moved on, I am not deriding the past but imaging is so much better these days
Their images show how dark the surface of the moon is.
Regarding the Apollo pictures, on the surface the astronauts used specially adapted Hasselblad large format film cameras, which gave excellent image quality. Thank goodness imaging technology has moved on, I am not deriding the past but imaging is so much better these days
Eric Mc said:
They even stitched some images together to make an earthrise movie -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H1KWtG66lEQ
That gave me goosebumps! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H1KWtG66lEQ
Edited by Eric Mc on Friday 4th January 11:52
Eric Mc said:
Absolutely it has.
I'm looking forward to seeing live HD video images of astronauts bouncing around on the moon's surface.
By the last Apollo mission (Apollo 17) the TV images were pretty good - but imagine how much better they would be now.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2aCOyOvOw5cI'm looking forward to seeing live HD video images of astronauts bouncing around on the moon's surface.
By the last Apollo mission (Apollo 17) the TV images were pretty good - but imagine how much better they would be now.
CoolHands said:
Surely the far side is the same as the near side. Pointless.
Strangely it is not. Much thicker crust and to start with. One theory is that there was originally a second smaller moon that at some point collided with the moon and ended up spread mainly across the far side of the moon.It is indeed a very different place. The assumption before 1959 was that it would be similar to the near side. The first great revelation of the new Space Age was when Luna 3 saw the far side for the first time and sent back this picture.
Even though it was a very crude image, it showed that the far side was significantly different in appearance to the near side - lacking the very prominent lava plains that we can see on the side facing earth.
Since then we have discovered that the polar regions (not examined in any detail in the Apollo era) are also quite different. Indeed, they even differ from each other with the southern polar region being much higher in water content than the northern polar regions.
The moon is a lot more varied than was once thought.
Even though it was a very crude image, it showed that the far side was significantly different in appearance to the near side - lacking the very prominent lava plains that we can see on the side facing earth.
Since then we have discovered that the polar regions (not examined in any detail in the Apollo era) are also quite different. Indeed, they even differ from each other with the southern polar region being much higher in water content than the northern polar regions.
The moon is a lot more varied than was once thought.
Dog Star said:
Pistonheads: cliquey one-upmanship matters.
It reminds me of the plane people - got to get as many acronyms and buzzwords in just to show you're one of the crowd - "yeah, I was flying out of LAX, tuned left and had status as a diamond PAX but then the VP got VD and I got a flame out blah blah"..
I don't know what you mean. It's perfectly ordinary banter, Squiffy. Bally Jerry, pranged his kite right in the how's-your-father; hairy blighter, dicky-birded, feathered back on his sammy, took a waspy, flipped over on his Betty Harpers and caught his can in the Bertie.It reminds me of the plane people - got to get as many acronyms and buzzwords in just to show you're one of the crowd - "yeah, I was flying out of LAX, tuned left and had status as a diamond PAX but then the VP got VD and I got a flame out blah blah"..
audidoody said:
Dog Star said:
Pistonheads: cliquey one-upmanship matters.
It reminds me of the plane people - got to get as many acronyms and buzzwords in just to show you're one of the crowd - "yeah, I was flying out of LAX, tuned left and had status as a diamond PAX but then the VP got VD and I got a flame out blah blah"..
I don't know what you mean. It's perfectly ordinary banter, Squiffy. Bally Jerry, pranged his kite right in the how's-your-father; hairy blighter, dicky-birded, feathered back on his sammy, took a waspy, flipped over on his Betty Harpers and caught his can in the Bertie.It reminds me of the plane people - got to get as many acronyms and buzzwords in just to show you're one of the crowd - "yeah, I was flying out of LAX, tuned left and had status as a diamond PAX but then the VP got VD and I got a flame out blah blah"..
Gassing Station | Science! | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff