PDA

View Full Version : Giant mirror?



peteshimmon
2005-Sep-08, 05:48 PM
Can I ask if the Apollo planners considered
a giant mirror flat on the lunar surface?
I envisage 25 panels of polished aluminium
each 1 sq yard. Some sort of easily
installed frame with cable tensioning after
assembly to make it flat. It would not always
be visible but at time reflected sunlight
would reach Earth and over time the loss of
relectivity due to micro-meteoroids would give
a scientific justification. Too late now and
I suppose there would still have been arguments:)

JayUtah
2005-Sep-08, 05:53 PM
The Apollo engineers went one better: they created a set of laser-based retro-reflectors that could be set up to reflect laser light back to Earth at any time. These reflectors are still used today.

publiusr
2005-Sep-08, 07:37 PM
...maybe if they had put a Face up there...
--ducks--

peter eldergill
2005-Sep-08, 10:58 PM
I asked about this a month or so ago. Check this:

www.bautforum.com/showthread.php?t=20287 (http://http://www.bautforum.com/showthread.php?t=20287)

L8R

Pete

peteshimmon
2005-Sep-09, 02:16 PM
Sorry if I am going over ground already covered. I wonder if NASA was
constrained by treaties preventing the appearance of celestial bodies
being changed. Anyway it might not prevent some corporation in future.
Thinking about a Clarke story 50 years ago, a solar powered bulldozer
might be landed to rearrange the boulders on a sea. The O's and A's may
be difficult but not the C's and L's.

Maksutov
2005-Sep-09, 02:31 PM
Sorry if I am going over ground already covered. I wonder if NASA was
constrained by treaties preventing the appearance of celestial bodies
being changed. Anyway it might not prevent some corporation in future.
Thinking about a Clarke story 50 years ago, a solar powered bulldozer
might be landed to rearrange the boulders on a sea. The O's and A's may
be difficult but not the C's and L's.Just leave the CHA alone. Right, Wally?

R.A.F.
2005-Sep-09, 05:19 PM
Just leave the CHA alone.

Now whatever...SPOON!!!...could Mak mean by that? :)

peteshimmon
2005-Sep-12, 09:37 AM
What the dickens are you talking about? B....... cliques mutter mutter!

Peter B
2005-Sep-12, 11:40 PM
Sorry if I am going over ground already covered. I wonder if NASA was constrained by treaties preventing the appearance of celestial bodies being changed. Anyway it might not prevent some corporation in future. Thinking about a Clarke story 50 years ago, a solar powered bulldozer might be landed to rearrange the boulders on a sea. The O's and A's may be difficult but not the C's and L's.

Governments are forbidden by treaty from claiming extraterrestrial land. But there's nothing stopping individuals or companies I think. However, there's no limit to *altering* other planets. After all, merely landing on the Moon alters it.

But what is there to gain by making an alteration such as you describe? A company might like to place a giant advertisement for its product on the Moon, but the project would be massive. Think how big the letters would need to be to be visible from Earth, even through binoculars. Imagine the effort involved in carving a couple of letters across the UK (assuming it was unpopulated); carving letters on the Moon would be more complex, even if it wasn't 380,000 kilometres away. The engineering would be incredible, and the cost and effort involved would dwarf any returns.

You might think that smaller letters could be made, and photgraphed from lunar orbit, but such photos could have been faked 30 years ago (and probably were for newspaper advertisements).

IMO
2005-Sep-12, 11:45 PM
Governments are forbidden by treaty from claiming extraterrestrial land. But there's nothing stopping individuals or companies I think. However, there's no limit to *altering* other planets. After all, merely landing on the Moon alters it.

But what is there to gain by making an alteration such as you describe? A company might like to place a giant advertisement for its product on the Moon, but the project would be massive. Think how big the letters would need to be to be visible from Earth, even through binoculars. Imagine the effort involved in carving a couple of letters across the UK (assuming it was unpopulated); carving letters on the Moon would be more complex, even if it wasn't 380,000 kilometres away. The engineering would be incredible, and the cost and effort involved would dwarf any returns.

You might think that smaller letters could be made, and photgraphed from lunar orbit, but such photos could have been faked 30 years ago (and probably were for newspaper advertisements).


Advertising on the moon was raised in the Heinlein story "The Man Who Sold the Moon". IIRC one advertiser paid big bucks to block another from posting a large lunar surface ad.

paulie jay
2005-Sep-13, 05:06 AM
I'm not really sure what the purpose of your proposed mirror is peteshimmon, but if it is to prove that we went to the moon I would say that it probably never occured to the Apollo planners that people would actually doubt that they really went.

Enzp
2005-Sep-13, 06:06 AM
And the corner reflectors do the same job already.

peteshimmon
2005-Sep-13, 09:52 AM
I cant see the damm corner reflectors:) Anyway a smaller mirror that could have
been sighted through an 12 inch scope might have been a good idea!

paulie jay
2005-Sep-15, 06:23 AM
Again Pete, it probably never occured to them that they would have to prove that they went!

PhantomWolf
2005-Sep-15, 10:03 AM
I cant see the damm corner reflectors:) Anyway a smaller mirror that could have
been sighted through an 12 inch scope might have been a good idea!
Well unfortunately the best telescopes we currently have active (Kech and the Hubble) can resolve to around 90 feet, or about 27 metres per pixal. To really see it, you'd need about a 10 by 10 square of pixals which would require a mirror to be 74,380mē in area, a square with each side being nearly 273m in length. I'm not even going to try and work out how big a mirror you'd need to see it through a 12" scope......

peteshimmon
2005-Sep-15, 02:36 PM
Heres a quote from me: life must be a long dark tunnel without imagination! And
disciplined imagination is better. Imagine looking over an urban area on a sunny
morning. That window reflecting the Sun must be miles away! Something similar
might have been put on the Moon. Never mind, they did well! I am not a doubter!

Maksutov
2005-Sep-15, 04:08 PM
What the dickens are you talking about? B....... cliques mutter mutter!Oh, come on now! Don't get Ticked off! http://img137.imageshack.us/img137/566/iconwink6tn.gif

Count Zero
2005-Sep-15, 08:52 PM
"A disciplined imagination is better."

I really like that! Whether you are a writer, a musician, an engineer or a scientist, those words ring true. Thanks, Pete!

Z28Jerry
2005-Sep-16, 01:26 AM
I'm not really sure what the purpose of your proposed mirror is peteshimmon, but if it is to prove that we went to the moon I would say that it probably never occured to the Apollo planners that people would actually doubt that they really went.

Yup, my thought exactly.

Ricimer
2005-Sep-16, 03:30 AM
Actually, I think Pepsi already got ahold of venus. I looked through a 16" inch scope at it low on the horizon. I saw a blue top, white band, red bottom. Quite clearly the pepsi logo, covering the entire planet.

Any claims of chromatic abberation due to the really bad eyepiece are patently absurd.

Duane
2005-Sep-16, 04:01 AM
This may have been mentioned, but the astronauts did leave mirrors on the moon. They were used to reflect lazers aimed at them, which allowed them to determine the precise distance to the moon to within a few centimeters. I think they still use them to measure the moon's precession.

antoniseb
2005-Sep-16, 12:03 PM
This may have been mentioned, but the astronauts did leave mirrors on the moon.

We did mention it, but the complaint was that peteshimmon thought they should have left something that the common man with a normal telescope could see to verify that we'd been to the moon without having to trust anyone.

Of course some of the "we faked it" claims include the idea that we sent robotic missions there to help simulate the communications, and to get background images for the sound stage. I suppose we could just as easily have sent a robotic probe to open up the giant mirror...

publiusr
2005-Sep-16, 05:48 PM
I still think the best way to prove moon landings would be to:

Support massive HLLVs like Sea Dragon

Put the Hoax Believers on the Moon

And leave them there.

genebujold
2005-Sep-18, 08:44 PM
I still think the best way to prove moon landings would be to:

Support massive HLLVs like Sea Dragon

Put the Hoax Believers on the Moon

And leave them there.

Preferrably without a landing vehicle. If the number of people were large enough, and the impact trajectory were just right, it would leave quite a streak!

Certainly enough to convince other hoaxters...

...until they began claiming that the streak had always been there and the government doctored the original moon photos...