Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Lunar blast / science method

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    2,346
    http://skyandtelescope.com/news/curr...icle_890_1.asp

    This article says that the famous 1953 lunar strike photographed by an amateur really wasn't (an asteroid hit, that is).

    What I like is the attitude of the JPL scientist who co-authored the paper claiming proof for the event:
    "That's disappointing. But it's more important to find that out."

    Bravo!

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    2,689
    I have a question. The article states "that the flare is centered a full 1, or 30 km, from the Clementine candidate." One degree of what? Is that for Clementine?

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    2,677
    I just realized that this article is saying the initial findings were wrong. I just kind of overlooked it the first time, thinking it was a repeat of the first announcements. Pretty interesting, if disappointing.

    KP, I believe it's 1° of the Moon's circumference. Take the total circumference of 10920 km and divide it by 360 and you get 30.33km.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    5,455
    http://www.npr.org/display_pages/fea...e_1182939.html

    Just today on NPR this story was alive again. Did they miss something or has more evidence come to light?

    I guess I'll have to go re-read the article more closely but I listened to the radio broadcast and they didn't say anything about finding the crater on records earlier than 1953.

  5. #5
    [...examines water...takes off boot and sock, inserts toe in water to check temperature...disregards fish floating to surface belly-up...]

    One of the things I noticed in one of the articles cited was that the flare in the original picture was a meteor(ite?) headed directly for the camera. Having seen another photo of this phenomemon, and understanding one of Prof. Newton's statements, if there was a piece of rock/ice headed DIRECTLY for the camera, wouldn't it have had to punch its way through the moon first?

  6. #6
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    5,455
    A meteor head on into the camera or an impact on the Moon, geeze aren't both of those choices pretty improbable. If you were fotographing a meteor shower you might get one head on, but a random meteor?

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    2,677
    On 2003-03-10 21:54, Charlie in Dayton wrote:

    ...if there was a piece of rock/ice headed DIRECTLY for the camera, wouldn't it have had to punch its way through the moon first?
    Not really. Since it's 300,000km to the Moon, it would take some time for the meteoroid fragment to get here. It would be able to pass lunar orbit well before the Moon itself reached that point, and then burn up just as everything lined up in a row.

    But they said they discounted that one too, as the flash lasted longer than a meteor would have.

Similar Threads

  1. Contest: Win Lunar Science Swag!
    By Fraser in forum Universe Today
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 2010-Jul-26, 10:40 PM
  2. Extraction Method for Frozen Lunar Water Ice?
    By sanman in forum Space Exploration
    Replies: 37
    Last Post: 2010-Mar-17, 06:42 AM
  3. Blast Crater for Lunar Module
    By jrkeller in forum Conspiracy Theories
    Replies: 45
    Last Post: 2009-Sep-24, 11:46 PM
  4. Lunar science...
    By marsbug in forum Space/Astronomy Questions and Answers
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 2009-Mar-11, 03:32 PM
  5. My method for multiplying numbers together - "the clop method"
    By clop in forum Science and Technology
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 2008-May-25, 10:46 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •