Re: Sundials on the moon
Richard Mallett responded: You may be recalling a thread about a 'proposed' sundial for the moon which Mike Shaw and myself discussed with Sir Patrick Moore and Joe Allen (NASA astronaut). It was all a bit light-hearted and 'after-dinnerish' and it was suggested that the lunar day should be divided into 100 equal 'lunar ticks'. The author of that scurrilous suggestion evades me. Tony Moss - I think the Mars Pathfinder spacecraft took a sundial to the Moon. How? i.e. Did it actually land a dial one the moon's surface? Tony Moss -
Re: Sundials on the moon
Regarding the recent controversy about whether the United States actually did send astronauts to the moon. Maybe this news wasn't circulated in European circles, recently Buzz Aldrin who is in his mid 70s punched out a reporter in his mid 30s who was hounding him to swear on the Bible that he really went to the Moon. Here's the story for those interested: http://www.cnn.com/2002/TECH/space/09/20/aldrin.charges.reut/index.html -
Re: Sundials on the moon
How? i.e. Did it actually land a dial one the moon's surface? Tony Moss - Sorry, Mars Pathfinder was a mission to Mars. I know that a design for a Martian sundial was produced, but I don't know if it was ever taken to Mars. Of course, nothing has soft landed on the Moon for a ver long time. Richard. E-mail from: Richard Mallett, 29-Sep-2002 -
Re: Sundials on the moon
Below is a link to the Martian sundial. The designers included Bill Nye, the Science Guy and or own Woody Sullivan. I think I recall that the dial was never delivered. Perhaps someone knows more about it. http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap990428.html Bob Terwilliger -
RE: Sundials on the moon
J D SMITH wrote (2002-09-30T02:03:00+0100): Hello All I am but a simple person but one thing does bother me. When the Luner Module took off from the moon (as recorded by the very expensive camera that is lying on the Moons surface just waiting to be picked up) why was there not a terrific dust cloud from the rockets as it took off. Regards to All John Maybe it was due to all the dust that was blown away when the Lunar Module landed on the moon? (Assuming it did land on the moon.) By the way, I really liked Ross Sinclair Caldwell's comment on the father-son bonding that occurred that night. I too remember that night vividly and what a great time my father and I had. -
Re: Sundials on the moon
but they did so in the obviously reduced time associated with a lower gravity Oops, my mistake. In my last message I meant: but they did so in the obviously INCREASED time associated with a lower gravity You probably thought/meant reduced SPEED but wrote time - funny, but I knew what you meant. I was only 3 years old at the time, but my father sat me in front of the television and made a great point of making me watch and explaining to me the profound importance of this event. Since then, the images have become such a part of humanity's collective memory that I can't tell which parts I remember personally ... I do know I have never had much patience with talk of a moon-landing hoax. Ross Caldwell 3'21E 43'35N Béziers, France Ross Aline's Fantastic French Adventure! http://www.angelfire.com/space/france _ Discutez en ligne avec vos amis ! http://messenger.msn.fr -
Re: Sundials on the moon
You may be recalling a thread about a 'proposed' sundial for the moon which Mike Shaw and myself discussed with Sir Patrick Moore and Joe Allen (NASA astronaut). It was all a bit light-hearted and 'after-dinnerish' and it was suggested that the lunar day should be divided into 100 equal 'lunar ticks'. The author of that scurrilous suggestion evades me. Tony Moss - I think the Mars Pathfinder spacecraft took a sundial to the Moon. I think the Martian day was called a 'sol' Richard. E-mail from: Richard Mallett, 27-Sep-2002 -
Re: Sundials on the moon
that presupposes that the Apollo astronauts actually did go to the moon. A recent TV programme here in the UK showed what seemed, on the face of it, compelling evidence of strange irregularities in the photographs from the moon. In one shot the lunar landing module is positioned against a backdrop of hills, while in another, against THE SAME backdrop, it is not there! They could not have moved it, and the chances of getting two shots of a range of irregular distant hills which superimpose exactly, must be astronomical. Others showed strange lighting effects, shadows from two directions simultaneously, and objects cutting out the graticule markings on the camera lenses (used for alignment of images)and of course the fluttering star spangled banner. As a worker in geosciences, I would also have to ask why NASA are so obsessed with even the tiniest quantity of rock getting into the public arena (except mounted in such a way that access to it is denied)? Could it be that any competent laboratory could show that it is identical to terrestrial material? Until I saw this programme I could not believe anything other than the grainy images I saw in 1969 were historic beyond belief. Now, I'm not quite so sure.. Peter Tandy Check out the book 'Bad Astronomy' or the website www.badastronomy.com for evidence that the astronauts did go to the Moon (much better than the 'evidence' for Iraq's weapons of mass destruction in my opinion) also the messages on the survey being run by the BBC (at www.bbc.co.uk/space, if memory serves) Richard. E-mail from: Richard Mallett, 27-Sep-2002 -
Re: Sundials on the moon
Anselmo wrote: I heard somewhere that Apollo astronauts took a sundial to the Moon. Is this true? What is it like? Does anybody have any picture of it? that presupposes that the Apollo astronauts actually did go to the moon. A recent TV programme here in the UK showed what seemed, on the face of it, compelling evidence of strange irregularities in the photographs from the moon. In one shot the lunar landing module is positioned against a backdrop of hills, while in another, against THE SAME backdrop, it is not there! They could not have moved it, and the chances of getting two shots of a range of irregular distant hills which superimpose exactly, must be astronomical. Others showed strange lighting effects, shadows from two directions simultaneously, and objects cutting out the graticule markings on the camera lenses (used for alignment of images)and of course the fluttering star spangled banner. As a worker in geosciences, I would also have to ask why NASA are so obsessed with even the tiniest quantity of rock getting into the public arena (except mounted in such a way that access to it is denied)? Could it be that any competent laboratory could show that it is identical to terrestrial material? Until I saw this programme I could not believe anything other than the grainy images I saw in 1969 were historic beyond belief. Now, I'm not quite so sure.. Peter Tandy -
Re: Sundials on the moon
Anselmo asked: I heard somewhere that Apollo astronauts took a sundial to the Moon. Is this true? What is it like? Does anybody have any picture of it? You may be recalling a thread about a 'proposed' sundial for the moon which Mike Shaw and myself discussed with Sir Patrick Moore and Joe Allen (NASA astronaut). It was all a bit light-hearted and 'after-dinnerish' and it was suggested that the lunar day should be divided into 100 equal 'lunar ticks'. The author of that scurrilous suggestion evades me. Tony Moss -
RE: Sundials on the moon
Peter Have a look at http://www.redzero.demon.co.uk/moonhoax/index.htm Although I did not see the program, I think the answers to all that you saw on television will be found there, and in many other places. For example, in brief: Fluttering banner - it was on a springy wire to hold it out without any wind and there's no atmosphere to stop it moving Distant hills - mountains a VERY long way away don't look it with no atmosphere but show the same pattern from a range of viewpoints Diverging shadows - uneven ground (try it with sugar and matchsticks on the kitchen table - this should be second nature to diallists on odd surfaces ;-) ) I expect NASA think (probably rightly) that a hoax theorist would exchange terrestrial rock for lunar rock at the first opportunity! A lot of people do seem to have looked at it though ... My local glossy free magazine ran a couple of was it a hoax? articles last year. I look forward to a future issue of it proving that Stonehenge was built by extraterrestrials, or possibly overnight by Merlin using magical powers, largely on the basis that we don't seem to have constructed many large stone circles hereabouts for the last 2000 years. Andrew James N 51 04' W 01 18' On 27 September 2002 09:38 Peter Tandy wrote snip that presupposes that the Apollo astronauts actually did go to the moon. A recent TV programme here in the UK showed what seemed, on the face of it, compelling evidence of strange irregularities in the photographs from the moon. ... Now, I'm not quite so sure.. snip -
RE: Sundials on the moon
Tony Moss wrote: ... it was suggested that the lunar day should be divided into 100 equal 'lunar ticks'. The author of that scurrilous suggestion evades me. ... but not me [I know, 'cos I was there] :-) The question of the sundial on the moon may actually be the sundial on Mars see: http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap990428.html Mike Shaw mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://homepage.ntlworld.com/jmikeshaw/ N 53º 21' 24 W 03º 01' 47 Wirral, UK. -
Re: Sundials on the moon
Message text written by INTERNET:sundial@rrz.uni-koeln.de that presupposes that the Apollo astronauts actually did go to the moon. Not sure if you personally saw the landing 'for real' at the time or not but I recall that several of these 'apparent issues' were actually noted and explained at the time. I can vividly remember that the flag one was. It is as if someone thought they could rake these oddities up for the program to which you refer and deliberately omit the explanations. I always understood that's why NASA refused to take part in the programme to refute the allegations that you saw. I suppose each of us has our own 'memorable episodes' of those original on-line, real time broadcasts. For me it was the repeat of Galileo's experiment with the weight and the feather. Not only did they fall together as they would in a vacuum but they did so in the obviously reduced time associated with a lower gravity. Jolly hard to fake that... Patrick - Forwarding addresses: E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web: http://www.dunelm.org.uk/homepages?patrick_powers Lat: N 51d. 49m. 09s: Long: W 00d. 21m. 53s -
Re: Sundials on the moon
Message text written by Patrick Powers but they did so in the obviously reduced time associated with a lower gravity Oops, my mistake. In my last message I meant: but they did so in the obviously INCREASED time associated with a lower gravity I'll be starting my own rumour here I can see! Regards Patrick - Forwarding addresses: E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web: http://www.dunelm.org.uk/homepages?patrick_powers Lat: N 51d. 49m. 09s: Long: W 00d. 21m. 53s -
