Gravity on the Moon...

Originally posted by zorgon

Originally posted by Totalstranger
yeah but Lear thinks there is semi-earth like gravity,

.64 of Earth to be precise, based on Werner von Braun's and Apollo 8 reading of the neutral point

and there are bases there. did India see any of that?

No India did not 'see' that, but then they claim they have 40,000 high res images... have we 'seen' those yet? Kaguya/Selene also did not 'see' them, but we won't see those pictures for at least another year yet... why? And China's ChangE-1 showed us ONE picture that had 'flaws'. Where is that spacecraft now?

I guess it doesnt matter because there will soon be a new, dummy account by none other than Lear himself blowing this out of proportion.

John has never had, nor ever will have a dummy account here or anywhere else. So who is blowing what out of proportion?

so nice find. now find a base, vehicles, or anything....anything

Already have... your just not seeing it..

I have added a link below about this mission



www.nasaspaceflight.com...

the moons gravitational pull is affected by the earth, along with the earths gravitational pull, there is a gravity on the moon like any other body in space, the core of the moon is not like the earth its egg shapped or oval i think, i mind seeing this some where, if i find the source i'll post it here.

I dont trust john Lear, about 85-90% of the things he has come out with are complete piddle, bases on the moon etc,

but the probe has mearly changed altitude to increase the image area with its cameras, its also recording the gravity changes in space around a celestrial body, just like they did on that comet not too long ago, there is no moon bases, or alien staging posts, they would have become highly obvious by now

The Hunted Few

reply to post by ArMaP
Hi Armap,
Maybe it just muddies the waters a bit more,since no-one
is really sure of gravity itself as a force.
Say for instance a perfect sphere has a perfect gravity around it,
and an irregular body does not,would that mean gravity is a force from somewhere else,and also the size of a body,
like Jupiter which we are told,is mostly a big bag of farts
has a huge force of gravity,it's a mystery.

reply to post by weemadmental


I read someone's opinion that this could also be to avoid (or at least to reduce) the heating problems they had at the beginning, but as that person, as far as I know, is not part of the mission, that is just another opinion.

reply to post by smurfy


You are right, it just "muddies the waters" even more, I don't understand what you mean by your post, sorry.

reply to post by TV_Nation


It would be interesting to do deep core samples and see the strata. I wonder if it could be like geode with a crystalline structure?

]

[edit on 28-5-2009 by smurfy]

Originally posted by empireoflizards
I'm no expert in this...but is it possible the gravity differences result from the earth's gravity counter-acting with the near side of the moon?

That is what I was thinking, and I'm no expert either.

I don't know why everyone is so puzzled.

[edit on 28-5-2009 by Pamie]

reply to post by ArMaP
I think John Lear said that gravity was "greater"how you measure
that against stronger,i'm not sure could just be sematics,
he may have meant the same thing.
Second part of my post was just general on gravity it is a pig!

reply to post by ArMaP


I believe he said there was stronger gravity on the Moon. So if one is to take the source and interpret it has the probe made an adjustment to compensate for orbital decay then that would indeed prove Lear's theory.

fascinating post but as others have pointed out the indian satellite is moving higher because it can, not because it has to! probably similar to the mars rovers which after completing their mission and outliving their expected lifetime, were used to do other things just because they could do so! what would you expect - send a hundred million dollar satellite to die just because it completed its mission while it's still fully functional?

why are they researching the moon so much? same could be asked of why we're researching the fruit fly even though it's known inside out. or some of the tiny worms, frogs or deep water lifeforms. because scientists want to find answers to all sorts of questions. and because they got the grants to do it! i'm assuming if it were up to some people on ATS we'd still be believing the bible is "the word" and we don't need any other books or knowledge...

besides i don't think (and this is speculation since i'm not a scientist) that the gravity anomalies on the moon are very large. this is probably just a tiny variation that needs very sophisticate and sensitive instruments to map out. if a human were there to try to "feel" it i assume they would not feel much different than in "normal" gravity areas. there are similar gravity variations mapped here on earth - i remember reading some articles about that.

i'm not an "aliens are here" believer but i'm quite sure there is life out there. i can accept that there may have been an advanced earth civ that made it to the moon before we (re)invented writing or the moon has been used as a base by ancient aliens that mined the earth millions of years ago. it's even possible that all this is kept hidden by the space agencies - understandably so. how many humans are willing to accept ancient ruins on the moon? or that in fact god did not create us, he created others before us and then we went back to the stone age and here we are on the moon *again*...

i think the US moon landings are real. however you won't see anything even with the largest telescope on earth because the distance is just too great. if you look at google earth's resolution where cars and people are visible on the streets, you must also remember that these satellites are just 200 miles above us or so. assuming that the indian satellite had good cameras they may have actual photographic proof of the moon landings by now... it all depends on what the primary mission of that satellite was and if it was equipped with very good cameras or not. and yet how DEPRESSING would it be if we mapped the moon with an inch resolution and found absolutely nothing other than rocks there?

why did we cancel moon bases? well maybe the global recession and terrible overspending that's planned for the next years can explain that perfectly. do you really think people would accept more trillions in spending on THE MOON (because it will take trillions to build and maintain a human inhabitable base there) when we have far bigger trillion dollar issues down here? look at the ISS - it's many years behind and far away from completion, even as a project funded by multiple nations. moon base may still happen if it becomes an international project like the ISS but it will probably be as slow to become reality as the ISS...

i loved the comment about the moon having an atmosphere just like earth. i really hope that was sarcasm or a quote from a fantasy novel because if you really believe that you've got to read up some more on those science books...

Well doesnt this beat all. I come to a thread about Gravitational Anomilies on the Moon, and what do I get? 5 pages of discussion about John Lear and his crazy theories. So I guess all you John Lear supporters didnt catch on that he is FOS when he started rambling about the moon being a giant Soul Catcher! Maybe we should change that quote to say you can fool most of the people most time.. if you just stick to your story. Some of you will never learn.

I TEND TO GIVE JOHN LEAR CREDIT AND INSTEAD OF THINKING HE IS A NUTCASE, I TEND TO THINK OF HIM AS ONE OF THE GREATEST PRACTICAL JOKERS OF ALL TIME!

[edit on 5/28/2009 by justsomeboreddude]

Originally posted by justsomeboreddude
Well doesnt this beat all. I come to a thread about Gravitational Anomilies on the Moon, and what do I get? 5 pages of discussion about John Lear and his crazy theories. So I guess all you John Lear supporters didnt catch on that he is FOS when he started rambling about the moon being a giant Soul Catcher! Maybe we should change that quote to say you can fool most of the people most time.. if you just stick to your story. Some of you will never learn.

I TEND TO GIVE JOHN LEAR CREDIT AND INSTEAD OF THINKING HE IS A NUTCASE, I TEND TO THINK OF HIM AS ONE OF THE GREATEST PRACTICAL JOKERS OF ALL TIME!

[edit on 5/28/2009 by justsomeboreddude]

Do you have evidence that he is incorrect somehow (yeah, i know you can't prove a negative...just sayin').

Listen, there are allegations of towers on the moon. Not just Lear, not just Hoagland. How about Ingo Swann? He has claimed the same, and his work is supported by true scientific data, overseen by Hal Puthoff (and paid for by the CIA, which oversaw each element of the RV project at SRI). As well, there have been reports of TLP's that involved what appeared to be buildings, towers, and bridges that appeared and then disappeared on the moon (as seen by astronomers on Earth).

So, assuming that it is entirely possible that there are towers on the moon, what purpose would you say that they served?

As well, why would you debase a lifes work just because of one outlandish theory? If that is the way things are done, then Hawking surely should not have a career.

So...what do you have to say about gravity anomolies on the moon? I notice that you ridicule the pages of conversation about Lear, and then make a post all about Lear....all in the exact same post.

Oh, the irony.

double post.

[edit on 28-5-2009 by bigfatfurrytexan]

The moon's gravity field is not necessarily "homogenous" because the gravity field of any planet or moon isn't. Especially earth's.

But it also depends on altitude or distance from the planet.. As gravity does become more "homogenous", in general, the further out you go in a moon or planet's gravitational sphere of influence.

If the scientists are right, then the moon formed after a mars-sized planet slammed into earth an extremely long time ago. The big reason the later apollo missions were largely geologic scientific missions was because we had no idea where the moon came from. What was found was pretty strong evidence to suggest the moon was once part of earth (or at least formed from material broken off from earth that eventually coalesced gravitationally to form one solid moon).

When you think about it, alot of the factors that would've eventually determined the geometry of the overall gravity field would've been things like the geometry of the core of this new body and the speed at which the material closer to the surface cooled over time.

It's highly unlikely that a moon with such a destructive birth would ever really have a perfect gravity field anyway. Especially when you consider that one side of the moon is constantly facing earth and that this inevitably affected the geometry of the resulting gravity field as well.. While the earth's gravitational force inevitably affected the orbit and orientation of the moon relative to earth at the same time.

But we also know that the moon is slowly drifting away from earth over time and noone has scientifically proven why.
It could just be weakening of earth's gravity field combined with the moon's sustained speed of orbit around the earth. Who knows.
But it is ironic how the very same laser ranging experiments set up by the apollo missions not only give us this data about the moon's slow drift away from earth but also prove that we really did land there.. (not to open up that can of worms).

-ChriS

[edit on 29-5-2009 by BlasteR]

[edit on 29-5-2009 by BlasteR]

No sh*t there's more gravity on the far side, it doesn't take an idiot to figure out why.
If you're on the near side of the moon, you will be under the influence of the moon's gravity, plus, you'll be getting 'pulled' away from the moon by Earth's gravity. Then, if you travel to the far side of the moon, you will be under the influence of the moon's gravity, plus, you'll be getting 'pulled' 'THROUGH' the moon by Earth's gravity, so the gravity will 'seem' to be more on the far side than the near side.
There you go.
So all you geniuses who thought it could be caused by aliens or machinery, you're idiots.

Very interesting read.

Understandably it is good to have a healthy does of skepticism and a dash of conspiracy to spice things up, but look at this in a more pragmatic way.

There are many many things still left to discover about our planet, the moon and the universe in general. Some discoveries will be awe inspiring, others will make us question current theories/principles of science.

The best way to look at this anomoly is to confront it with a scientific mind. There are many things that we do not know about geophysics (either on Earth or other planets)

So lets take this discovery in stride and relish the fact that we are discovering new things about our wonderful universe everyday. Perhaps when all possible explanation is exhausted and no answer is found, only then maybe go into the realm of conspiracy theories.

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
Now we see that NASA has scrapped any moon habitation? What about private industry? Do we see similar issues with the private ventures?

Hmmm Never thought to check on that... I will now though

Originally posted by whatukno
and hence why the far side has a stronger gravity than the Earth side. The moon believe it or not was molten at one point spinning round the Earth in it's orbit as it cooled. The force of it's orbit sent more mass to the far side than the near Earth side.

Documents and links please... because I find nothing at NASA that backs your theory

What qualify as anomalies?

Earth also has variances in its gravity field (see here )