Why doesnt Nasa have any detailed pictures of the Moon anomally Shard?

reply to post by NeoVain

We would not see the moon since it would be daytime here.

You think the Moon is never visible during the day? But the point is, even if earthshine were bright enough to overpower sunshine, it could not be coming from that far "south". The Earth does not go "south" of the Moon. Ever.

reply to post by AthlonSavage


Nikola Tesla stated he could move the earth onlly if he could place towers (with electromagnetic forces). He stated also he could destroy or guide comets wits a laser (vacuum needed like on the moon). Tesla was re inventing the inventions of our creators. (Our creators never would let destroy their creatures (us) by a simple comet)

The real leaders of this earth couldn't control Tesla like they prefered to do.
So Tesla did not get the fame he deserved (yes he had ocd, so what, but appartently that was not enough to neglect him) . He saw women as the future leaders of the world (a better reason for men to neglect him just like they did with Alfred Russel Wallace).

Our creators parked the moon -that once was a planet- around the earth for so many reasons.

www.evawaseerst.be...

reply to post by zandra

Did you know Tesla was a eugenicist?

The only method compatible with our notions of civilization and the race is to prevent the breeding of the unfit by sterilization and the deliberate guidance of the mating instinct, Several European countries and a number of states of the American Union sterilize the criminal and the insane. This is not sufficient.

www.pbs.org...

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by NeoVain

 

We would not see the moon since it would be daytime here.

You think the Moon is never visible during the day? But the point is, even if earthshine were bright enough to overpower sunshine, it could not be coming from that far "south". The Earth does not go "south" of the Moon. Ever.

edit on 2/11/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)

You were the one using the word south, not me. But since you seem to have a hard time grasping what i try to explain, i made a picture for you.




Now imagine this in 3d, with the sun alot closer to the camera than than earth and the moon, so that the sunrays hits the moon in such a way as the picture depicts, illuminating the craters. It also hits the earth, so that it illuminates the moon at the same time, making the tower cast a lighter shadow to the left.

reply to post by Phage


May be he was only a product of his time. Bur we deviate.

en.wikipedia.org...

reply to post by NeoVain

I understand you perfectly and you are wrong.

Yes I know I used the word south. That is because it is the proper word to use. The "shadow" is being cast to the north. That means if the Earth were producing it, it would have to be to the south of the "shard". That does not happen. If it did we we be able to see the "bottom" of the Moon from Earth. We can't. Ever.

Put it another way. The location is near the middle of the near side of the Moon, only a few degrees off. That means the Earth is always almost directly overhead at that location. Earthshine would not create a long shadow. Even during the lunar night.

It also does not happen that earthshine creates a shadow when something is in full sunlight on the Moon. Remember when I was corrected about my use of incident angle? The Sun was at an angle of 80º. That is high in the sky. It was daytime.

reply to post by zandra

Yes. Bringing Tesla into the discussion was a deviation.

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by NeoVain

 

I understand you perfectly and you are wrong.

Yes I know I used the word south. That is because it is the proper word to use. The "shadow" is being cast to the north. That means if the Earth were producing it, it would have to be to the south of the "shard". That does not happen. If it did we we be able to see the "bottom" of the Moon from Earth. We can't. Ever.

No, it means we where to the right of the shard, since the shadow where to the left. nothing more.

Put it another way. The location is near the middle of the near side of the Moon, only a few degrees off. That means the Earth is always almost directly overhead at that location. Earthshine would not create a long shadow. Even during the lunar night.

So you are saying that the "shard" from the original nasa pic, are always pointing straight towards us,?

It also does not happen that earthshine creates a shadow when something is in full sunlight on the Moon. Remember when I was corrected about my use of incident angle? The Sun was at an angle of 80º. That is high in the sky. It was daytime.

edit on 2/11/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)

The sun being at an angle of 0º would mean straight overhead, "high in the sky". 90º would mean it is horizontally aligned. 80º is near horizonal, certainly not "high in the sky", but rather very low, and lighting the area from the side, as is also evident from the craters.

reply to post by NeoVain

Here is a picture from Apollo 16, EVA 3. The Sun was about 45º above the horizon, the Earth was about 80º above the horizon. How many shadows do you see?

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by NeoVain

 

Here is a picture from Apollo 16, EVA 3. The Sun was about 45º above the horizon, the Earth was about 80º above the horizon. How many shadows do you see?

2

Originally posted by wolveriine
reply to post by Phage

 

I see a tower like structure which rises above the Moon's surface casting an obvious shadow . Don't know if the shadow is in wrong direction .

The shadow *is* in the wrong direction which can be seen if you look at the other shadows in the image.

I also have reason to believe that the part (dot) of the "shard" which is ABOVE the horizon is just a coincidental artifact or maybe even a star, by pure random coincidence lining up with the lower part of the "shard" - resulting in that it APPEARS like a tall, vertical shard.

(One indication for this is that the lower part and upper part dont line up EXACTLY)


If we take into account that the "shadow" cannot be taken as evidence of a tall structure (we KNOW that the shadow is not right!) - conclusion would be its really not much of shard anymore, just some random dots and lucky coincidence it appears like a shard AT FIRST GLANCE.

What we have is three parts in the image which are LIKELY not connected at all:

reply to post by NeoVain

You're kidding. From the tool? I see one, at about 3 o'clock from the tool. Where do you see the second one.

Oh, you are right about the incidence angle Yup. It's getting late(r) I'm losing it.
80º is 10º above the horizon.

Here is a picture from Apollo 12, EVA #1. The Sun was about 8º above the horizon. The Earth was about 80º above the horizon. See any double shadows?

reply to post by flexy123

The shadow *is* in the wrong direction which can be seen if you look at the other shadows in the image.

if you look from left to right with the view that the height of the moon surface is greater at the start of a shadow at left side than where it ends on right side then the casting light source is from left and the shard shadow is correct. This is an impossible argument to win one way or other without more detail information about the landscape we are looking at in picture.

reply to post by AthlonSavage

if you look from left to right with the view that the height of the moon surface is greater at the start of a shadow at left side than where it ends on right side then the casting light source is from left and the shard shadow is correct.

The Sun is on the right. The right rims of the craters are shading the right side of the craters. Does a west facing cliff get illuminated by the rising Sun? The west facing rims of the craters are cliffs. If the Sun were in the west they would be illuminated. They aren't.

Where do you think the Sun is in this image? Lower left or upper right?

The Sun is on the right. The right rims of the craters are shading the right side of the craters.

I understand the concept and when i look at the crater which i circled in red (on right) i can see its outer rim edge is highest on the left side of crater (as looking into picture). Therefore the shadow is casting in the same direction as shard indicated by arrow.


And in the circle on left you can see two shallow craters on a hill rise and yes the shadows in both are consistent with the sun casting a shadows in the same right direction as shard.



In this picture below its obvious which direction sun is illuminating moon face from and as we move closer to the darkside we see the shadows growing from left to right looking into the page. Now look back at them two little craters i circled. No doubt about it the sun is on left looking into page and the shard is casting in the correct direction.

reply to post by flexy123

I also have reason to believe that the part (dot) of the "shard" which is ABOVE the horizon is just a coincidental artifact or maybe even a star, by pure random coincidence lining up with the lower part of the "shard" - resulting in that it APPEARS like a tall, vertical shard.

That dot above the shard looks like a star to me

reply to post by AthlonSavage


Indeed, that is what i see as well. However this shadow is not consistent with the shadows on some of the craters in the full picture. This is an anomaly by itself, which would indicate that either:

1. This picture is a mosaic, with different regions of the moon photographed at different times, or
2. The earth is illuminating that part of the picture (both craters and anomaly) while the sun is illuminating the bigger craters more.

reply to post by NeoVain

Indeed, that is what i see as well. However this shadow is not consistent with the shadows on some of the craters in the full picture. This is an anomaly by itself, which would indicate that either:

The picture titled Centuar target has a view more looking down verticle on moon and the shard picture it looks like it was taken closer to moon and the camera taking a wideview shot across the landscape. I think that will play some tricks with the angles of some of the shadows if we consider also the the ground is not complete a smooth plane but has rises and falls.

Originally posted by AthlonSavage
reply to post by NeoVain

 

Indeed, that is what i see as well. However this shadow is not consistent with the shadows on some of the craters in the full picture. This is an anomaly by itself, which would indicate that either:

The picture titled Centuar target has a view more looking down verticle on moon and the shard picture it looks like it was taken closer to moon and the camera taking a wideview shot across the landscape. I think that will play some tricks with the angles of some of the shadows if we consider also the the ground is not complete a smooth plane but has rises and falls.

edit on 11-2-2013 by AthlonSavage because: (no reason given)

Also, the moon is round. This means that shadows would be cast at different angles at different points in the surface, the further apart the location, the more inconsistant would the shadows be. A shadow that is cast north at one end of the moon would be cast south at the other end of the moon. However this would not explain a shadow cast east or west, which is what the moon "tower" seem to be doing, therefore i assume a second light source like the earth is needed to explain this (unless the picture is a mosaic)

Originally posted by wolveriine
reply to post by flexy123

 

I also have reason to believe that the part (dot) of the "shard" which is ABOVE the horizon is just a coincidental artifact or maybe even a star, by pure random coincidence lining up with the lower part of the "shard" - resulting in that it APPEARS like a tall, vertical shard.

That dot above the shard looks like a star to me

edit on 11-2-2013 by wolveriine because: (no reason given)

Probably, yes. However the top of this tower is certainly no star.Also, the shadow from this "tower" is also consistant with the shadows of the craters in the area.