Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

An explosion on the Moon
NASA ^ | 12.23.2005

Posted on 12/24/2005 8:11:55 AM PST by jmcenanly

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 121-133 next last
To: Some hope remaining.
You do know what this means? If "they" can "see" a 12cm object strike the Moon, how come "they" never release
photos of the Apollo landing sites taken from Earth or the Hubble?

I was just reading some USENET posts on the possible location of the Beagle 2 "landing" site. (On Mars...)

61 posted on 12/24/2005 9:29:37 AM PST by Calvin Locke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: jmcenanly

Sheila Jackson Lee wants to know if it hit near the Mars Rovers.


62 posted on 12/24/2005 9:38:38 AM PST by BnBlFlag (Deo Vindice/Semper Fidelis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jmcenanly

Even NASA can't get it right. It was an "impact", not an "explosion."

Words have meaning. Or at least they should, especially to scientists.


63 posted on 12/24/2005 9:46:35 AM PST by Atlas Sneezed (Your FRiendly FReeper Patent Attorney)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MediaMole
There rules here you know . . .
64 posted on 12/24/2005 9:53:05 AM PST by BenLurkin (O beautiful for patriot dream - that sees beyond the years)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: picturebell
Somebody playing paintball with a really hot gun...
65 posted on 12/24/2005 9:54:03 AM PST by UncleJeff
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

66 posted on 12/24/2005 9:54:50 AM PST by BenLurkin (O beautiful for patriot dream - that sees beyond the years)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Calvin Locke
If "they" can "see" a 12cm object strike the Moon, how come "they" never release photos of the Apollo landing sites taken from Earth or the Hubble?

Dude, what they saw wasn't the 12cm object striking the moon. What they saw was the 70 kiloton explosion that resulted from the 12cm object striking the moon. A 70 kiloton explosion is just a little bit larger than the bottom half of a moon lander, and gives off just a little bit more light.

The landers are way too small to be seen by any telescope on Earth, or by the Hubble for that matter.

67 posted on 12/24/2005 9:55:22 AM PST by wyattearp (The best weapon to have in a gunfight is a shotgun - preferably from ambush.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: jmcenanly

. . . . women and minorities hardest hit


68 posted on 12/24/2005 9:55:27 AM PST by ChadGore (VISUALIZE 62,041,268 Bush fans. We Vote.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Beelzebubba; jwpjr; jmcenanly
It was an "impact", not an "explosion." Words have meaning. Or at least they should, especially to scientists.

There's nothing wrong with using "explosion" here. Just because it was a big bang caused by kinetic energy of an impact instead of chemical 'bomb' energy doesn't make it less of an explosion.

Words -do- have meaning, or at least they should....to FReepers!

69 posted on 12/24/2005 9:56:52 AM PST by sam_paine (X .................................)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: jmcenanly
moon.google.com has it live!


70 posted on 12/24/2005 9:57:07 AM PST by ChadGore (VISUALIZE 62,041,268 Bush fans. We Vote.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ChadGore
http://moon.google.com/
71 posted on 12/24/2005 9:58:38 AM PST by ChadGore (VISUALIZE 62,041,268 Bush fans. We Vote.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: EagleUSA
[chuckle]
All too typical of a reaction nowadays.
72 posted on 12/24/2005 10:00:16 AM PST by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: sam_paine
There's nothing wrong with using "explosion" here. Just because it was a big bang caused by kinetic energy of an impact instead of chemical 'bomb' energy doesn't make it less of an explosion.


By the same token, when I kick the toe of my boot into the dirt, and raise a cloud of fragments, that is an explosion?

No, I begin with the lay dictionary definition:
1. A release of mechanical, chemical, or nuclear energy in a sudden and often violent manner with the generation of high temperature and usually with the release of gases.
2. A violent bursting as a result of internal pressure.
3. The loud, sharp sound made as a result of either of these actions.

A rock hitting dirt does not fall under any of these definitions. Of course, scientists and engineers have a narrower definition of the term. Even the energy released when the gunpowder is detonated in a rifle or cannon is not an explosion, it is rapid combustion.

NASA is just playing "bread and circuses" exaggeration games to get headlines and our earnings.
73 posted on 12/24/2005 10:09:09 AM PST by Atlas Sneezed (Your FRiendly FReeper Patent Attorney)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: wyattearp
What they saw was the 70 kiloton explosion that resulted from the 12cm object striking the moon.


Actually, what they saw was the cloud of ejecta debris and dust that was kicked up from the impact.

When this happens near the terminator (the sunset/sunrise line that divides the dark from the light) in a dark area, and the debris rises up into the sunlit area, it can be very visible, even to the naked eye.
74 posted on 12/24/2005 10:11:59 AM PST by Atlas Sneezed (Your FRiendly FReeper Patent Attorney)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: sayfer bullets

That was a cool series, actually. After the bloodless, passionless first season.

Dan


75 posted on 12/24/2005 10:12:59 AM PST by BibChr ("...behold, they have rejected the word of the LORD, so what wisdom is in them?" [Jer. 8:9])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: jmcenanly
The Lunartic Fringe. What a Rush!

Bush's fault line!

76 posted on 12/24/2005 10:15:25 AM PST by Young Werther
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OkiMusashi

Official notification that you have posted the best reply to one of these threads in the history of FreeRepublic.


77 posted on 12/24/2005 10:22:15 AM PST by ImpBill ("America ... Where are you now?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: wyattearp

I can imagine how they estimated the amount of energy the explosion had from the image, but how do you suppose they could determine the velocity?


78 posted on 12/24/2005 10:22:23 AM PST by Dan Evans
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: jwpjr
Isn't the headline a bit misleading?

My reaction as well. I was expecting volcanism, hydrothermal activity, maybe some weird chemical reaction. Instead it was a routine meteorite impact with the sensational difference that someone on Earth observed it. That's where the head's emphasis should have been.

79 posted on 12/24/2005 10:22:24 AM PST by Bernard Marx (Don't make the mistake of interpreting my Civility as Servility)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Beelzebubba
1. A release of mechanical, chemical, or nuclear energy in a sudden and often violent manner with the generation of high temperature and usually with the release of gases.

I would say this definition covers a meteor impact. A meteor has mechanical energy that is converted to high temperature that violently vaporizes the soil and releases gases.

80 posted on 12/24/2005 10:29:18 AM PST by Dan Evans
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 121-133 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson