The Dark Moon

[Cargo]

This website is the one of the worst for mainstream gagging. But they do seem to post some nice pictures now and then.
https://arstechnica.com/science/2023/01 ... dden-pole/

ShadowCam. The camera was designed with maximum sensitivity to light, such that it could provide images of permanently shadowed regions of the poles—which is to say, capture images of things that are inherently very dark.

Haha, how Dark you say?

http://shadowcam.sese.asu.edu/images/1284

[GaryN]

From you link Cargo:

..was designed to capture dim light reflected from nearby topography."

Clever stuff no doubt. The dark craters should also be getting hit with galactic cosmic rays and causing gamma rays to be produced, which would cauuse seconary emissions at some lesser wavelengths. The crater temps are also measured at 25-30 C above absolute zero so will be emitting at some wavelength.

I've been trying on Twitter to elicit a response from some of the NASA experts there about lunar or Martian surface lighting levels but no response so far. Surely it must be embarrassing for them to talk about their great achievements and scientific research, but can't tell me any absolute values in lux or equivalent units.
Much lower levels than theory predicts SHOULD lead to some very big questions about present cosmology models, especially the bright, hot Sun assumption. It will never come to that unless independent researchers can conduct experiments. A SpaceX 'ride share' mission is satill $250,000 minimum, plus the cost of the experiment hardware, the communications system, ets, so half a million probably. Then you have to have permission from the Authorities for the National Security considerations. It's just not going to happen.
I have also E-Mailed Chris Hadfields contact address with some Apollo and ISS astronauts quotes about the absolute blackness when looing zenith from orbit. I doubt I will hear anything back, no doubt he still has to tread carefully in his dealings with NASA.

I just started playing with ChatGTP after seeing some youtube vids about it. My first question:

are stars visible by eye from outside of Earths atmosphere?

A few seconds later:

Yes, stars are visible by eye from outside of Earth's atmosphere. In fact, they are typically more visible in the absence of the Earth's atmospheric distortions and light pollution. However, viewing stars from space can also be affected by other factors, such as the presence of cosmic dust and the brightness of the Sun, which can make some stars more difficult to see.

I think it gets its info directly from wikipedia.

The bottom line for me in all this is that the Sun is not what we are told it is, and the Egyptians and other Sun worshipers were far closer to the truth that all the mainstream scientists in the world. Religion enters into this in a major way too, but we won't go into that here of course.

[GaryN]

Received an apologetic reply from Chris Hadfields 'handler' to my request for him to comment on the utter blackness of space when looking away from the Earth or Moon from orbit. He is unfortunately to busy with his latest book and speaking engagements. I think that is the only they he could have handled the matter.

Ah, this looks like what I am after:

Lighting Maps and Models: The LMMP shall provide geo-registered lunar lighting maps and models that provide lunar lighting information for any location at or near the lunar surface for any lunar time reference.

The project has also been extended to provide similar information for the Martian surface.

Lets go to the web site at http://www.lmmp.nasa.gov/

Hmm. We’re having trouble finding that site.

Oh, what a surprise!

[Holger Isenberg]

The onboard high resolution GoPro and Pixellink / Point Grey recordings on Orion during Artemis 1 are apparently soon to be published. They are already internally available for NASA employees: https://www.reddit.com/r/ArtemisProgram ... oard_video

Those are from the low altitude pass on the lunar rear side.

[GaryN]

NASA does admit to some of the Hero 7 Black cameras being modified, so trying to determine exactly what an un-modified one would see vs the modified will be very difficult if not impossible to determine unless they release full details.

This camera can now see the full spectrum from UV Ultraviolet, Visible light, and NIR Near-Infrared through this conversion. (The Hero7 is the last line of camera models from GoPro that can be converted to Full Spectrum-NIR!!!)

https://www.irmods.com/h7-irfs-camera

[GaryN]

Using the elicit.org research AI web site I asked:

Are there any visible light photographs of the Sun taken from space and using off-the-shelf cameras and a neutral density filter?

Response:

Prinz 1973 found that high spatial resolution photographs of the sun are possible using an Aerobee rocket. This suggests that it is possible to take high resolution photographs of the sun from space. However, none of the papers explicitly address the question "Are there any visible light photographs of the Sun taken from space and using off-the-shelf cameras and a neutral density filter?" So we cannot say for certain if this is possible. However, since one of the papers found that high spatial resolution photographs of the sun are possible from space, it is likely that it is also possible to take such photographs using off-the-shelf cameras and a neutral density filter. Further research is needed to confirm this.

The Prinz document concerns UV photography. Further research is needed. I like that idea.

I asked where I could find the LMMP data and was only given some suggestions(NASA-Marshall Space Flight Center) and some basic information:

A beta version of the LMMP software was released for limited distribution in December 2009, with the public release of version 1 expected in the Fall of 2010.

This pdf explains the project and shows how the web interface looked:
https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/file ... R12_v4.pdf

Lunar Mapping and Modeling Portal (LMMP) Image Processing Challenge
https://www.nasa.gov/feature/lunar-mapp ... -challenge
It would seem that the project was not fully funded by NASA and has quietly been dropped.

Dead links:
http://vestatrek.jpl.nasa.gov/
http://www.topcoder.com/solarsystem/lmmp/

[GaryN]

It would seem that the authorities have gone to great extents to hide the true values of the surface illumination levels to be found on the surface of the Moon or Mars. The units of lumens or lux that we use here on Earth are not to be found elsewhere, and even the value of the Suns brightness has been obfuscated. They now use irradiance, with a present value of 1361 W/m2.

Solar irradiance
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_irradiance

The last time I or my AI research assistant can find reference to the lumens unit is from the Apollo 8 mission. NASA must have realised something was amiss and so just changed the game. "More research is required" is the only answer I have received from the AI, and I wonder if the I in AI should not stand for Imbecile. I realise it is early days for AI, and I do believe that it will not be long before a correctly trained and informed system will be capable of at least identifying the information not available if not actually supplying any definitive values. Similarly I think that AI will eventually be very useful as a source of research that will bolster the case for the Electric Universe models.

The AI did find a paper I had not seen before that explains that it is not possible at the moment to use data from any of the presently employed instruments to easily convert W/m2 to lux.

A conversion guide: solar irradiance and lux illuminance

A survey of the literature found no definitive and readily available “rule of thumb” conversion standard between solar irradiance and illuminance. Easy-to-find Internet sources contain conflicting and widely varying values ranging from 688449 to 21000 lx for 1000 W/m2 (1 Sun) of solar irradiance. Peer-reviewed literature contains Luminous Efficacy equivalent values ranging from 21 to 131 lx per W/m2.

https://www.extrica.com/article/21667

So although the Mars rover cameras have looked at the surface and the Sun under a range of Sun elevations and atmospheric conditions we have absolutely no idea of actual lux values. Only the Russian lunar lander has ever looked at the lunar sky but there are no actual values given that tell us anything useful.
The Measurements of Sky Brightness on Lunokhod-2
https://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/pdf ... ..14..123S

NASA is obviously not going to send any instruments into space or to the Moon or Mars that would call presently accepted models into doubt, but will anyone else? Interesting times we live in anyway.

[Cargo]

That reminds me of something in another thread/message I can't find yet.

Tanget: https://www.spaceflightinsider.com/miss ... n-landing/

"The Moon-bound suits are going to have a white outer layer in order to reflect heat and protect its users from extreme high temperatures"
Some of the suit is "proprietary".

"Additionally, there are planned dust mitigation techniques, but the specifics of those haven’t been disclosed. Axiom Space said the company and NASA are looking at a number of solutions, including ways to clean the suit after a Moonwalk as well as disposable elements, such as a visor protector, etc."

Well, that brings in a whole lot of questions.
It does look like they are retaining the 'shield' visor layer system. Obviously the last/top one will be the Gold Shield.

[GaryN]

Obviously the last/top one will be the Gold Shield.

The gold visor layer is probably required as the lunar surface produces IR at eye damaging wavelengths, but not from heat. It is longer IR wavelengths that can cause damage with extended exposure. There is no proof that there is great heat from the Sun, no experiments have been performed to measure direct sunlight heat, something any company intending to operate on the Moon would have to know before they got there. The light is from fluorescence and is feeble by comparison to the heat we feel on Earth under the Sun, and I'd wager that with a Fresnel solar concentrator it would take all (Earth) day to heat a hot dog! The excess heat within the suit is produced by physical activity, and Bean proved this as he kept going after the nozzle for his evaporative cooling system froze up. He was very active and overheated to a point where they had to tell him to take a break. With his body heat and the supposedly hot Sun he would have boiled in his own juices in just a short while.
Solar concentrators would seem an obvious choice on the Moon for producing electricity or melting regolith to make bricks or other structural components but nothing will ever come of the idea. Similarly, concentrators have been proposed for spacecraft and Deep Space-1 did carry a concentrator but I find no reports on its power output or detailed specifications.

[GaryN]

Astronauts test moon camera design for future Artemis missions

https://www.space.com/astronauts-test-m ... type-earth
Pictures are back!

Not that I think anyone is ever going back to the Moon (in my lifetime anyway..) they have covered their asses as regards to lunar surface lighting levels with this unit. I can find no technical info regarding spectral response or modifications to the camera sensor. If one of their Nikon D5 cameras were to be used and set to full auto then information from the EXIF file could have been used to determine actual lighting levels. Can't have that now, can we? For sure the 'extended red' capabilities that it will have will be used to obfuscate any scientifically valid data. More NASA eye candy would be what we see.

[GaryN]

Japanese billionaire's lunar SpaceX voyage postponed

https://www.spacedaily.com/reports/Japa ... d_999.html

This mission will never fly, can't have civilian eyes in space confirming what the Apollo mission crews told us, that it is totally black out there.
Will Elons big rocket just keep exploding?

[GaryN]

I finally found an answer to my surface illuminance levels for the Moon through a Chinese AI service:

Theoretical is 4500 lux.
I broke Grok in less than an hour.
I posed a number of questions carefully planned to lead Grok into my trap. Long story short it conceded that none of the space based solar observatories employed a neutral density filter to view the Sun as thousands of Earth based photographers do. I then asked it to show me a photo of the Sun from Earth using an ND filter. Three moving dots for a while, no answer, then the prompt again. I asked it again, same thing.
So then I asked if Grok could suffer from cognitive dissonance:

It didn't finish its reply. I finally popped the big question:


I have posted a few replies on youtube to the Thunderbolts videos, but on going back later to check they were not there. When I looked at my post history they are not there. YT would seem to be blocking me.