Is it true that the moon isn't real? That it's an optical illusion.?

Question

Scientists say this because they believe it has something to do with light spectrums that decieve the eye. New research into this phenonema has showed that the moon could just be a product of super charged light protons that float in the atmoshere. This theory adds weight to the suggestion that the moon landing was a hoax, and was falsified.

Answer 1

I don't think we should be too hard on PaulR. I have been reading his other questions and they are revealing as to what sort of person he is. He is at least open about himself and trying to disentangle untruths from reality, And i think we may need to be supportive, as I think he may have learning difficulties but is here to learn.

Read his question about whether radiation can really give you superpowers (as Marvel Comics would have us believe) and ask yourself what kind of person needs help to unscramble that, Then I think this question and why it is being asked will become a lot clearer.

JayT and BruceBirchall are asking all the right questions, with admirable scientific rigour, but I suspect PaulR is not schooled in the Scientific Method and how research is done and published and how theories are hypotheses at first that then require observational evidence for them to become accepted, as he comes over to me as being altogether too trusting and impressionable but he then has doubts about what he has picked up, and is simply asking if his doubts make sense to others.

Let's not put the guy down, folks, Just say what you think is wrong with this theory and why you think he should reject it.

Answer 2

There is in fact an optical illusion concerning the moon and this is to do with its apparent size in the sky. Most people have noticed this at some time, particularly that it appears larger when rising or setting.

Originally it was thought that the largeness was an illusion caused by refraction near the horizon; the light is passing through more air before it reaches your eye and this spreads the beam creating a larger image.

Sounds convincing doesn't it!

In fact it is the smaller moon that is the illusion; isolated from known objects on and near the ground against which the apparent size of the moon can be judged, the visual cortex of the brain comes to a mistaken conclusion that it is smaller than the image being seen and deliberately shrinks your perception of its size.

Stephanie: when some idiot claims that 'scientists say', more often than not there are no scientists involved. If there are they are usually scientists who hold a particular religious view and are capable of making bogus 'scientific arguments' that the layman can neither understand nor refute, lacking the knowledge and training.

Someone, whose name unfortunately I cannot recall, famously quoted, 'It's amazing the number of facts that folks know that just ain't so!'. This board proves again and again just how little science most people know, even those who respond to these questions with serious answers that they truely believe are correct!

Answer 3

There seems to be a spate of questions at the moment, all doubting the basic tenets of modern science, that most people now take for granted. Is this a conspiracy by Creationists, I wonder?

There was someone on Yahoo Answers earlier today asking "Is it true that we have never even been to outer space and that the Earth is really flat?" and someone else a few days ago insisting that the Moon was no more than 20 miles away and that this was his "Theory". Scientists, he claimed, were lying to us when they said it was a quarter of a million miles away. He, however, knew the truth.

Quite why they should lie about this, he did not say. He was asked to produce some evidence for his "theory". He failed to do so. His credibility and that of his theory weren't exactly enhanced by the fact that he called himself Mr_Soapy_Tit_****!

(I mean, come on, how many Nobel Prize Winners for Physics do you know who are called Mr Soapy Tit W ank?)

Lacking any such evidence, the status of his theory remains, therefore, that of an unsubstantiated assertion.

I shall treat your assertion similarly. I note you call it a theory, Well, theories need evidence to support them. That is what the Scientific Method involves.

Evidence and the publishing of a paper in a reputable and authoritative journal like Nature (they scrutinise papers before they publish them, so readers can have confidence in what the journal publishes).

If you claim the Moon isn't real, how do you explain the tides? Or are they an optical illusion too? Tides are caused by the pull of gravity of a nearby body. If the Moon isn't real, then the nearest body is Mars which at its closest is 35 million miles away and when at its furthest away is more than 200 million miles away.

Yet the tides are pretty much of the same magnitude, all the time, so it can't be Mars, can it? If it was, they would vary significantly in their amplitude, depending on where Mars was, relative to Earth. The same line of reasoning rules out Venus, too.

So what are we to postulate to explain the tides? An invisible body that we cannot see and nobody knows about?

Perhaps you can quote chapter and verse of the scientific paper that makes this claim so we can all read it and make our own minds up? Or is this just a rumour you have picked up, that you cannot substantiate? Something some bloke said down the pub, that sounded good at the time?

Frankly, lacking their research paper to corroborate your assertions, I would have to dispute that the authors of this idea are scientists. We have no way of checking their credentials. Which university do they work for? What have they worked on previously? Is any of the team a Professor in their field? What exactly is their field? Optics?

Sorry, Paul, but this reads to me as New Age mumbo-jumboand I am not going to give it any credence until there is scientific evidence that somebody has sufficient confidence in to publish and to put his or her name to it i.e, stake their reputation on it,

Nor should you give it any credence. To do so would be to be naive and gullible. You should demand the same level of proof from your source as I am demanding from you, Scientists (and this is a science forum not a New Age tittle-tattle-mongering forum) are above all sceptical and need convincing,

I am open to persuasion and being convinced, but you will have to do better than statements like "it is something to do with" which read like vague, poorly-remembered and not-really-understood recollections of something you have read or heard.

I think most people who have answered this question would feel similarly. You need to make out a persuasive case, You haven't done so, yet.

Answer 4

If that theory were true, it would be easy to prove and it would be nothing short of a world-class scientific discovery that would shake the foundations of modern science.

Hopefully, you'll come to the realization that the theory is pseudoscience and that it adds no weight to anything. I can't imagine any competent, experienced scientists actually believing such a theory.

I'd be very interested to know which scientists support the theory and in which reputable scientific journal(s) the theory was published.

I'd also like to see some of the experimental data from their research that led to the conclusion that it's even possible for the moon to be merely an illusion.

Answer 5

Okay, I see most people have gone with my first reaction of 'Huh???', but thinking about it, it is possible you have heard of something called the 'Moon Illusion', which is concerned with the fact that the moon can sometimes appear much larger that normal when it is near the horizon. This is an optical illusion, but it only effects the appearance of the moon in the Earth's sky, it does not mean the moon itself is an illusion. For more on this, check out the excellent 'Bad Astronomy' site; http://www.badastronomy.com/

Also, I remember there was some 'original thinker' (read nutter) who proposed that not only was the earth hollow, but we were living on the INSIDE, and the Moon was just a distorted reflection of the sun. Or something.

Answer 6

What scientists are tellin you that? Do yourself a favor and go to the beach tonite. Wade out till the water comes to your neck and watch for the fake moon. When the water covers your head just wait, it will be a figment of your imagination that you are drowning because the fake moon cant possibly create this hi tide. let me know the outcome tomorrow.

Answer 7

first to all morons who think the moon is made of cheese, sorry to disapoint you but the moon is 43% of nickel and 18% asteroids and 39% of other. secondly. the moon is real. before life on earth it was predicted that a giant asteroid the size of pluto crashed into earth and a giant piece of the earth floated off into space. but due to the earths gravity. the piece of the earth did not get far. it began orbiting earth.asteroids and metearoids shaped the moon into a sphere and it still contains craters.funny, thanks to the giant asteroid that made the moon, it also started the human life. backteria arised from the destruction of the smashup.thank god for the giant asteroid huh?

Answer 8

What about the fact that detailed charts have been made of the surface, which is visible from a strong telescope. The craters have always been the same on the moon in observable history.

Answer 9

Neil stepped onto a stage in Hollywood and the moon is a holograph projected from the White House........to keep Bush amused

Answer 10

That's the biggest bullsh|t I have ever heard. Why can't scientists do studies off of things we don't know!! Why research the existence of the moon if we've already proved it exists by physically going there!!! So stupid!!