I even have a very powerful telescope. I cannot see the footprints from the astronauts, the American flag that was left, nor any debris.. In all pics from the hubble none of the above can be observed. We did land on the LIGHT side of the moon. We can see rocks on mars- how many millions of miles away???? The moon is only 250,000 miles away.... Why. No evidence exists we actually were there? I guess the man in the moon hid all of the evidence we were ever on the moon. Perhaps he put it in the storage room at MGM studios.
2006-08-29 14:30:35 · 16 answers · asked by Tim B 3 in Science & Mathematics ➔ Astronomy & Space
We can see mountains on Mars, not rocks.
There is no way you could see a footprint on the moon.
2006-08-29 14:35:58 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
You are such a dreamer ..
Footprints !!! Do you think that these footprints would still exist till today, don't you know that the surface topography changes even if there is no atmosphere, it could be by the rocks that is landing on the moon from the space.
Let's talk about the flag .. You need to know the exact location of the flag so that you can focus your telescope to be able to see that object. You won't see a great details and count all 52 stars .. but you'll see a very faint object .. again the flag won't be moving because no wind on the moon ..
Good luck
2006-08-29 15:55:16 · answer #2 · answered by Duda .. 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
The hubble can not resolve the landers on the moon. If the hubble were to look at car in London from New York with it's headlights on it would see one pixle as one light have a one pixle space and then see the next pixel as a light. This resolution is from a point light source the most simple type of light to resolve. Using this information with the more diffuclt non-point light source the objects we left on the moon woud have, the hubble is just not big enough to resolve the landing sites. The whole site would be 1 or 2 pixles across.
As for Rocks on Mars....Sorry, we can see Albeto differnce or differnaces in the reflectivity of the dirt over large areas on the surface of Mars..no rocks with a telescope though. The rock photos come from the landers we have on Mars and the obriter orbiting the planet. We has quite a bit of hardware on Mars to take photos of rocks.
We have plenty of evidance that we were on the moon...like say rocks! Photos, TV broadcasts (not the originals but we have plenty of TV footage) we have capsules that orbited the moon. We even have reflectors we can shoot lasers off of to measure the distance from the Earth to the moon do to the millimeter.
What does not exist is real evidance that we were never there.
2006-08-29 14:37:46 · answer #3 · answered by Scott A 2 · 3⤊ 1⤋
The Hubble is under no circumstances pointed on the Moon because of the fact it would fry the cameras. remember, it may see issues as much as 5,000,000,000,000,000,000 circumstances dimmer than the Moon (40 4 magnitudes). No kidding. next, the failings human beings left on the Moon are so tiny while in comparison with their distance (<=0.01 arc-sec) that they are next to impossible to work out. remember, the Moon is a PLANET. it is so enormous that if it have been going around the sunlight particularly than Earth it may well be a planet. Do you ever look at a globe and think of, i'm able to work out gadget sheds and persons!? The Hubble can basically see such remote galaxies because of the fact they have the brightness of billions upon billions of billions of stars! it truly is a minimum of a sextillion circumstances brighter than the moon. inspite of those barriers, i think of I as quickly as observed in Sky & Telescope mag the only guy-made merchandise on Moon seen from Earth. They used a great telescope, and probable an quite short exposure, and that they had to correctly known precisely the place it grew to become into to even locate the dang subject. inspite of the undeniable fact that it confirmed between the Apollo landers. It appears like a tiny black speck of sand which will become a fuzzy gray blob interior the magnified inset. it truly is it, it truly is all you will discover. it truly is no longer even the lander, inspite of the undeniable fact that it truly is long shadow interior the low sunlight. it is so borderline truly that the different 5 Apollo landers are impossible to be seen. The exposure had to be truly short (measured in microseconds) or in any different case the image may well be blurry or maybe blind the digicam. ultimately, i've got seen the Flat Earth Society website, even if in the event that they *might desire to* take truly nice photos that coach better than a dot then all of the paranoid no longer uncomplicated-center conspiracists will in the present day cry pretend and it would do no longer something to cajole such deludeds. you will possibly desire to be kindof kooky already to believe |each little thing's| a conspiracy.
2016-11-06 01:45:39 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
You didn't really thin this one out first did you? Assume the footprint, being padded and all is 12" long. The moon is 250,000 miles from here. That's a resolution 1:3,000,000. Now let's discuss field of view? To see a 12" footprint you would want to have a field of view of no more than 20'. That's about 1:150,000 or an accurate angle of less then 1/1000 th of one degree accuracy in aiming the telescope. How many tons of concrete did you use to build your telescope base?
Don't waste your time seeking conspiracy theory's. They seldom, if ever, hold up.
2006-08-29 14:47:54 · answer #5 · answered by chrisbrown_222 4 · 6⤊ 1⤋
I think you are a bit confused. You don't have telescopes that can see rocks on Mars or the moon. But you can bounce a radio signal off of the receiver the astronauts left on the moon if you want. You can also find plenty of scientists in many countries, including those hostile to the US, that tracked the Apollo missions and watched through their telescopes how the US landed on the moon.
2006-08-29 14:37:14 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 1⤋
The only way you can see rocks on mars is with a camera on the Martian surface. With a telescope you can barely see regions of the surface. With a telescope circling the planet you can see mountains, valleys and the like.
2006-08-29 15:24:25 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
The very best telescope cannot possibly have the resolution to see a footprint on the Moon from Earth. I suggest you do a Google search on how resolution works before you get yourself all worked up.
2006-08-29 14:41:43 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
By extension, communications satellites don't exist either because they can't be seen with powerful telescopes. And they are only 22,000 miles away.
And of course, the Holocaust never happened, nor did the World Trade Center come down. In fact, I don't think it ever existed in the first place. And that whole story about atomic bombs in Japan is obviously bogus as well.
2006-08-29 14:38:22 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
Jeez, he thinks he should see footprints on the moon with his backyard telescope.
There's been some silly things said on this forum, but that really takes the cake.
Hey, you should sell your telescope to NASA for a billion dollars, cause they haven't got anything remotely like that.
2006-08-29 14:48:20 · answer #10 · answered by nick s 6 · 2⤊ 2⤋