We have high power telescopes on Earth that see with great detail , and satalites that photo in great detail streets on Earth, and I've heard even licence plates on cars.
Point these salalites to the moon and take some pictures.
2006-09-10 06:25:28 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Science & Mathematics ➔ Astronomy & Space
We have powerful telescopes, but not powerful enough. Even assuming an orbiting telescope could see 1/2" details from 250 miles up (which probably exaggerates current capability by quite a bit), the smallest detail visible on the moon with this scope would be 238,000/250 x .5 = 476" =~40 feet.
2006-09-10 06:38:17 · answer #1 · answered by injanier 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Those spy satellites that can take pictures of licence plates on cars (I've heard they can read the headline of a newspaper) are very close to Earth - a few hundred miles above Earth's surface - but they are all about 240,000 miles from the Moon! They would never be able to resolve anything we left on the Moon. Also, even our most powerful telescopes can't resolve the stuff we left there. Believe me, if they could, they would have already done that. Although I bet even with that type of proof there would still be people saying we never went to the Moon.
2006-09-10 22:59:39 · answer #2 · answered by kris 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The satelites that take photos of streets are about 150 miles up. The moon is over 238,000 miles away. To resolve any of the instruments at the landing sites, you either have to get a *lot* closer to the moon or have a *much* larger lens/mirror. Even the Hubble can't resolve things the size of the lunar lander from the distance to the moon. When we launch probes to orbit the moon and take high definition photos, it should then be possible to resolve the landing sites.
The recent European probe didn't have the resolution either, BTW although it was closer.
2006-09-10 13:48:46 · answer #3 · answered by mathematician 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
That is a good question. I also would like to see some high definition pictures taken of the moon today. I think it is mostly because the scientist working on our moon still have so much data from the apolo missions that they are still swamped with work.
Ohh I just remembered something in the news. A europian satalite was taking some more recient pictures of the moon and reciently crashed into it at the end of its life cycle. Maybe it caught some pictures of our junk that we left up there.
2006-09-10 13:40:41 · answer #4 · answered by jeff.sadowski 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Why do we need photos of that??? What good are photos of that going to do?? Our satellites are not THAT good to see a small object like that on the moon. You have to remember the satellites taking pictures of earth and showing objects, are objects that are much bigger than those left on the moon. Also, the satellites orbit the Earth... I don't think there are any satellites orbiting the moon... so why would we spend millions of dollars to send a satellite to orbit the moon?? Just so we can take pictures of souvenirs we left behind?? I think not.
***Edit: Good point... didn't think about it that way. Pictures WOULD be proof we actually went there. :)
2006-09-10 13:29:46 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
If pictures were successfully taken showing (albeit tiny and poorly resolved) the remains of Apollo and other lunar vehicles, what would keep you from questioning if the photos were doctored? And believe me, photos can be doctored. Which is NOT to say that I am questioning the historic validity of the moon landings, only making a point.
2006-09-10 14:34:59 · answer #6 · answered by Search first before you ask it 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The Chinese are sending a satellite. If they are successful we will have proof from their satellite. It would seem that China wants a piece of the Moon for themselves. Boy are they in for a surprise.
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2006-05/17/content_593317.htm
2006-09-10 13:39:39 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Neil Armstrong was up there, but he dropped his camera phone.
2006-09-10 14:04:40 · answer #8 · answered by chewie_says 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋