Why aren't there any stars in pictures of armstrong on the moon?
2007-09-18 23:43:55 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous in Science & Mathematics ➔ Astronomy & Space
its such a tough choice between so many good answers that im going to put this question up for voting...
2007-09-19 21:20:08 · update #1
Nobody believes it was staged who actually bothered to do objective research on the matter.
The reason stars are not visible in the pictures of the moon is the same reason fewer stars are seen in the sky of a large city than out in the country. Light pollution. Too much light in the background causes the eyes or camera to ignore the fainter points of light.
It is a matter of exposure, really. In order to have taken pictures of the stars, the sun would have had to be on the opposite side of the moon at the time.
Read the following link for more detailed explanations as to why the moon landing was NOT faked.
2007-09-19 00:50:07 · answer #1 · answered by most important person you know 3 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Who thinks the moon landings were staged? Mental midgets and gullible morons who buy into the bulls**t that the Flat Earth Society and conspiracy theory nitwits have spouted about how it is impossible to land on the moon.
Why no stars in the photos? Here's an experiment you can do for yourself -- go outside on a dark, cloudless night and look up. See the stars? Now, take a bright flashlight and shine it in your eyes -- do you see any stars now? Why not?
Because the pupils in your eyes have constricted in reaction to the bright light of the flashlight. And the same prinicple applies on the moon. It is VERY BRIGHT on the moon, so the photographer has to stop down the aperture to avoid over-exposing the film on the subject -- things like the astronauts in their white space suits, or the surface of the moon with its highly reflective regiolith. And when you stop down the aperture, the film does not receive enough light from the background stars to be able to cause the film to react, ergo -- the stars don't show up in the photos. QED.
All this is explained very clearly at:
www.badastronomy.com
www.clavius.org
How about doing some reading at a reputable source, rather than those dumb@$$ conspiracy theory sites.
2007-09-19 09:19:45 · answer #2 · answered by Dave_Stark 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Why should there be stars in the photographs?
The lunar surface at the landing site was in daylight. The sky was black because of lack of atmosphere, but the ground was as brightly lit as the ground here on Earth in the middle of the day. The camera could not correctly expose the ground and capture stars, because the difference in brightness was simply too great for the dynamic range of the film. Star photographs require exposures of several seconds or minutes, in which time any sunlit item in the picture will become a huge washed out white blob on the film.
Only two objects in the sky were bright enough to show up on the film. One was Earth, seen in quite a few pictures, and the other was Venus, seen as a tiny white speck in a few pictures, but only visible on the high resolution scans available from some websites. In the lower resolution jpegs preferred by most sites (especially those who want to claim there are anomalies in the pictures) it is too small and faint to survive the compression process.
2007-09-19 07:54:32 · answer #3 · answered by Jason T 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
First ques: Who thinks that? Only clueless morons who couldn't keep up in grade school science class.
Second ques: Why no stars? So, are you implying that the ISS is not real? Ever watch NASA TV? No stars in the external shots there either. Why not? If they opened the camera's "iris" [or aperture or whatever the technical term is] up enough to allow in star light, the reflected sunlight off the objects such as the station and spacesuits would wash out the picture. This is with modern technology. The tech and film of 40 years ago was even less capable. This was exactly what happened when one of the missions was supposed to broadcast live from the surface of the Moon and the astronaut did the opposite of what he was supposed to by accident. He was supposed to have camera pointed away from sun, "iris" completely closed, turn camera on, slowly open "iris", verify video signal, and connect for link to Mission Control for broadcast. Well, he set it up facing the sun with "iris" fully opened and powered it up. Poof, camera was instantly fried and useless. That particular live broadcast never happened much to the consternation of the anchorman whose agency had arranged for to broadcast the exclusive.
2007-09-19 19:50:10 · answer #4 · answered by quntmphys238 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You can't see stars on Earth during the day, can you? That's because the sun is too bright. The moon is the same.
2007-09-19 08:28:53 · answer #5 · answered by Bob B 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It was staged in area 51 as at moon there is no atmosphere but in picture flag is seen floating. how came it is possible?
2013-10-01 11:36:43 · answer #6 · answered by Kanchan Rawat 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You know what I found really odd? That there was sunlight but the sky was dark. Could it be because the moon has no atmosphere?
2007-09-19 14:07:17 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Well, do stars ever show up in the pictures that you have taken at night?
2007-09-19 07:04:58 · answer #8 · answered by Mark 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It is due to the brightness of the moon's landscape. Do some research about it. There is plenty out there.
2007-09-19 06:56:23 · answer #9 · answered by John L 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
People who believe this usually cant grasp the fact that mankind is capable of doing something this extraordinary... usually because they can't make anything of themselves.
2007-09-19 09:52:36 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋