I mean, telescopes were as good as they are now. If they landed on the near side, we could have seen the whole thing. Am I wrong?
2007-11-30 03:43:47 · 9 answers · asked by krumenager 3 in Science & Mathematics ➔ Astronomy & Space
Yes, you are. No man made telescope today (or 40 years ago according to you) has the resolution to see such detail from earth. Not even close.
2007-11-30 03:51:07 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 7⤊ 0⤋
Yes. You are definitely 100% wrong. Telescopes do not have the resolution to see anything as small as a lunar excursion module on the moon. And astronomers who control the telescopes have better things to do with those devices. Many, many astronomers have their personal research projects that deperately require time on the telescope, and frivilous uses would cost anyone so inclined their reputation and job. Telescope time is a seriously valuable commodity.
2007-11-30 03:59:04 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 0⤋
Yes, you're wrong... The resolving power of the best scopes can only discern down to about 1/2 square mile of the moons surface, and that's endangering some of the optics because of the amount of light there is.
To "see" them actually land, you need a mirror basically bigger than a football field, and a completely still atmosphere - neither likely to occur on Earth.
2007-11-30 04:11:55 · answer #3 · answered by quantumclaustrophobe 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
If you look at the disc of the full moon, the size of it is the same as the distance across the lower 48 states. No scope can see something the size of a moving van at that distance.
2007-11-30 10:23:38 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
In a sense, we did.
While observing it optically was, and is, far beyond the capabilities of telescopes, signals from the Apollo CSM were received from lunar orbit by ham radio operators.
2007-11-30 04:02:57 · answer #5 · answered by laurahal42 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
U are wrong.... The resolution of a telescope is dependent on the focal length . I doubt that we would be able to see it from the Hubble telescope.
2007-11-30 06:44:32 · answer #6 · answered by JOHNNIE B 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Not even the Hubble space telescope can resolve the lunar lander! Its resolution is about the size of a football field------
NASA----
http://sm3a.gsfc.nasa.gov/messages/676.html
2007-11-30 04:02:36 · answer #7 · answered by Bullseye 7 · 4⤊ 0⤋
If you trust scientists' and engineers' honesty, what's the difference whether you observe it directly from the Earth or watching the live broadcasting of orbital cameras... in your living room? Kind of like going to a baseball game or watching it on TV. I prefer latter.
2007-11-30 03:55:08 · answer #8 · answered by OrionA 3 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Have you never read Youtube comments
the moon landing was all a sham and never happened. it was all filmed in a studio somewhere in Cape Canaveral.
http://xkcd.com/202/
yeah
no it was that everyone was amazed that they could watch it. also in America it was midday so there was no way to star gaze unless they did a Galileo and burned their eyes out.
2007-11-30 04:17:48 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 6⤋