The Boring Sun

Beyond the boundaries of established science an avalanche of exotic ideas compete for our attention. Experts tell us that these ideas should not be permitted to take up the time of working scientists, and for the most part they are surely correct. But what about the gems in the rubble pile? By what ground-rules might we bring extraordinary new possibilities to light?

Moderators: MGmirkin, bboyer

Re: The Boring Sun

Unread postby GaryN » Fri Apr 19, 2019 9:03 pm

The dark image of the Lunar far side taken by the camera on the Beresheet probe is the photograph as recieved by SpaceIL. The Space.com web site must have learned of that and replaced the adjusted image with the original. I downloaded the dark one and some basic level adjustments with the Gimp reproduced the adjusted version.
The SpaceIL web site does not yet show or discuss the images, but on the social media blogs the members discuss how they didn't like the original photos so adjusted them and went as far as making their images grey scale. Similarly, the radio hams who have been downloading images from the camera the Chinese have in orbit on the far side adjusted their images to elimiminate the purple hue, and believed the purple was due to overexposure. An overexposed image would be white, and the purple is most likely an effect of the camera having boosted the gain way up in order to capture the extremely dark scene.
Cleaned up footage from Apollo 11 allows for a better understanding of the lighting conditions they encountered. One thing to notice is that the video from the Vidicon based camera has some ghosting, and this is due to the gain of the camera being high, resulting in persistence of the brighter objects. Aldrin asks command for exposure settings for shadow photography on the sequence camera (DAC)to take the footage from the lander. After a delay, command tells him "f/2 at 1/160". According to NASA info though the camera did not have a 1/160 setting, maybe he meant 1/60?
Here is the DAC footage:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d73jCthcAok
The image can be seen to brighten when he adjusts the settings.That indicates a very dark scene ad the lit surface appears blindingly bright. The film was also capable of being 'pushed' so could have been brightened during processing. Then he can be heard saying how he was having difficulty seeing, it was very dark in the shade. If the lunar surface was as bright as we are lead to believe though, then scattered light should have given sufficient illumination to be able to see quite well, and the DAC footage does show illumination of Armstrong and his back pack from scattered light. The ground must have been very dark indeed in the shadow.
This low light I believe is due to the time that they landed on the surface and their location. As NASA gained experience with and understanding of the strange nature of the lighting conditions, they improved their photos and video footage with every mission, and by A17 they really did an impressive job. Kubrick was advising no doubt. NASA also had learned enough to know where and at what times to be on the surface to have the best lighting conditions. So yes, the lighting on the near side can be quite bright, especially to astronauts who have been kept dark adapted during the 3 day trip.

"There is no dark side in the moon, really. Matter of fact, it's all dark."
A little voice at the end of Eclipse, Pink Floyd:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n9xOl8qZ7tc
Waters was a good friend of Kubrick.

From the adjusted image it can be seen that the Sun must have been almost directly behind the camera and the backscatter at maximum, so the dark original image is very telling.
Image
Textbook big hex crater for sure.

The far side is darker than the near side as there is no Earthshine. It is even darker than I expected. This fact is unlikely to concern NASA though, it seems that even the scientific community will never question them, let alone the general public, who will go on believing that because the Moon appears so bright from Earth that it must be blindingly bright, and hot, on the surface.
In order to change an existing paradigm you do not struggle to try and change the problematic model. You create a new model and make the old one obsolete. -Buckminster Fuller
User avatar
GaryN
 
Posts: 2641
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:18 pm
Location: Sooke, BC, Canada

Re: The Boring Sun

Unread postby allynh » Tue Apr 23, 2019 1:43 pm

In my checking the OSIRIS-REx site I spotted this picture. It was assembled from different shots and each part adjusted, so we are not seeing an actual untouched picture of stars taken in one shot.

The brightest dots coming out are close particles/debris being expelled, the fainter are stars?

Look at the full view and see if it is useful.

https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/file ... jets_0.jpg

NASA Mission Reveals Asteroid Has Big Surprises
https://www.nasa.gov/press-release/nasa ... -surprises
This view of asteroid Bennu ejecting particles from its surface on January 19 was created by combining two images taken on board NASA’s OSIRIS-REx spacecraft. Other image processing techniques were also applied, such as cropping and adjusting the brightness and contrast of each image.

Credits: NASA/Goddard/University of Arizona/Lockheed Martin
allynh
 
Posts: 897
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 5:51 pm

Re: The Boring Sun

Unread postby GaryN » Wed Apr 24, 2019 11:36 am

The brightest dots coming out are close particles/debris being expelled, the fainter are stars?


Could be, but the OSIRIS-REx instruments are not Bayer filtered visible light cameras like the Beresheet used, and the Beresheet camera at Bennu would have seen absolutely nothing, way too dark. The MapCam, tested from Earth is quite capable of imaging a galaxy and stars, but we will not see images like this from Bennu, it requires Earths atmosphere to do so.
Image

The China and Israel cameras are the first true colour cameras to ever view the far side of the Moon. The purple tint of the Chinese images of the far side are due I am told to the "difficult photography conditions of space", though what that difficulty is I am not told. We will never see such a thing as an LPO (Lunar Photographic Orbiter) that just uses a Bayer filtered camera with a zoom lens such as the Leica APO-Telyt-R f/5.6 1600mm telephoto lens. ($2.6 million)
Image
In order to change an existing paradigm you do not struggle to try and change the problematic model. You create a new model and make the old one obsolete. -Buckminster Fuller
User avatar
GaryN
 
Posts: 2641
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:18 pm
Location: Sooke, BC, Canada

Re: The Boring Sun

Unread postby GaryN » Thu May 09, 2019 11:19 am

No response as yet from the SpaceIL team concerning the Beresheet Lunar far side photos. There is no discussion of this on any mainstream science site and only 2 comments that I have found. Without more information about those images regarding exposure settings it is not possible to say that it really is so dark. Automatic exposure or manual, and if manual were the settings based on the assumed solar constant and known reflectivity of the surface, illumination angles and viewing angle?
I am more convinced than ever that the Atmospheric Light Transformer model is the correct one, but if so then the implications for everything we are told about what is out there and how far away it is believed to be all go into the garbage can. It is very frustrating that the truth is so near yet impossible to verify, and this is the main reason I believe that NASA avoids the subject and diverts our attention with promises of Mars colonies, Hubble eye candy and pictures of black holes nonsense, and the public laps it all up. It will have to be a privately funded and fully independent mission that eventually conducts the empirical scientific experiments that destroys all present models, but will that ever be allowed to happen? Despite its claims of being a private company SpaceIL could not have achieved what it did without the Israel military and NASA. And just a guess, but the computer reset that prevented the engine firing during the landing may have been due to an electrical discharge.

Looking into the history of lunar orbital photography is interesting.

Lunar Orbiter program.
5 NASA missions,1966 through 1967, to determine possible landing locations.

"Lunar Orbiter 4 photographed the entire nearside and nine percent of the far side, and Lunar Orbiter 5 completed the far side coverage.."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_Orbiter_program

So there are photos of the far side, and they are available in a digital library now:
Digital Lunar Orbiter Photographic Atlas of the Moon
https://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/luna ... tion.shtml

This pdf file explains the photography, scanning and transmission to Earth process
Kodak Panchromatic Negative Films for Aerial Photography
https://www.asprs.org/wp-content/upload ... 95-699.pdf

The film used was SO-243 and a Wratten 25 filter was installed.
Wratten 25 is tricolour red band, blocks below 580 nm, used for infrared photography.

There have been up until now no colour photographs of the lunar far side.
In order to change an existing paradigm you do not struggle to try and change the problematic model. You create a new model and make the old one obsolete. -Buckminster Fuller
User avatar
GaryN
 
Posts: 2641
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:18 pm
Location: Sooke, BC, Canada

Previous

Return to New Insights and Mad Ideas

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests