Nasa states it found the crashed Mars lander.

[fishfront]

If Nasa can use Hubble and seven million of our tax dollars to find a wrecked Mars lander boondoggle,who of you says it will not focus.Show me anything we left on the Moon.I have used my telescope and a lazer and I have never found a reflection inside the sea of tranquility.Did the solar winds knock over the mirror?I bet that Nasa spokeperson who announced the Mars find is fired because Nasa denies that it is true.xp has a great pic of the moon for screen saver

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: fishfront on 2002-10-26 12:07 ]</font>

[GrapesOfWrath]

Are you saying that Hubble has imaged machinery on Mars? I did not know that. Is there more info available?

Welcome to the board.

[Superstring]

First off, welcome to BABB.

Secondly, just curious, where did you hear this? /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_confused.gif I haven't heard anything about this either.

[Laser Jock]

On 2002-10-26 12:04, fishfront wrote:
If Nasa can use Hubble and seven million of our tax dollars to find a wrecked Mars lander boondoggle,who of you says it will not focus.Show me anything we left on the Moon.I have used my telescope and a lazer and I have never found a reflection inside the sea of tranquility.Did the solar winds knock over the mirror?I bet that Nasa spokeperson who announced the Mars find is fired because Nasa denies that it is true.xp has a great pic of the moon for screen saver

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: fishfront on 2002-10-26 12:07 ]</font>


Hi fishfront, welcome to the board. You say that you have used a laser and a telescope to try to get a reflection off the moon. That sounds very ambitious. What kind of laser? How big was your telescope? I say this since it would be difficult to get a detectable return signal by using anything but a very big laser on a large telescope. A laser pointer on a 5 inch scope is just not going to work. One nitpick: The Apollo astronauts left a set of corner cubes on the moon, not a mirror. Corner cubes have the wonderful property that they will reflect any light that hits them in the same direction that it came from. A simple mirror will scatter off the light to some other direction (angle of incidence equals angle of reflection). Here is a link that explains how they work and what they look like:

http://www.netacc.net/~jmlopt/products/prisms/technical_cornercubes.html

Though scattering your laser off the moon didn't work, I certainly give you points for trying. Most people would be too lazy. /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif

_________________
"I am not left handed either."

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Laser Jock on 2002-10-26 12:36 ]</font>

[GrapesOfWrath]

On 2002-10-26 12:33, Laser Jock wrote:
Though scattering your laser off the moon didn't work, I certianly give you points for trying. Most people would be to lazy.
Hey, what about me, don't I get points too? I've been shouting at the moon.

Trying to use SONAR.

[Laser Jock]

On 2002-10-26 12:37, GrapesOfWrath wrote:

Hey, what about me, don't I get points too? I've been shouting at the moon.

Trying to use SONAR.


You just keep on shouting. If it starts talking back you let me know. /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif

[fishfront]

You believers of the corrupt U.S. government think that over 100 shuttle missions not one has has left our atmostsphere is not strange?Why?Because "there is nothing else to see"?To be an astronaut one has to go to outer space .ie,American Heritage Dictionary.If you care about equallity then stop the maddness of going to Mars.Tell your corrupt officals in writing.VoteNoWar.org/WE THE PEOPLE have to take back our country.

[Superstring]

On 2002-10-26 13:54, fishfront wrote:
You believers of the corrupt U.S. government think that over 100 shuttle missions not one has has left our atmostsphere is not strange?Why?Because "there is nothing else to see"?To be an astronaut one has to go to outer space .ie,American Heritage Dictionary.If you care about equallity then stop the maddness of going to Mars.Tell your corrupt officals in writing.VoteNoWar.org/WE THE PEOPLE have to take back our country.


Huh? We never said anything about that, so I don't know what you are saying.

[Laser Jock]

On 2002-10-26 13:54, fishfront wrote:
You believers of the corrupt U.S. government think that over 100 shuttle missions not one has has left our atmostsphere is not strange?Why?Because "there is nothing else to see"?To be an astronaut one has to go to outer space .ie,American Heritage Dictionary.If you care about equallity then stop the maddness of going to Mars.Tell your corrupt officals in writing.VoteNoWar.org/WE THE PEOPLE have to take back our country.


Uh, Houston, I think we have a troll.

[fishfront]

If I tell you where I work, I would loose my right to use the equiptment and Nasa stated they left a "mirror device". excuse ME!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[mallen]

Yeah... he's trolling in other topics too.

[g99]

he/she is definitely a troll, check out his other topic: http://www.badastronomy.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?topic=2550&forum=4&1

He/she is just some person who wants to support his views of the world and is using any means. Smells like a scam, tried going to the site, it doesn't exhist.

If you are so afraid of loosing your rights to this technology and instruments, why post in the first place? and then why talk about voting against war? What does a laser and mirror and voting have to do with eachother?

-----------------------------
"Hippopotomonstrosesquippedaliophobia": The fear of long words
"It takes Thousands to fight a battle for a mile, Millions to hold an election for a nation, but it only takes One to change the world." by Dan Sandler(G99)2002

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: g99 on 2002-10-26 14:37 ]</font>

[Laser Jock]

On 2002-10-26 14:28, fishfront wrote:
If I tell you where I work, I would loose my right to use the equiptment and Nasa stated they left a "mirror device". excuse ME!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Just go to bottom of the link I provided. It says we left corner cubes. OK, you could argue that since you can glue three mirrors together to make a corner cube it is a "mirror device." But I have a feeling that that is not what you mean.

[nebularain]

On 2002-10-26 12:04, fishfront wrote:
If Nasa can use Hubble and seven million of our tax dollars to find a wrecked Mars lander boondoggle....
You still haven't answered the question of where you got this info.

Show me anything we left on the Moon.I have used my telescope and a lazer and I have never found a reflection inside the sea of tranquility.
How big is the Sea of Tranquility? I'm sure it is a few, or several, square miles (or kilometers - the preferred measurement of astronomers), is it not? Wouldn't it be a bit difficult to pin point the exact location of one of these "mirrors"?

On 2002-10-26 13:54, fishfront wrote:
You believers of the corrupt U.S. government think that....If you care about equallity then stop the maddness of going to Mars.Tell your corrupt officals in writing. VoteNoWar.org/WE THE PEOPLE have to take back our country.
Stuff like this will get you banned from the Board and your thread locked.
_________________
"But I can see the Covenant colors [that] the sun and the rain have woven against the blue of the sky"
- Rich Mullins, The Howling

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: nebularain on 2002-10-26 15:01 ]</font>

[fishfront]

21-Mar-2001 - Experts Find Hint of Mars Lander
Fifteen months after the Mars Polar Lander vanished, Defense Department imaging experts have spotted what may be a trace of the spacecraft on the surface of the Red Planet, a NASA official said. Experts at the National Imagery and Mapping Agency have spent months poring over high-resolution images of the region where the Polar Lander was to have set down.

[fishfront]

Manua Kea, Hawaii 14,000 feet absl

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: fishfront on 2002-10-26 16:03 ]</font>

[fishfront]

19-Mar-2001 - Spy Agency May Have Located Mars Polar Lander
The Mars Polar Lander may have been found -- intact -- by a top-secret spy imagery agency. The National Imagery and Mapping Agency (NIMA) has been quietly scanning Mars pictures, looking for the Mars Polar Lander since early December 1999. According to a source close to the NIMA effort, photographic specialists at NIMA think they’ve spotted something.

[fishfront]

Did I give you enough info?

[Kaptain K]

I have used my telescope and a lazer and I have never found a reflection inside the sea of tranquility.
From this site:
http://sunearth.gsfc.nasa.gov/eclipse/SEhelp/ApolloLaser.html

"Once the laser beam hits a reflector, scientists at the ranging observatories use extremely sensitive filtering and amplification equipment to detect the return signal, which is far too weak to be seen with the human eye. Even under good atmospheric viewing conditions, only one photon is received every few seconds."

BTW This is with a 30 inch (75 cm) telescope!

_________________
Be alert! The world needs more lerts.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Kaptain K on 2002-10-26 16:04 ]</font>

[fishfront]

check out new posts
On 2002-10-26 12:17, GrapesOfWrath wrote:
Are you saying that Hubble has imaged machinery on Mars? I did not know that. Is there more info available?

Welcome to the board.

[fishfront]

see more posts
On 2002-10-26 12:27, Superstring wrote:
First off, welcome to BABB.

Secondly, just curious, where did you hear this? /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_confused.gif I haven't heard anything about this either.

[nebularain]

On 2002-10-26 15:54, fishfront wrote:
Did I give you enough info?

Actually, no - you didn't give a reference, and there is no mention of Hubble. Sorry.

Now that you mention it, I do believe I remember reading about this, but it was from a satellite orbiting Mars that these images came from.

_________________
"But I can see the Covenant colors [that] the sun and the rain have woven against the blue of the sky"
- Rich Mullins, The Howling

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: nebularain on 2002-10-26 16:02 ]</font>

[Andrew]

Did I give you enough info?


No, what was the source for their images that they used to locate the MPL? I'll bet you it wasn't Hubble.

This (http://almagest.as.utexas.edu/~rlr/mlrs.html) site allegedly has some information on Lunar Ranging Retro-Reflectors (LRRRs) set down by Apollo.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Andrew on 2002-10-26 16:04 ]</font>

[fishfront]

These quotes come from AP also on Mars lovers page.When I saw the Nasa dude on ABC he stated NASA spent seven million DOLLARS of the Hubble Time.

[nebularain]

AH! Found it. They used the Mars Global Surveyor. See here (http://www.cnn.com/2001/TECH/space/03/22/mars.lander/index.html) .

BTW, referencing means you provide the web link, like I just did. Please do so.

Please believe me, and the rest of us, that your posts have put you in danger. Just research the Board for "banned" posters, and you will see what I mean.

_________________
"But I can see the Covenant colors [that] the sun and the rain have woven against the blue of the sky"
- Rich Mullins, The Howling

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: nebularain on 2002-10-26 16:15 ]</font>

[R.A.F.]

Thanks for the link nebularain. I noticed that it is 19 months old. I'm wondering...is there news of this that is a little more recent?


<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: R.A.F. on 2002-10-26 19:04 ]</font>

[Kizarvexis]

On 2002-10-26 12:04, fishfront wrote:
If Nasa can use Hubble and seven million of our tax dollars to find a wrecked Mars lander boondoggle,who of you says it will not focus.Show me anything we left on the Moon.I have used my telescope and a lazer and I have never found a reflection inside the sea of tranquility.Did the solar winds knock over the mirror?I bet that Nasa spokeperson who announced the Mars find is fired because Nasa denies that it is true.xp has a great pic of the moon for screen saver

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: fishfront on 2002-10-26 12:07 ]</font>


Here is another page about the laser ranging experiments.

http://www.lpi.usra.edu/expmoon/Apollo11/A11_Experiments_LRRR.html

Here is a very revelant paragraph on what happens to the laser during the experiment and a very likely answer to your lack of success.

Laser beams are used because they remain tightly focused for large distances. Nevertheless, there is enough dispersion of the beam that it is about 7 kilometers in diameter when it reaches the Moon and 20 kilometers in diameter when it returns to Earth. Because of this very weak signal, observations are made for several hours at a time. By averaging the signal for this period, the distance to the Moon can be measured to an accuracy of about 3 centimeters (the average distance from the Earth to the Moon is about 385,000 kilometers).

Kizarvexis

[Atko]

Heheh - the Hubble can't even resolve a mountain on Mars, let alone a missing spacecraft. Check this out for a "hi-res" Hubble images of Mars -

http://www.seds.org/hst/Mars95.html

Re the Surveyor article - Three bright pixels and they think it might be the lander though? I admire their optimism.
/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_wink.gif

[overrated]

Also, re: using the Hubble on the moon--it's not possible because of the limitations of the HST's equipment. It's been discussed on the Lunar Hoax forum here: http://www.badastronomy.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?topic=1522&forum=3&start=25

(And here's a quote from the discussion:
"A telescope's diffraction limited resolving power depends linearly on the aperture of the telescope. Groundbased telescopes also have to look through the murky and turbulant atmosphere so without corrective techniques that are just now becoming common in large telescopes (called adaptive optics), a telescopes resolution is limited by the atmosphere to about 0.5-1.0 arcseconds (3600 arcseconds are in one degree and 360 degrees around the whole sky). That limits groundbased telescopes to a resolution of about 2 kilometers on the moon. From space, a telescope is limited by its diffraction limited resolution. For the Hubble Space Telescope, that is a little less than 0.05 arcseconds or about 90 meters at the distance of the moon. To resolve the LM descent stage which is about 10 meters across, one would need to have a resolution better than 10 meters, perhaps 2-3 meters which means we need a telescope some 30 times larger than the HST in orbit around the Earth to resolve the largest equipment left on the moon.")

[David Hall]

On 2002-10-26 23:44, overrated wrote:

To resolve the LM descent stage which is about 10 meters across, one would need to have a resolution better than 10 meters, perhaps 2-3 meters which means we need a telescope some 30 times larger than the HST in orbit around the Earth to resolve the largest equipment left on the moon.")


Which is why, of course, we doubt the Hubble was used to detect the crashed lander. We know it's not capable of such a feat. If it can't detect such craft on the Moon, then Mars is right out.

But, as pointed out, the Hubble telescope is not the only tool in the NASA arsenal. The Mars Global Surveyor is currently orbiting Mars, and provided the images used to (possibly) spot the lander.

As for the lunar reflector, it's been pointed out clearly that it takes sensitive equipment and a lot of time to get clear signals. And before you go screaming foul play, this was not designed to hide anything, this is just the limitations of the technology at the time and the economics of the missions.

I suggest that before you go screaming impropriety in NASA's claims, you make sure you understand what is actually being claimed in the first place.

[The Shade]

On 2002-10-26 16:10, nebularain wrote:
AH! Found it. They used the Mars Global Surveyor. See here (http://www.cnn.com/2001/TECH/space/03/22/mars.lander/index.html) .


I thought that the "we found the MPL" story sounded familiar.

To continue on this topic, the first thing that struck me with fishfront's post was that the Hubble Space Telescope (HST) had actually "imaged" the wrecked Polar Lander. This immediately sounded odd since HST has nowhere near the resolution needed for this task.

[overrated]

On 2002-10-27 09:23, David Hall wrote:
I suggest that before you go screaming impropriety in NASA's claims, you make sure you understand what is actually being claimed in the first place.


Easy, there... I'm not screaming impropriety about anything. I posted that link and that quote to answer fishfront's suggestion that the Hubble was being used.

[fishfront]

On 2002-10-29 20:39, overrated wrote:

On 2002-10-27 09:23, David Hall wrote:
I suggest that before you go screaming impropriety in NASA's claims, you make sure you understand what is actually being claimed in the first place.

Well its seems I was wronng.Thank you all for the replys.I will keep my next post after reading the rules.But it still sounds like they are spending to much of OUR money to star gase in the world we live in now!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Easy, there... I'm not screaming impropriety about anything. I posted that link and that quote to answer fishfront's suggestion that the Hubble was being used.

[Colt]

What is interesting is about three months ago they think that they briefly picked up transmissions on a low RF band from the lander. Then it died. It was only a low-power emergency beacon, so no data. It was also very noisy. I can't find anything on this though. : -Colt

[nebularain]

On 2002-10-29 21:32, fishfront wrote:
Well its seems I was wronng. Thank you all for the replys. I will keep my next post after reading the rules. But it still sounds like they are spending to much of OUR money to star gase in the world we live in now!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Appology accepted. Differing opinions and debates are a big part of what keep the Board so active - when kept within the rules of course /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_razz.gif . But I hope you realize you are going to have a very hard time convincing us who love astronomy that any money put into scientific investigations of such is a waste of money. (And "very hard" is a gross understatement.) You can try, though. /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_wink.gif