Re: Temprature on Moon Surface
- From: "Brad Guth" <ieisbradguth@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 27 Sep 2005 11:05:32 -0700
This update is for the benefit of George and to all others of this
"Temprature on Moon Surface" topic.
Perhaps before we common folk and the likes of "tj Frazir" can fully
appreciate "What's actually HOT and NASTY about Venus", instead we may
need to regress a few decades in order to appreciate what's actually
HOT and NASTY about our Moon?
Besides the raw solar influx aspects of 1.4 kw/m2 scorching
continuously upon most any given portion of the moon for nearly a month
at a time, thus getting whatever's dark and nasty extremely hot and not
to mention damn reactive as all get out. How about for the all around
sporting heck of it all, lets say we jump off the mainstream status quo
good ship LOLLIPOP that's entirely owned and operated by our
NASA/Apollo rusemasters, in order to discuss our going back to our moon
for the very first time, so as to get an honest to God grasp upon
whatever the lunar atmosphere is actually all about. Of course, I'm
speaking robotically since it's usually so downright hot, reactive and
physically nasty or otherwise just damn cold and nasty upon our moon,
not to mention that robotics are certainly a whole lot cheaper than
clumping moon-dirt and obviously so much safer as compared to human
efforts and, since we're talking of accomplishing this as a one way
robotic ticket to ride and there shouldn't hardly be any R&D required,
as such robots are going to be damn fast at getting the job done, and
without any need of their having banked bone marrow standing by.
Seems rather gosh darn pathetically odd that there was never one usenet
contribution or even a sub-topic generated thought as to this perfectly
nifty NYT published consideration;
Moon's thin atmosphere extends farther than thought
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.astro/browse_frm/thread/59366d395809215b/ac201e82b060a176?lnk=st&q=lunar+atmosphere&rnum=9&hl=en#ac201e82b060a176
FROM THE NEW YORK TIMES:
Moon's thin atmosphere extends farther than thought
(c) 1995 Copyright Nando.net
(c) 1995 N.Y. Times News Service
Now researchers at Boston University, who two years ago determined
that the rarefied gas bubble surrounding the Moon extended 5,000 miles
high, say new studies show that the lunar atmosphere reaches out twice
as far.
The astronomers, Dr. Michael Mendillo and Dr. Jeffrey Baumgardner of
the Center for Space Physics at Boston University, said that during
the eclipse the Moon was totally in Earth's shadow, blocking the
bright moonlight that obscures observations of gases in the lunar
atmosphere. Under these conditions, the astronomers were able to
detect the faint glow of sodium gas, which serves as a marker for
other gases in the lunar atmosphere.
"We were surprised to find that this glow extended to over nine times
the radius of the Moon, to a height of about 14,000 kilometers, or
9,000 miles above the Moon's surface," Mendillo said.
The researchers say their observations have enabled them to rule out
some theories on the origin of the lunar atmosphere. They believe that
the most likely explanation is the evaporation of atoms from the lunar
surface when it is struck by light particles called photons coming
from sunlight. Sodium and other elements escape the surface through
erosion caused by the bombardment of photons.
The astronomers earlier ruled out a suggestion that the lunar
atmosphere was formed by the constant bombardment of the surface by
micrometeorites. If the micrometeorite theory was true, they said, the
atmosphere would be evenly distributed instead of being irregular in
shape, as their measurements indicate.
Another theory holds that solar wind -- charged particles streaming
from the Sun -- kicks up surface atoms as it lashes the lunar surface.
But the researchers said this theory now appeared to be eliminated
because Earth's magnetic field traps solar wind and shields the lunar
surface during the full-moon phase, when their observations show the
tenuous lunar atmosphere fully extended above the surface.
-
If the regular lunar atmosphere extends out as far as having been
reported, then obviously doing the math of what was at the time of Nov.
1993 as having been detectable at 8r (14,000 km) off the lunar deck as
representing perhaps 100 atoms/cm3 worth of sodium, whereas that amount
certainly represents quit a bit of what's compiled upon the deck
(12.8e6/cm3 or 12.8e9/m3), especially since sodium is most certainly
one of the lighter elements of available mass that's associated within
the mostly basalt lunar surface that's having been continually giving
berth to such sodium gas. Obviously from meteor impacts that
contributed a great deal of further insult to injury were subsequently
generating massive amounts of additional sodium atmosphere, thereby
having co-generated other elements such as good old O2 of which the
molecular speed of hot O2 simply wouldn't have been so easily excavated
away by the typical hot and nasty gauntlet of solar winds (100~300
km/s).
Upon being under siege my a nasty gauntlet of micro and not so micro
meteorites might easily suggest having multiplied the atmospheric
population of sodium by as great as a billion fold, making the near
surface sodium density worth 6.4e15/m3 plus the other heavier elements
as equally having been released becoming near worthy of creating 0.028
bar.
This image and information as to Leonids impacting the Moon imposes
further notions as to what the intensity of such impacts created with
respect to the visible aspects of sodium.
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2000/ast26oct_1.htm
Without a surface deployed probe taking various direct measurements, as
such we can't possibly begin to imagine what that surface environment
situation would have looked and felt like up close and personal. Of
course I've tried several times to suggest we need this sort of raw
data and, lo and behold each and every time the mainstream status quo
of need-to-know and otherwise taboo/nondisclosure flak was
insurmountable.
Besides the O2 that most certainly had to have been made available,
there's also Argon, Xenon, possibly a touch of CO2 plus other extremely
heavy elements, including the likes of existing Rn-222(radon) that's
around most of the time as having been naturally created by the
available Ra-226(radium) and via secondary/recoil reactions as having
been solar and cosmic contributed. Therefore, our moon is not nearly as
devoid of an atmosphere as we'd thought. As for deploying the modern
day micro probes of perhaps as little as one kg becomes quite doable,
with somewhat larger deployments accomplished as each of these highly
affordable efforts produces a better understanding of what other
methods can be achieved within such a thin but otherwise available
atmosphere that's actually fairly respectable considering the 1/6th
gravity factor.
According to Mike Williams;
"The strength of the surface gravity (1.623 m/s/s) isn't the critical
factor. What's more significant is the escape velocity (Moon 2.38km/s,
Titan 2.65km/s)."
"The heavier gas sticks around but the useful gas escapes. The various
types of molecules settle down to having the same average kinetic
energy, but that means that the lighter molecules move faster than the
heavier ones. They move just as fast, in fact, as if the heavier
molecules were not present."
"There's a piece of JavaScript on this page
<http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/kinetic/kintem.html#c4>
that will calculate the average molecular speed given the molecular
mass and temperature. N2 molecules (m=28) on Titan (T=-197C) average
260m/s which is about a tenth of the escape velocity. CO2 molecules
(m=28) on the Moon (daytime T=107C) average 464m/s which is about a
fifth of the escape velocity. That might sound OK, but not all
molecules travel at the average velocity, some travel faster and leak
away. The Earth isn't able to hold on to hydrogen molecules, and they
average about a fifth of Earth's escape velocity."
"Radon atoms would travel at an average of 206m/s on the Moon, which
suggests that you could build an atmosphere of pure Radon."
Of course, for building and sustaining that sort of a radon atmosphere,
as for that to happen the moon requires having a good amount of
background cash of radioactive elements including Radium(Ra-226) as for
generating the Rn-222 gas, although a good amount of raw solar influx
and thus secondary/recoil reactions might otherwise accomplish this
same task, that plus the matter of accepted fact that our moon has been
identified as being considerably more radioactive than Earth shouldn't
have gone to waste.
Fortunately for us humans terraforming our moon into being livable (at
least within), radium half life is 1600 years and thus the radon
generated shouldn't be around forever. In fact, if our icy proto-moon
wasn't so gosh darn newish, as such most of the radioactive raw
elements simply would have faded away by now, that is for other than
what's continually solar and cosmic contributed and supposedly
responsible for creating the sequestered He3, of which someone
eventually needs to go there and process for obtaining that nifty
substance before Earth runs itself entirely out of fossil/geological
based energy and we turn ourselves into another Mars.
~
Life upon Venus, a township w/Bridge & ET/UFO Park-n-Ride Tarmac:
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-town.htm
The Russian/China LSE-CM/ISS (Lunar Space Elevator)
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/lunar-space-elevator.htm
Venus ETs, plus the updated sub-topics; Brad Guth / GASA-IEIS
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-topics.htm
War is war, thus "in war there are no rules" - In fact, war has been
the very reason of having to deal with the likes of others that haven't
been playing by whatever rules, such as GW Bush.
.
- Prev by Date: Re: electric field near an isolated conductor
- Next by Date: My Red Ball
- Previous by thread: Re: Temprature on Moon Surface
- Next by thread: Re: Sucking Spaghetti
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading
