Hacker Read top | best | new | newcomments | leaders | about | bookmarklet login

"Earliest images of the moon taken from space", I guess?


sort by: page size:

> stellar image of the moon

When do we get a lunar image of the sun?


I found another really good moon photo here:

https://www.reddit.com/r/space/comments/wu9dm3/100_megapixel...


Title suggestion: not of the moon, but from the moon.

Credit where due. This isn't footage from afar, but from something standing on the moon.


its just the mooninites taking pictures

It's from _A Deepness in the Sky_.

The actual epoch chosen was the time of the first moon landing, a little prior to 1-Jan-1970 (I like this touch, something with actual historical significance and likely documentable to a fraction of a second, rather than an arbitrary date).


The history of the first map of the other half of the Moon is no less dramatic. Actually, the very first image of the back side of the Moon was destroyed immediately after creation.

More than one of these purports to have become the moon; I'm skeptical.

"moon"?

We get to see more images of the Moon's surface. In a previously unexplored region.

How is that not a big deal?


> You would see two moons in that sky instead of one

Any pictures of this?


Nah, Samsung was substituting in a really good picture of the moon for people's regular moon pictures: https://www.theverge.com/2023/3/13/23637401/samsung-fake-moo...

>The moon in front of clouds... that is all you need to know right there.

Well that is entirely possible. I would say that's the least of the problems with the picture.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SdojiTkJi_4


Can't he just have shown screenshots of different sizes of moon lmao.

> You could sort of do this on the moon, but mountains.

Here is am image of the moon, taken from orbit around it, a mere 28.4 miles above the surface: http://neverworld.net/lunar/lo2_h162_3a-m.jpg


I've never given it much thought but the first thing that hit me is that the moon really is just a big 'ol rock up in the sky. These images have changed the way I view the moon. Pretty neat.

Published in 2010, a controversial hypothesis about the origin of the Moon proposes that the Moon may have been formed from the explosion of a georeactor located along the core-mantle boundary at the equatorial plane of the then-rapidly rotating Earth, 4.5 billion years ago.

Whoa, I didn’t know that was even an option. I thought Verneshots were scary, but that’s just orders of magnitude more impressive.


Only in the sense that it's moving. These are, apparently, actual images of the Moon. I suspect it's a typo, and the images are from 2010, but I don't know.

Well, the moon _is_ in space...

;)


That’s the moon. ;-)
next

Legal | privacy