"Surely if the gravity issue was so bad on the moon, then we would have stopped making terrestrial scopes long ago, since it is so much worse here."
Building a scope to not deform under the gravity is easy enough - but requires a much heavier mirror. Consider the JWST mirror - in terms of kg/m^2 it's a tiny tiny proportion of the mass of any ground based scope.
The point was that your mirror has to be heavier - and thus you need a much larger LV, and thus it becomes much more expensive - in what is already a prohibatively expensive, and essentially pointless exercise.
As for research grade astronomical instruments being built from in-situ resources on the moon....not in your lifetime, my lifetime, or our grandchildrens lifetime - it's heavy industry
http://mirrorlab.as.arizona.edu/MISC.php?navi=castr
Doug
Space/Science » in reply to Bets anyone?
re: Bets anyone?
The whole thread (24 posts)
- On Lunar Surface Telescopes: Dr. Daniel Lester testimony to Subcommittee on Space...
- I can only see disadvantages to a moon based observatory
- Goodbye Uncle Eddie
- Low Earth Orbit is easier, cheaper, and better. (n/t)
- Costs vs Risk Reduction Table From NASA's NEO Office
- Great Reference Chris
- And you have the power and authority to prevent lunar telescopes [optical or radio] from coming to pass, Chris? (n/t)
- So yesterday's news...
- Bets anyone?
- re: On Lunar Surface Telescopes: Dr. Daniel Lester testimony to Subcommittee on Space...
- re: On Lunar Surface Telescopes: Dr. Daniel Lester testimony to Subcommittee on Space...
- Arthur C. Clarke knew that in 1960...
