Sorry it is more or less antidotal. All I have is what a student from the UW said at a presentation in 2002 at NSS Seattle.
Which was that the number of photons received from the retroreflectors has dropped from the 1970s.
But, most of the problem could be in the Earth atmosphere and allocating smaller scopes to the task. Still we use better lasers and sensors and more powerful computers.
I note he made no reference to documents that proved no change in the retroreflectors. Which would be as you point out is critical to his argument. Anyway, I just don't see arguing that because they work the dust isn't a real issue. If he had some evidence of some other sort I would feel better about this sort of claim.
And the argument that robots have operated fine is also proof of the dust not being an issue is bogus as well. The only "long term" moving machines on the moon were Lunokhods. And if I remember right they operated for a few months. Not that the USSR would have told us then, but how many moving parts failed during operation? They had 8 wheels for a reason.
Space/Science » in reply to Can you document that the reflectors have degraded?
re: Can you document that the reflectors have degraded?
The whole thread (40 posts)
- OK! TIt's timne to end this cosmic bogeyman BS about the hazards of lunar dust.
- Agreed! It's time to end this cosmic bogeyman BS about the hazards of lunar dust.
- re: Not sure where you are coming from. Dust on the Moon is an engineering problem yet to be solved.
- This issue was discussed in the Physics Today article.
- re: Are you trying to claim micrometeorites and cosmic rays do not hit the surface of the Moon?
- OK, you have a point there
- This issue was discussed in the Physics Today article.