[Martin Frey]

Martin Frey asked the Naked Scientists:

I recently visited the traffic museum in Lucerne in Switzerland and saw stones from the moon. Is there a possibility to find out whether this stones are really from the moon ?

What do you think?

[RD]

Rocks from the surface of the moon have isotopes which are rare on Earth.
This is because the moon does not have an atmosphere to protect the surface from incoming cosmic rays, which create the isotopes.

[sooyeah]

Well theres an answer, I do ofcourse disagree, well you would expect no less, I'm sure. There are plenty of other places it could have come from. Any rock flotting in space has no atmosohere protecting it, so over time all would probably show the same isotopes would they not?

One experiment that would be interesting is to see if it glows red in the dark, as the moon does during a luna eclipse. Under the simlar circumstances the moon rock should do the same surely.
We will need to go there and actually get some to know for sure, but that's a whole other post, which I can't be bothered with.

[Bored chemist]

Jolly,
Any rock will glow red when illuminated with red light. It's a lot of trouble to go to but you could use the red light produced by putting the earth in the way of the sun and letting the atmosphere scatter the blue components of the light away. What would be the point?
"We will need to go there and actually get some to know for sure, " we did.

[lyner]

OH BC. Your last two words.
Sit back and watch the reaction.

[RD]

http://stuffucanuse.com/fake_moon_landings/moon_landings.htm [Links inactive - To make links active and clickable, login or click here to register]

[qazibasit]

Go back to ur basics. See what the moon is doing, its actually reflecting the rays of sun. If you look closer to the moon rocks you will find that it is made up of tiny particles which have the property to reflect and these granular rocks are basically from moon origin. Yes there is a posibility that any nova or meteorite would have striked moon in the past. So one can identify easily the different nature of rock in any such area.

[lyner]

Perhaps you could elaborate, QZ. Your last post seems to be a circular argument.

[qazibasit]

well i have see the moon stone in my hand in USA, where my uncle who was working in NASA. He got retired from NASA and got a small piece of moon rock as a gift from NASA for his services for 32 years.

[sooyeah]

Jolly,
Any rock will glow red when illuminated with red light.

Sure and if you used green it would be green and yellow, yellow. HELLO!

It's a lot of trouble to go to but you could use the red light produced by putting the earth in the way of the sun and letting the atmosphere scatter the blue components of the light away. What would be the point?

It's called experimenting, I thought you like that. Besides light has a colour trinity.
But anyway, we are NOT, I repeat NOT, starting again! I mean come on Bored you must have some water to go Degas or something [](Hugs).

"We will need to go there and actually get some to know for sure, " we did.

How this for a reaction.....









Keep watching






 []

[Bored chemist]

OK, but I still want to know why you want to go to all that much trouble to check something uncontraversial and obvious.
Things look red under red light.

[lyner]

light has a colour trinity

and what might that be?
Could that be a reference to the tristimulus values used in colour matching? That is an entirely psychometric concept which describes how we perceive colours. What's that to do with the basics of light? It's just a subjective thing.

[Bored chemist]

I was ignoring that aspect. It's also technically wrong since some people have more than 3 types of photoreceptors and some have fewer.

[sooyeah]

OK, but I still want to know why you want to go to all that much trouble to check something uncontraversial and obvious.
Things look red under red light.

Wait two seconds,

light has a colour trinity

and what might that be?
Could that be a reference to the tristimulus values used in colour matching? That is an entirely psychometric concept which describes how we perceive colours. What's that to do with the basics of light? It's just a subjective thing.

Yes, I know.

I was ignoring that aspect. It's also technically wrong since some people have more than 3 types of photoreceptors and some have fewer.

My point Mr Chemist(you see what I did there) was that maybe rather than the moon rock glowing because red light or any other colour light hit it, and was reflected; Was that it actually stored up the energy from it's solar exposure and then glowed when in darkness(just like the little stars, people stick on there bedroom walls etc).

If so, that could be used as a test, to see if the rock actually came from the moon.

Hence my post:

One experiment that would be interesting is to see if it glows red in the dark, as the moon does during a luna eclipse. Under the similar circumstances the moon rock should do the same surely.

I am challenging your assumption that the Moon glows red because the Earth blocks out the blue light, I argue the Earth blocks out the red too. MY POINT.

[LeeE]

I am challenging your assumption that the Moon glows red because the Earth blocks out the blue light, I argue the Earth blocks out the red too. MY POINT.

Please give your argument for the Earth blocking red light too.

[sooyeah]

I am challenging your assumption that the Moon glows red because the Earth blocks out the blue light, I argue the Earth blocks out the red too. MY POINT.

Please give your argument for the Earth blocking red light too.

Hey there LeeE, well I found this site

http://www.mreclipse.com/Special/LEprimer.html [Links inactive - To make links active and clickable, login or click here to register]

This site actually supports Mr chemist argument and for anyone who wants to read about lunar eclipses, there it is.

If I have an argument it's this, considering the size difference between the moon and Earth and the reality that the Moon and Sun can cause each other to have eclipses. When a lunar eclipse happens the Shadow is far greater.
They currently argue that the moon glows red because indirect sun light travels through our atmosphere in enlightens it with colors from red to yellow.

I was arguing that rather than that, what if the moon held on to the solar energy, and realeased it, when in darkness, it would only do so for a short period of time, after which it would return to normal, lunar eclipses only happen at full moon times, which is also the time we see the moon full faced, the only time you really see the Moon from Earth full on.
It may be wrong, it's just an idea, an idea which I was hoping, if correct, could be used to experiment on rocks, that people claim came from the Moon.
Fact? No, a what if. If there is an experiment you could do to prove or give support towards it, then please do.

Trouble is if you had a pieace of Moon rock you would have to treat it in the same way the Moon was treated before the eclipse happened.
If you did that and it didn't glow Red, then if I am right it wouldn't be moon rock.

The only reason I even looked at and considered this idea, is because right now, we have no way of actually knowing if a rock without doubt came from the Moon. Even if I was right and you did that test and it glowed red, that still wouldn't be conclusive, but it would be better than the tests they run at the moment.

I might not be right, I may be completely wrong. It's just a thought. []    

[Bored chemist]

"Wait two seconds,"
If I wait a bit longer and then look out of the window I will see the sunset, it's red.
So I know that the earth's atmosphere removes blue light and lets the red stuff through.
Just about everyone on the planet is directly aware of the evidence that suports my point of view.
Jolly, on the other hand maintains the oposite point of view. Brave? perhaps? Dumb? Also a possibillity. Scientific? Not by any means.

Incidentally, as Jolly knows perfectly well, the question of how do we know they are moon rocks was debated at pointless length in another thread. The analyses of the rocks indicated that they had been subject to conditions that simply don't exist on earth.

[lyner]

Jolly

Moon and Sun can cause each other to have eclipses

No, the EARTH causes a Lunar eclipse actually.

the only time you really see the Moon from Earth full on.

It's always 'full on' 'cos it's a sphere - not a dinner plate.

[sooyeah]

Jolly

Moon and Sun can cause each other to have eclipses

No, the EARTH causes a Lunar eclipse actually.

That's a typo, I meant Earth. Surely you can see that. You really are scrapping the barrel.

the only time you really see the Moon from Earth full on.

It's always 'full on' 'cos it's a sphere - not a dinner plate.

I'll let you figure that one out.

[sooyeah]

"Wait two seconds,"
If I wait a bit longer and then look out of the window I will see the sunset, it's red.
So I know that the earth's atmosphere removes blue light and lets the red stuff through.
Just about everyone on the planet is directly aware of the evidence that suports my point of view.
Jolly, on the other hand maintains the oposite point of view. Brave? perhaps? Dumb? Also a possibillity. Scientific? Not by any means.

OK when did I say that Mr chemist? I didn't mean the atmosphere Blocked the sun rays, from hitting the moon, I was suggesting that maybe the Moon was in complete shadow. A place where no light can get through.

I do how ever see what you point is and where we have diverged, I was talking about the Earth, that solid mass, you have been talking about the atmosphere. Please understand The Earths atmosphere, proportional To mass, is tiny. There is a far greater area behind the earth in complete shadow, compared to that smaller area you are referring to that may have red light in it. 

Incidentally, as Jolly knows perfectly well, the question of how do we know they are moon rocks was debated at pointless length in another thread. The analyses of the rocks indicated that they had been subject to conditions that simply don't exist on earth.

As previously stated any rock not from Earth would be the same, so where is the proof that it's Moon rock? Why Moon rock not Mars rock for example?

Just say it: "I have Faith in NASA!"

[Bored chemist]

"OK when did I say that Mr chemist? "

Here

"I am challenging your assumption that the Moon glows red because the Earth blocks out the blue light, I argue the Earth blocks out the red too. MY POINT."
You seem to have overlooked the fact that the earth has an atmosphere which selectively blocks blue light.

Jolly, why don't you just say it "I don't believe the evidence that I can see with my own eyes"?

[sooyeah]

"OK when did I say that Mr chemist? "

Here

"I am challenging your assumption that the Moon glows red because the Earth blocks out the blue light, I argue the Earth blocks out the red too. MY POINT."
You seem to have overlooked the fact that the earth has an atmosphere which selectively blocks blue light.

OK Mr Chemist, you will see I said "Earth" not Atmosphere. If you had read the rest of the last post surely you would see that. Does it matter? Doesn't does it.

Move on Bored move on,

So rather than dragging up points that have already been answered. Why not answer the ones that haven't; Like the main question of this thread:

How do we confirm the moon rocks are really from the moon?

Which leads to my Question:
where is the proof that it's Moon rock? Why Moon rock not Mars rock for example?

[LeeE]

We've been able to learn a lot about the planets and their moons from spectrographic analysis of reflected sunlight, and in the case of our Moon, by going there.   This info has also been supplimented by a lot of experiments conducted by probes.  The end result is that we know quite a lot about the composition of the planets and their moons, and knowing whether a rock comes from the Moon, or from Mars, comes down to finding the best match.

[lyner]

Yes. And the red light bit is a red herring.

[LeeE]

Actually, a kipper might be more appropriate - quite a good colour match []

[JimBob]

Rocks from the surface of the moon have isotopes which are rare on Earth.
This is because the moon does not have an atmosphere to protect the surface from incoming cosmic rays, which create the isotopes.

they have isotopes and chemical compounds not found on earth - especially types of plagioclase.

[Bored chemist]

Last time I checked the atmospher was part of the earth, but not it seems on Jolly's plannet.


Also when he says "Move on Bored move on,

So rather than dragging up points that have already been answered. Why not answer the ones that haven't; Like the main question of this thread:

How do we confirm the moon rocks are really from the moon?"
I presume he means "move backwards" to this,
"Incidentally, as Jolly knows perfectly well, the question of how do we know they are moon rocks was debated at pointless length in another thread. The analyses of the rocks indicated that they had been subject to conditions that simply don't exist on earth."
which I posted yesterday.


As for the penetrating matter of "Why Moon rock not Mars rock for example? "
Because we went to the moon to get it; we didn't get lost and go to Mars by mistake.

[sooyeah]

Last time I checked the atmospher was part of the earth, but not it seems on Jolly's plannet.

Yes the planet Earth has an atmosphere, The Earth- the mass of the earth, is well earth and rock isn't it and no light is passing though that is it. How many times will I have to repeat myself? Someone keep a tally.

Also when he says "Move on Bored move on,

So rather than dragging up points that have already been answered. Why not answer the ones that haven't; Like the main question of this thread:

How do we confirm the moon rocks are really from the moon?"
I presume he means "move backwards" to this,
"Incidentally, as Jolly knows perfectly well, the question of how do we know they are moon rocks was debated at pointless length in another thread. The analyses of the rocks indicated that they had been subject to conditions that simply don't exist on earth."
which I posted yesterday.

One: Have you read the title of this thread?
Two: A rock from anywhere in the universe, will be subject to conditions that don't exist on the Earth? YES OR NO BORED?
Three: What part of we are not doing this again, did you not understand?

As for the penetrating matter of "Why Moon rock not Mars rock for example? "
Because we went to the moon to get it; we didn't get lost and go to Mars by mistake.

Here's is the problem, some people believe we didn't go to the moon, so saying this is definitely moon rock because Neil brought it out of the module, won't satisfy them, will it. Point

So lets imagine you are holding a rock in 1950, it's not from Earth, you just saw it fall from the sky; Now, how do you know where it came from?
How did the Russians know there rock was from the moon before the lunar landings?

[Bored chemist]

You clearly didn't read what I posted. Did you read JimBob's post?
As you say the thread's title is "How can we..."
Present tense. How we might have done it in 1950 isn't the point.
Now, we can say these rocks came from the moon because they are like the other rocks from the moon.
The only problem with that is if you don't believe that we went to the moon. Well, as you say, we are not doing that discussion again but my memory tells me that you utterly failed to convince anyone about your minority view. To the extent that we are doing it again it's because you brought the conspiracy theory up.

The obvious answer is they are moon rocks because they look like moon rocks.
Oh, btw,
re "A rock from anywhere in the universe, will be subject to conditions that don't exist on the Earth? YES OR NO BORED?
"
The answer's plainly no. A rock from Blackpool will not have been subject to conditions that don't exist on Earth. Blackpool might not be in your univers, but it's in mine.

[LeeE]

Jolly - do you have a clear idea of what you're trying to achieve in this thread?  Would you mind sharing it with us?

[lyner]

It's just attention seeking. Don't get involved.
He'll go away if he's not encouraged.

[sooyeah]

Jolly - do you have a clear idea of what you're trying to achieve in this thread?  Would you mind sharing it with us?

Yes

It's just attention seeking. Don't get involved.
He'll go away if he's not encouraged.

 []

You clearly didn't read what I posted. Did you read JimBob's post?
As you say the thread's title is "How can we..."
Present tense. How we might have done it in 1950 isn't the point.

Did you read my last post? SORRY it is definitely a point!

Now, we can say these rocks came from the moon because they are like the other rocks from the moon.
The only problem with that is if you don't believe that we went to the moon. Well, as you say, we are not doing that discussion again but my memory tells me that you utterly failed to convince anyone about your minority view. To the extent that we are doing it again it's because you brought the conspiracy theory up.

The obvious answer is they are moon rocks because they look like moon rocks.
Oh, btw,
re "A rock from anywhere in the universe, will be subject to conditions that don't exist on the Earth? YES OR NO BORED?
"
The answer's plainly no. A rock from Blackpool will not have been subject to conditions that don't exist on Earth. Blackpool might not be in your univers, but it's in mine.

You See people? You see! You see what he's doing? This is not normal! He's not an man, I tell you! I have it on good authority he sleeps upside down in a cave somewhere in Peru, He spends his days lurking in the science wing, thinking up ever increasingly sinister ways to annoy the students. Over a year I've been posting and he's still at it!! Your all either, Blind or crazy-

[Bored chemist]

So you have run out of anything resembling rational argument then.
What we could have done in 1950 does not answer the question "how do we confirm moon rocks are from the moon". It might answer "how could we have confirmed that moon rocks..."
but that's a different question.
BTW, I haven't been caving in over 20 years but I'd quite like a trip to Peru.

[sooyeah]

So you have run out of anything resembling rational argument then.
What we could have done in 1950 does not answer the question "how do we confirm moon rocks are from the moon". It might answer "how could we have confirmed that moon rocks..."
but that's a different question.
BTW, I haven't been caving in over 20 years but I'd quite like a trip to Peru.

OK Mr Chemist, quibbling aside.

Well let's ask a different question:

If you are in a lab with space rock, and do not have a sample of "Moon rock"(that Neil brought back) or charts relating to tests done on the "Moon rock"(Neil brought back); How do you know it's moon rock?   

Mental note: It's not in Peru