Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics > #894087

Re: The Apollo moon landings

Cross-posted to 2 groups.

Followups directed to: sci.physics

Show all headers | View raw

In sci.physics Bertitaylor <bertietaylor@myyahoo.com> wrote:
> Hubble should be able to detect centimetre sized objects on the Moon.
> 
> Simple arithmetic will show that.
> 
> Now Webb could tell the shoe size as well.
> 
> WOOF woof-woof woof woof-woof woof
> 
> Bertietaylor
> 
> --

Let’s now repeat the analysis using the James Webb Space Telescope
(JWST) instead of Hubble to evaluate Arindam’s implied claim:

    “JWST can see objects less than a centimetre in size on the Moon
    if properly utilised.”

This is also demonstrably false, for similar physical reasons — even
though JWST is a more powerful telescope than Hubble, it’s still
diffraction-limited and not designed to resolve such small details
on the Moon.
 James Webb Space Telescope (JWST): Resolution Analysis
Key Specs:

    Primary mirror diameter: 6.5 meters

    Best wavelength: ~2 microns (infrared, near the shortest it can go)

    Distance to Moon: 384,400 km

 Step 1: Angular Resolution (Rayleigh Limit)
θ =1.22⋅λ/D
θ = 1.22⋅2×10−6/6.5 ≈ 3.75×10−7 radians
 Step 2: Linear Resolution on the Moon
s = θ⋅d = 3.75×10−7⋅384,400,000 ≈ 144 meters

Even if JWST were perfectly aimed at the Moon (which it isn’t — see next
section), its best possible resolution would be ~140 meters.

    So, JWST can see nothing smaller than a football field on the Moon.

 Additional Constraints on JWST

    JWST cannot even point at the Moon:

        It must keep its sunshield facing the Sun and instruments in
	deep cold.

        The Moon is far too close and bright, and in the wrong position
	in the sky for its orientation.

        It’s not allowed to observe the Moon or Earth for safety reasons.

 Conclusion: Arindam Is Wrong Again

    JWST cannot image the Moon at all — by design.

    Even if it could, it could not resolve footprints or flags.

    Its theoretical resolution is worse than Hubble’s in the visible
    spectrum due to its longer wavelength operation.

    The claim of “centimetre-scale” visibility is off by a factor of
    10,000–14,000×.

 Final Thoughts

Arindam’s style remains the same:

    WOOF woof-woof... with application of middle school level arithmetic.

But the actual arithmetic — even at middle school level — shows that he
has not done any.

JWST cannot see footprints.
JWST cannot see flags.
JWST cannot even see the lunar landers.

And it’s not because of any "conspiracy".
It’s just physics.



-- 
penninojim@yahoo.com

Back to sci.physics | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Re: The Apollo moon landings bertietaylor@myyahoo.com (Bertitaylor) - 2025-07-12 05:26 +0000
  Re: The Apollo moon landings occam <occam@nowhere.nix> - 2025-07-14 13:08 +0200
    Re: The Apollo moon landings bertietaylor@myyahoo.com (Bertitaylor) - 2025-07-14 11:20 +0000
      Re: The Apollo moon landings bertietaylor@myyahoo.com (Bertitaylor) - 2025-07-15 12:06 +0000
  Re: The Apollo moon landings bertietaylor@myyahoo.com (bertitaylor) - 2025-07-16 12:57 +0000
    Re: The Apollo moon landings bertietaylor@myyahoo.com (bertitaylor) - 2025-07-16 13:21 +0000
    Re: The Apollo moon landings Jim Pennino <jimp@gonzo.specsol.net> - 2025-07-16 06:52 -0700
      Re: The Apollo moon landings bertietaylor@myyahoo.com (Bertitaylor) - 2025-07-17 00:18 +0000
        Re: The Apollo moon landings Jim Pennino <jimp@gonzo.specsol.net> - 2025-07-16 18:19 -0700
        Re: The Apollo moon landings "Paul.B.Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2025-07-17 14:00 +0200
          Re: The Apollo moon landings nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2025-07-19 23:01 +0200
            Re: The Apollo moon landings bertietaylor@myyahoo.com (Bertitaylor) - 2025-07-20 00:06 +0000
              Re: The Apollo moon landings Jim Pennino <jimp@gonzo.specsol.net> - 2025-07-19 18:08 -0700
              Re: The Apollo moon landings bertietaylor@myyahoo.com (Bertitaylor) - 2025-07-20 12:36 +0000
                Re: The Apollo moon landings Jim Pennino <jimp@gonzo.specsol.net> - 2025-07-20 07:17 -0700
                Re: The Apollo moon landings Python <jp@python.invalid> - 2025-07-20 19:37 +0000
                Re: The Apollo moon landings bertietaylor@myyahoo.com (Bertitaylor) - 2025-07-20 22:49 +0000
                Re: The Apollo moon landings Jim Pennino <jimp@gonzo.specsol.net> - 2025-07-20 18:15 -0700
                Re: The Apollo moon landings "Paul.B.Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2025-07-21 13:38 +0200
              Re: The Apollo moon landings "Paul.B.Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2025-07-21 20:58 +0200

csiph-web