I found cosmic rays on the moon. Does the moon have an atmosphere?

Hello everyone,

Good to be back!

Jackie asked me to visit the forum and so here I am. Apologies for not showing up lately. I have been "very busy" with new footage.

Speaking of footage ...

A couple weeks ago while studying some older footage of the Apollo 12 landing on the moon, I noticed some strange effects in the film. This film was shot by the astronauts with the onboard camera. After having watched the same scene over and over again I saw greenish streaks of light so I carefully went through this particular sequence frame by frame. I discovered objects which resambled cosmic rays. Now, I have seen hundreds of artificially / CGI made cosmic rays but never "live ones". The cosmic rays I found are of a special type: the kind you see on celestial bodies with a gaseous atmosphere.

Could this be an indication that the moon has an atmosphere?

Exclusively for this forum only, here are the "original screenshots and QE Super resolution images".




Upload Image to TurboImageHost.com

Let me show you this video I made with frames from the 1969 Apollo 12 mission. This video might, or might not be showing evidence that the moon has an atmosphere.

The reason why I made this video is because of the strange nature of these cosmic rays.

As a hobby astronomer I know that the moon cannot have an atmosphere due to the laws of physics. Fact is however that the objects I found must be cosmic rays. They are definitely no artifacts. According to the laws of physics and in the special way these rays manifested themselves in this film they can only be viewed this way on celestial bodies with a gaseous atmosphere.

But that is not all my friends. There is a second alternative!

What if these recordings are not made on the moon but on our planet. A planet with a gaseous atmosphere! This would support some of the conspiracy theories, that the landing on the moon was staged. Now I honestly do not believe in this theory but fact is that we have a contradiction here!

So, what is it we see here? What is really going on?

For those who like to skip the intro: the "show" starts at: 2:50

https://www.youtube.com/embed/d74_kcGgVX0

Greetz,

Sander

UPDATE: It is not true that we cannot see cosmic rays. Fact is that we are unable to photograph a few cosmic rays but when they are with billions we can see them in the sky over the North - and South Pole. We know them as Polar Lights.

Thank you for sharing your findings...There is so much you have posted, I, for one, will not be bored for a long time *lol*.

Welcome back Sander!

Interesting post... from what I've read of the Apollo 17 transcripts when they were decompressing to exit the LEM, any atmosphere would have to be 0.08 psi or less. They cracked the LEM door open at 0.20 psi, but had to hold it open to keep it from blowing shut. They used as an example a statement that an inflated (toy) balloon would be about 1.5 psi.

C

This is odd.

When the pressure inside the LEM is higher than the pressure outside the LEM you would expect the "remaining air" to stream out instead of streaming in. When they needed to hold the door open, keep it from blowing shut, would that not mean that the pressure on the moon is higher than the pressure inside the decompression chamber. Am I missing the point?

Greetz,

Sander

Hmmm... good point, Sander.

I rechecked the transcript (Apollo 17), and the hatch opens inward. There was barely enough room for them to open it with both astronauts suited up.

One would have to stand behind the hatch door when it was open, so that the other could egress. Then he'd swing the door partly closed so that he could get out from behind it, and then egress himself.

So... from what I've seen, it was never specifically stated that pressure equalized at exactly "zero", so that leaves a bit of room for some slight pressure.

C

I might have something to contribute to this topic.

I don't know much about lunar atmosphere except that it seems like there isn't much (except due to the ice/water disassociating, venting of gases for whatever reason, and dust electrostatically levitating). Evidence for me is the 40 years of imagery that shows little change in boulder tracks due to any lunar weather. This is true even for the minor footprints of astronauts that haven't been filled by dust yet.

The odd lights might look very electrical but also seems like crinkled film at the end of a film segment. I do not know the exact process of how the film is used in the camera, whether it is a unique roll or what, or how the film is advanced (motor or spring) but whether during filming or Earth bound processing, I think the film got messed up a little. Note that this film was not televised back to Earth. It was “16 mm onboard film” taken by the 16mm Maurer Data Acquisition Camera (usually called "the DAC") and had to be processed in a film lab. The DAC could take movies of short length. No film processing could be done onboard. Other TV cameras on board and on the surface provided realtime images of activities. The TV cameras had their own artifacts. The Westinghouse Color camera you refer to in your video was damaged by being pointed at the Sun when it was first used on Apollo 12 causing an overload in the secondary vidicon tube, rendering it useless for the remainder of the mission.

Dr. Louis Barbier said cosmic rays can’t be seen? There was a specific experiment on Apollo to observe them. I think it is called ALFMED. From a web site (new members cannot post links for 5 days).....
“All crews since A-11 (and perhaps some earlier) observed light flashes when in the dark or when they closed their eyes, while in transit to and from the Moon, on the surface, and in lunar orbit. On A-14 an observational schedule was first followed to test the various theories of the origin of the flashes. Flashes could be seen with the eyes open or closed when the spacecraft was dark. They discovered that it was not necessary to be dark adapted to see the flashes. This indicates that Cerenkov radiation from energetic cosmic rays traversing the eyeball, which had been the most widely accepted explanation for the light flashes, probably did not cause all or most of the flashes because light from this source is quite faint. Some of the flashes observed in space may be caused by direct ionization interactions of cosmic rays with the retina.”

I recall reading stories about Mir and ISS astronauts who found that they could block some of the lights/flashes by parking themselves by the heavy batteries in the Russian modules. I count this as seeing cosmic rays and it sounds pretty scarey to me to know radiation is penetrating your head!

I hate to sound too uneducated, but are gamma rays part of what you are referring to? If that were the case, there is an interesting article posted at

http://www.lpi.usra.edu/lunar/missions/apollo/apollo_16/experiments/gamma_ray/ where there was this passage:

"Some elements, such as uranium and thorium, are naturally radioactive and emit gamma-rays as part of their radioactivity. The bombardment of the lunar surface by galactic cosmic rays causes some other elements to emit gamma-rays."

I have the dunce cap ready, just in case I need to wear it for a while.

From what I read, cosmic rays are extremely high energy particles from outer space (some are galactic, some are from the Sun) while gamma rays are radiation. Yes, it seems some gamma rays are caused by cosmic rays.

Dunce cap? I had to refresh my memory by cheating and looking at Wikipedia!

Hi there!

These feather-like objects are not the result of bad wrinkled / damaged film. Why not? Because the "object" is only visible in a single frame. If the film would be damaged the object would be visible in a continuous sequence of frames.

True:
Dr. Louis Barbier said cosmic rays can’t be seen?

Also true:
There was a specific experiment on Apollo to observe them. I think it is called ALFMED. From a web site (new members cannot post links for 5 days).....
“All crews since A-11 (and perhaps some earlier) observed light flashes when in the dark or when they closed their eyes, while in transit to and from the Moon, on the surface, and in lunar orbit. On A-14 an observational schedule was first followed to test the various theories of the origin of the flashes. Flashes could be seen with the eyes open or closed when the spacecraft was dark. They discovered that it was not necessary to be dark adapted to see the flashes. This indicates that Cerenkov radiation from energetic cosmic rays traversing the eyeball, which had been the most widely accepted explanation for the light flashes, probably did not cause all or most of the flashes because light from this source is quite faint. Some of the flashes observed in space may be caused by direct ionization interactions of cosmic rays with the retina.”

You should read this. They did not see featherlike objects, neither the ALFMED, which only was able to record streaks of light.

http://history.nasa.gov/ap16fj/08_Day3_Pt1.htm#046_56_46

What the ALFMED looked like:

http://www.myspacemuseum.com/ALFMED.htm

Fact:
There is at present no technology on earth that can actually capture an IMAGE (full shape) of a cosmic ray.
Reason: the light emitted by cosmic rays is too weak to be recorded. The only images we have are computer generated models or artifacts (streaks/dots) created in emulsion film / CCD images..

True:
The Westinghouse Color camera you refer to in your video was damaged by being pointed at the Sun when it was first used on Apollo 12 causing an overload in the secondary Vicodin tube, rendering it useless for the remainder of the mission.

Fact: the damage of the camera occurred AFTER these scenes with cosmic rays were taken, which was immediately after landing on the moon. At the time of recording the camera was functioning as it should.

Finally:

Researchers believe that cosmic rays are responsible for these flashes of light, though the exact mechanism is unknown. Hypotheses include one or all of: Cherenkov radiation created as the cosmic ray particles pass through the vitreous humor of the astronauts' eyes, direct interaction with the retina/optic nerve, or direct interaction with visual centres in the brain.[1]

So basically our scientist have no idea what they are dealing with: no facts, no proof only hypotheses!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_ray_visual_phenomena

Here is a contradiction: we can neither film nor photograph them according to science but we did ...

Option 1: Either these are cosmic rays and NASA has a technology to capture them, or
Option 2: we are dealing with something else, which moves so fast that we can only capture it in a single frame.

Greetz,

Sander

As Jackie pointed out, the data that there are cosmic rays hitting the Moon's surface is uncontrovertible. I don't see how it has anything to do with atmosphere though.

Regarding the clip you provide as evidence, I think we should at least agree that it is a "16mm film" and not color TV kinescope footage.

This 16 mm film that has the weird electrical effect is at the end of Magazine L (a "magazine" is a roll of film) . So the film was not processed until it came back to Earth. The color TV camera you refer to is not related to this film. That TV camera sent its signal back to Earth and the downlinked signal was supposed to be captured on a kinescope on Earth, not in the LM.

I think you might be right about the use of both the DAC and TV camera being used around the same time since Magazine K is the LM landing and the color TV camera was in EVA 1. But you need to get the kinescope footage of the color TV camera.

Hi there,

I gree it is a 16 mm film recording.

Why the atmosphere?

Look at the featherlike shape. Cosmic rays, when seen in an environment without a gaseous atmosphere (vacuum / space) are dots, or streaks of light. The featherlike shape however only shows up when cosmic particles collide with atmosperic gasses. Than the characterstic umbrella / feather shape is created. Ergo: according to NASA the moon has no atmosphere still we see something than can only happen under atmospherical conditions.

Greetz,

Sander

A company called spacecraft films has the footage on 3 DVDs for Apollo 12. I recall that I have this somewhere and will take a look at the relevent segment.

I was also thinking that the line seems horizontal, but the radiation comes normally from above, only a small percentage would be horizontal to the surface.

I found my DVD set from Spacecraft films for APollo 12. It had the color TV kinescope images, but they were very grainy and had too much noise to get any value from. No rays like the film you pointed out, some horizontal lines but nothing weird.

This company didn't include the film you highlight for some reason. It is amazing how much better quality the 16 mm film is than the color TV!

Hello guys!

Yeah, it is really remarkable that we are even talking kinescopes for copies from 1970.....Especially for something as important as the moon images.

16mm film from DAC cameras has superior resolution and contrast as compared to the then available video. Multi-generational copies serves to reduce the available quality by some magnitude, reducing or obliterating possible evidence available photographically, no?

I'm curious if anyone knows where 1st generation (likely unobtainable or lost....) or early generation, unedited raw film and video copies might be found.....

Seems we keep hearing about "adjustments" made to resultant images. I'd like to know what the originals looked like......Probably asking too much......:-)

P.S. Wouldn't have anything to do with seeing something we shouldn't?......:-)

Hey Rick - I have been looking here and there and it's a no go so far. Will post if I find anything!