Lunar atmosphere in Apollo 11 photograph

[Shank]

In 1954 British Astronomer Val Firsoff reported viewing what he believed was a red sunset near Mare Imbrium.  He believed the effect was caused by the presence of water and carbon dioxide molecules suspended in a fairly dense atmosphere.  16 years later the Apollo 11 mission returned to earth with this photograph:

 

It is AS11-44-6667 taken July 21st at the beginning of Translunar Coast on the return trip from the moon.  The photo shows a nearly full moon with a distinct reddening at the terminator similar to what Firsoff claimed he saw 15 years earlier. 

When enhanced with increased saturation the red color is even more striking.



It should be noted that As11-44-6667 is often presented as a whitewashed disk devoid of most of the color information, more similar to a black and white photograph rather than a color photo.  This one is one of the better prints. 

For comparison purposes AS11-44-6692 is presented.  A view of earths' terminator during a red sunrise.



A number of years ago I showed those photos to Edgar Mitchell at his own forum.  He never said I was right or wrong.  He just called it good work.       


http://www.holloworbs.com/Lunar_Atmosphere.htm
http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/ap11ann/kippsphotos/6667.jpg
http://history.nasa.gov/ap11ann/kippsphotos/6692.jpg

[ArMaP]

Interesting, but if it was an atmosphere, shouldn't it be always present?

Or is it some kind of intermittent atmosphere that only appears sometimes?

PS: the right side of the photo is redder than the left side, so the effect on the Moon is a little less pronounced than it looks on the photo.

[Shank]

NASA cut my hotlinks, oh well, still have the important one.  That photo is actualy flipped compared to how we see the moon in the sky.  The red limb would actualy be a sunrise rather than a sunset.  Some have suggested that a transient lunar atmosphere follows the terminator as it rotates around the moon.  The Apollo science packages left on the moon did find some evidence for that.

When people calculate escape veliocities for gasses on the moon they use the daytime high of 107C.  And true, no light gas could stay there at that temperature.  The temperature on the night side is -150C, at that temperature some light gasses and vapors could stay.  At the terminator the temperature would be close to -150.  At sunrise the gases would be lying low in depressions, valleys and the bottoms of craters.  They would begin to heat, expand and rise.  The solar wind, blowing almost near paralell to the ground at sunrise, would propel them back behind the terminator where they would cool again and fall back to the -150C lunar surface and wait for sunrise to pick them up and move them again.  This process would likely continue for hours after sunrise as deep craters and depressions would remain darkened and -150C cold for some time after sunrise.  Only when the sunlight began to reach inside them would the gasses they held be driven out and blown to the dark side of the terminator by the combination of heating and solar wind.   

So at the terminator there would be like a leap frog game going on.  Gasses sit in the cold dark, the light comes and blows them back into the dark again, over and over and over all the way around the entire lunar surface.  The proposed light gas atmosphere, if it does indeed exist, would not be like our earth atmosphere, enveloping the entire planet 360 degrees around.  It would exist in a narrow band 5 or 10 degrees either side of the terminator and always moving.  Or, the atmosphere exists over the entire dark side and is constantly being pushed from both ends by the sunrise and sunset terminators so that we never see it because it's always in the dark.   

As for why it is not always visible, again if it even exists, I can only guess it would have to do with a host of factors from lunar terrain to f-stop camera settings to our atmosphere's color filtering quality.  No color we ever see in earth based telescopes is ever as vivid and bright as what we get from Hubble.  That red coloration may be only barely perceptable at the best of times with earth based scopes.  Firsoff and others got lucky and saw it on a few occasions.  Maybe everything has to be just right to see it.   Perhaps if we had more space based photos we would see it more often.                     

[1Worldwatcher]

Hi Shank,
Great thread, and may have some kind of explanations of the hows this could be, but not absolutely positive it is the answer. Seems as if your knowledge of these events is a bit more than I , but here, This is a video that was created buy our esteemed Sgt.RockNRoll, he has quite the software set for 3D rendering and analogy.



This is one video that the Sgt. had rendered, but has some pretty astonishing stuff in it that serves credence to your inquiry of the lunar surface and possible atmospheric implications.

Too view more of these types of videos, go here: http://www.thelivingmoon.com/forum/index.php?topic=443.0

Very amazing stuff, as Armap already knows..."Enjoy!"

1Worldwatcher

[zorgon]

Interesting, but if it was an atmosphere, shouldn't it be always present?

Well it is always there but not always visible Same way that the skies on Mars are clear when there is no dust storm. Since there is little water vapor on the moon and the atmosphere is not dense I would imagine we only see it under certain conditions

AS15 88 12013


And then NASA has shown us air glow pictures dating back to Surveyor as well as Sunset/Sunrise rays that Astronauts sketched and astronomers have seen from Earth



Sunset rays Surveyor 1



Apollo 15 about one minute prior to sunrise on July 31, 1971, is seen just beyond the lunar horizon. The bright object on the opposite side of the frame is the planet Mercury. The bright star near the frame center is Regulas, and the lesser stars form the head of the constellation Leo. Mercury is approximately 28 degrees from the center of the sun. the solar coronal streamers, therefore, appear to extend about eight degrees from the sun's center."



Oh wait WHAT? Stars seen from the moon by APOLLO? Say it ain't so 


On the left are lunar "twilight rays" sketched by Apollo 17 astronauts;
on the right are terrestrial crepuscular rays photographed by author Trudy E. Bell.

NASA calls them "MOON FOUNTAINS"   

[ArMaP]

Well it is always there but not always visible Same way that the skies on Mars are clear when there is no dust storm. Since there is little water vapor on the moon and the atmosphere is not dense I would imagine we only see it under certain conditions

So, what makes it visible?

AS15 88 12013

It looks like that photo shows more the brighter areas "bleeding" into the dark sky than anything else, as there is no "glow" in the darker areas.

And then NASA has shown us air glow pictures dating back to Surveyor as well as Sunset/Sunrise rays that Astronauts sketched and astronomers have seen from Earth

Yep, I know those.

Oh wait WHAT? Stars seen from the moon by APOLLO? Say it ain't so 

It is, I have posted that (and other) Apollo photos that show stars, all taken when the Sun is not visible, as expected.

[Pimander]

On the left are lunar "twilight rays" sketched by Apollo 17 astronauts;
on the right are terrestrial crepuscular rays photographed by author Trudy E. Bell.

ArMaP, do you know how this can be explained without an atmosphere?  You normally have an answer when it comes to images.


Were the astronauts lying when they said they could not see stars after Apollo 11?

[mikeybandb]

I took this pic in 2010, not sure if blue is common on not.

[ArMaP]

ArMaP, do you know how this can be explained without an atmosphere?  You normally have an answer when it comes to images.

I don't think an atmosphere is necessary for that to happen, what is needed is something where the light can be reflected. Dust rising high enough would have the same effect.

Were the astronauts lying when they said they could not see stars after Apollo 11?

Probably not, as the photos with the stars all have signs of a long exposure time (the stars look like lines instead of points), so it's possible that they weren't able to see them, although I also don't understand why they wouldn't see them when in the dark.

[ArMaP]

I took this pic in 2010, not sure if blue is common on not.

It looks like colour aberration. Do you have more photos taken with that camera?

[zorgon]

Dust rising high enough would have the same effect.

Yes like NASA's MOON STORMS

but then they keep telling us (especially with the Apollo Missions) that dust on the moon doesn't stir up like it does in an atmosphere.  So if they use that excuse to explain no dust from Apollo then try to switch that to account for MOON FOUNTAINS...

well Never A Straight Answer has it all covered

[zorgon]

Probably not, as the photos with the stars all have signs of a long exposure time (the stars look like lines instead of points), so it's possible that they weren't able to see them, although I also don't understand why they wouldn't see them when in the dark.

AS10-32-4810



And  NASA SAYS:

"If you could turn off the atmosphere's ability to scatter overwhelming sunlight, today's daytime sky might look something like this ... with the Sun surrounded by the stars of the constellations Taurus and Gemini. ..."



So there is the sun in full daylight and all those marvelous stars which is what we would see from Earth if there was no atmosphere to scatter light

So WHY was this not the same case on the Moon? How could they have missed such a spectacular display... unless   

[The Matrix Traveller]

Well it is always there but not always visible  Same way that the skies on Mars are clear when there is no dust storm. Since there is little water vapor on the moon and the atmosphere is not dense I would imagine we only see it under certain conditions

BINGO !

Right on the nail Z....

I guess the human species has much to Understand...

[ArMaP]

AS10-32-4810

Are those supposed to be stars? They look more like dust or scratches on the photo than stars.

So there is the sun in full daylight and all those marvelous stars which is what we would see from Earth if there was no atmosphere to scatter light

So WHY was this not the same case on the Moon? How could they have missed such a spectacular display... unless   

Unless things are not as the theory says.
But, as I said on my previous post, they should have seen the stars at least when on the "night side".

[mikeybandb]

It looks like colour aberration. Do you have more photos taken with that camera?

I do, let move to my pc in my mancave.
will post them soon.