Water on Moon!

[arozanski]

news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20091113/ts_afp/sciencespaceusmoon/print

NASA finds water found on the moon
37 mins ago

WASHINGTON (AFP) – A "significant amount" of frozen water has been found on the moon, the US space agency NASA said Friday, boosting hopes of eventually setting up a permanent lunar base.

Preliminary data from a moon probe "indicates the mission successfully uncovered water in a permanently shadowed lunar crater," NASA said.

"The discovery opens a new chapter in our understanding of the moon," it added in a statement.

The data was found after NASA sent two spacecraft crashing into the lunar surface last month in a dramatic experiment to probe for water.

One rocket slammed into the Cabeus crater, near the moon's southern pole, at around 5,600 miles (9,000 kilometers) per hour. It was followed four minutes later by a spacecraft equipped with cameras to record the impact.

That means we can make ice cubes, which means we can have mixed drinks! Yahoo!

[bizarro]

Just saw that, very cool!

[jeromeoneil]

So the lead up to the LCROSS impact was probably the most hyped event NASA has done since Hubble. There were lots and lots of people on the ground watching through telescopes, including me. It was incredibly disappointing that the impact was as uneventful as it was (read: can't see shit).

The result of all that was a whole lot of wailing and gnashing of teeth about NASA pulling it off as a "publicity" stunt, which kinda pissed me off. The took their time analyzing the data, and gosh, low and behold, it looks as if science worked, again!

Water on the moon. Nice!

[kitkat]

I suspected that the lack of a substantial (that is "can see with your backyard telescope") ejecta plume, cloud whatever was a good sign they hit something other than dessicated dust (rest of the moon IOW). That is about as "intuitive" as realizing that dry & dusty gets up a lot better than mud. The scientists hinted at such at the time, but few paid any attention to their mumblings amid the "moon bombing" media circus.

[john]

Nov 13, 2009 15:27:52 GMT -5 kitkat said:

I suspected that the lack of a substantial (that is "can see with your backyard telescope") ejecta plume, cloud whatever was a good sign they hit something other than dessicated dust (rest of the moon IOW). That is about as "intuitive" as realizing that dry & dusty gets up a lot better than mud. The scientists hinted at such at the time, but few paid any attention to their mumblings amid the "moon bombing" media circus.

You mean this one?

[scissors]

There's also evidence that the amount of water on the moon fluctuates over the course of its orbit.

For those who dig comedy, yes, that means it gets bloated on a monthly basis.

[bizarro]

Hahahaha!

So.... does that mean whitey's going back to the moon? Gil will be rolling over in his grave.

[will]

If an expedition left a couple cases of scotch on the moon, would they still be good to drink in a century? This is applied science at its best.

And maybe they should send some black guys to the moon so Gil can rest in peace. And get some healthcare for his sister Nell, fer chrissakes.

[bizarro]

Or, at least, some rat traps.

What does minimal gravity do to booze? I'm thinking the Russians probably already know.

[arozanski]

Probably not - the difference in pressure would lead to evaporation, although the low temperature would probably cause the bottles to break long before the contents could evaporate.