:blabla:
Why is that a problem?
Why should they?
They're trying to simulate the surface of the moon.
The moon's surface (aside from what little atmosphere there is) is for all intents and purposes a vacuum.
| In the moon's atmosphere, there are only 100 molecules per cubic centimeter. In comparison, Earth's atmosphere at sea level has about 100 billion billion molecules per cubic centimeter. |
https://www.space.com/18067-moon-atmosphere.html
So if the moon's surface is a vacuum, and the test was done in a vacuum, then the conditions are similar enough for science to be done.
Which is irrelevant. They weren't testing for depth.
They were comparing the structure of the footprint. It matched the photo almost exactly, which shows that such a footprint could be made even with that little regolith.
As you saw, footprints in sand are much softer and less defined than footprints in regolith BECAUSE of the sharper grains.
Why not?
Here's the problem with that assertion, and the solution that my position offers:
The problem with it is that the lunar regolith is not sedimentary dust, it's not the same kind of particle we have here on earth.
The solution to your supposed problem is that the regolith is a product of meteorites slamming into the moon. In other words, the dust on the moon are the debris from meteorite impacts.
Which is COMPLETELY consistent with my position, the Hydroplate Theory, which asserts that when the fountains of the great deep broke forth, they launched crustal debris from the edges of the cracks in the crust into space, where some of it impacted the moon (which is why the moon has so many craters, and half of the moon (what used to be the leading half of the moon in its orbit) is now facing the earth due to gravity, which also explains lunar libration; and the rest of the debris was shot out into orbit around the sun and eventually into interstellar space) looks like it was melted at some point in the past.
No, Dave, NOT as one would expect, and even in the video, you can clearly see that the footprints are not being filled in, the dust that's being kicked up is being kicked AWAY from the footprints. Watch that portion again, and look closely at where the dust is going, and notice that the footprints are still there, clearly defined even in such a low quality video (as compared to today's footage).
On earth, when you run along the beach, your footprints are not clearly defined, but look more like indentations in the sand, because the sand particles, since they are smooth, will quickly slide against each other and fill in the footprints the moment you take your foot away, and while sand is being kicked away from the footprints in front of you, the sand also
On the moon, however, the lesser gravity combined with the sharp edges allows the regolith to be pushed together and become "locked" together (think puzzle pieces), which prevents them from sliding. The amount of lunar dust that fills in the resulting footprint is therefore FAR less than the amount in a footprint made on the earth in sand.
The portion of the video you're talking about, though, is dealing with whether the footage was sped up or slowed down to make it seem like it was real.
Moisture cannot account for the clearly defined structure of the footprint.
They even showed what that would look like with wet sand.
Straw man, moon dust was not created by wind. It was created by meteorite impacts.
Saying it doesn't make it so, Dave.
Why not?
Such dust particles clearly exist, or are you going to deny the existence of lunar regolith brought back from the moon, as well?
