- Joined
- 16 Feb 08
- Moves
- 117006
@sonhouse saidYou said in your previous post that the back side of the moon is “in total darkness and no direct light from the sun”, this is completely incorrect.
@divegeester
Of course there is no 'dark side' of the moon but because it is tidally locked to Earth, the backside gets slightly less energy in total since Earth does emit some energy which will reach the moon, a small part of it of course.
Furthermore it is actually the nearside of the moon which gets “slight less” exposure to the sun, not the far side. This is basic earth/moon rotational geometry sonshouse. When the near side of the moon is facing the sun it will at times be fully or partially eclipsed by the earth. This never happens to the fair side.
Either way, neither option supports your earlier assertion.
Stop doubling down chap.
290d
@sonhouse saidBecause it disagrees with certain people's pet theories.
@divegeester
Of course there is no 'dark side' of the moon but because it is tidally locked to Earth, the backside gets slightly less energy in total since Earth does emit some energy which will reach the moon, a small part of it of course.
Look at Suzianne's post, nice piece about that subject.
why would folks double thumb her down? It's just an article and may even be wrong so why the TD?
290d
@sonhouse saidThis is the post that the paper I linked agreed with. That was why I posted the link.
@divegeester
Because Earth emits heat as well as the sun so that increases slightly the heat on the nearside but the backside has total darkness and direct light from the sun but that is slightly less heat than the combined heat from Earth and sun hitting Luna.
Not much heat for sure but it is a tiny bit more.
@divegeester saidHe meant dark from earthshine. Obviously.
If your link asserts, as sonhouse did, that the far side of the moon is in total darkness, then it too is totally incorrect.
I really tire of you throwing out everything people say and focusing on one thing misspoke.
- Joined
- 16 Feb 08
- Moves
- 117006
@suzianne saidThat is not what he said at all, so no, it’s not obvious.
He meant dark from earthshine. Obviously.
Clearly Sonhouse is mistaken when he asserts that “the back side of the moon is in total darkness”, it isn’t. Much of the time it is full sun, most of the rest of the time it’s in partial sun. Occasionally, for a day or so, during a full moon on earth, the back side of the moon will be in total darkness.
286d
@shallow-blue saidNObody makes that mistake.
He may have meant that, but it's not as obvious as you gaslight it is. Clearly, none of you have ever listened to a Pink Floyd album, or you'd have known how many people make that mistake.
People aren't as stupid as you'd like to believe.
@divegeester saidSure you could.
I couldn’t care less what you tire of.
You'd stop chasing my skirt if you couldn't.
@divegeester saidYou're singing to the choir.
That is not what he said at all, so no, it’s not obvious.
Clearly Sonhouse is mistaken when he asserts that “the back side of the moon is in total darkness”, it isn’t. Much of the time it is full sun, most of the rest of the time it’s in partial sun. Occasionally, for a day or so, during a full moon on earth, the back side of the moon will be in total darkness.
He knows that too.
I have no idea why you (and others like SB) love to paint people as know-nothings. If I had to guess, it's because you're both insecure of your own intelligence.