Palomar Observations of LCROSS Moon Impact

Adaptive optics observations from the 200-inch Hale Telescope at Palomar Observatory of the crater Cabeus during the impact of the NASA LCROSS probe. This silent film shows data from 4 minutes prior to impact through 8 minutes after, compressed into less than 40 seconds. More info is at http://www.astro.caltech.edu/palomar/lcross.html

Category:

Science & Technology

Tags:

• astronomy
• Palomar Observatory
• Moon
• LCROSS

[ParaglidingManiac]

Adaptive optics are the best!

[SSRacingUK]

I must have blinked................

[george7378]

Plume or not - these are some seriously good images of the Moon! I would love a go with that telescope. And to the idiots who think the mission is fake - why on Earth would NASA tell everyone to look out for an impact plume if they knew there wouldn't be one? Surely they would say that the impact would not produce visible debris to avoid controversy? People who come up with nonesense like that (and other conspiracies) are really just lost causes who think they know better than real scientists.

[calvinoism1]

There is no impact , why would they not simply show us the impact?

[presbarkeep]

ppfftttt....  nothing

[propaghandi2]

Plume or no plume it has been a hell of a ride, thank you Nasa for the moths of fun i had following LCROSS and LRO..... loved it all the way.......

[TomekKogutah]

and?... I saw nothing, or I am blind.

[ParaglidingManiac]

Once again, NASA disapoints people :(

[ApolloWasReal]

How am I misrepresenting your argument? I have yet to hear anyone else express doubts about the reality of the LCROSS impact. ANYONE. And that includes the usual crowd of Apollo hoax conspiracy fanatics.

Oh, I hear disappointment that it wasn't as spectacular as one had hoped. I was too. But most people seem to realize that the whole reason you conduct scientific experiments is because you DON'T know exactly what's going to happen in advance. Otherwise it wouldn't be science.

[Essanach]

As I already said, and as you again demonstrate here, you have to misrepresent my argument and create straw men to bash instead, because you can't refute what I actually said. That's fine. Honest readers will see what you are doing. I'm done here.