Let's say the correct exposure for the foreground is, say, f/8. If you had to guess the f/stop for the background what would it be?

What is this TELLING YOU about the source of light given the above?

And no - being on the moon has nothing to do with it. We are talking about a fundamental property of the universe which applies equally well to all travelling waves (such as sound). If anything it makes the question simpler.

This one is a real CORKER

How reflective is a magic suit covered in asphalt?

Again, the lighting is wrong on so many levels in this photograph.

Question: what is the melting point of Kodak Ektachrome?

Good thread! Helped pass a couple of hours at work. I never knew there were so many loons about. Or did I?

Can you hear a ROCKET MOTOR delivering TENS OF THOUSANDS of pounds of thrust at upwards of 160 decibels ANYWHERE in this rlcliprl

Remember, you MUST hear it roaring feet below Armstrong because it is attached to the ship and as ANYONE with half a brain knows - sound travels through more than just air.

Sure, if it were completely detached from the ship you wouldn't hear it. But it wouldn't provide much use to the pilots. CRASH!

I thought you were concentrating purely on SCIENCE?

Was this a lie? Or do you know something about light or sound that will shortly revolutionize the way we think about both?

QuestionFOR CERTAIN about levels of light intensity measured at three unobstructed locations based several miles apart?

Replying to this despite your blatant trolling, and despite the fact that it is impossible to do other than guess, unless you stood at the scene on the Moon with a light meter, because this particular point might be interesting. If you confirm what your point actually is, and what you mean by "the background" - the distant Moon surface? The LEM?

And with reference to that, can we please be informed of whatever it may be that moon hoaxers think is the Killer Point which, you presumably imply, arises from this?

I await with bated breath. Your answer might shatter decades of being fooled!

[iHahahaha. You've been destroyed by Myself an Satellite TV. And by Mugwump on the Moon landing and your defensive hyperbole is the accusation that we're trolls. Poor Borg has nothing left not even Your faith can rescue your downfall as its been smashed to death. You've become a liability Told you that your foundations are built on a Stanley Kubrick filmset..And them foundations have crumbled. hahaha

Ah, so finally you get it. Good.



Not much. The law itself is a given, but the actual lighting conditions on a curved and rotating moon will vary depending on the angle of incoming light, as the Sun rises in the sky, and the reflectivity of the particular type of terrain at each location scattering the incoming light around the scene.

Look at a full Moon through your binoculars. Or even just with your eyes. These factors cause us to be able to see a huge range of shapes shades and patterns even in "dead overhead" lighting conditions.

Unless NASA is faking the Moon, I suppose, and it is really another "holograph".

I am trying to get YOU to understand. I can't make this point any simpler without spelling it our for you.

So engage that lump of lard sitting between your lug holes and think.

You are not THINKING.