Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: Earth Phase Discrepancy in AS14 Images

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2020
    Posts
    1

    Earth Phase Discrepancy in AS14 Images

    Did you look at the photograph taken the next day? I suggest you compare AS14-64-9192 with AS14-66-9227? The earth changes from waxing to waning earth. Not possible for this to happen the next day. It would take another 6 days for this to happen.
    Last edited by PetersCreek; 2020-Jul-30 at 07:00 PM.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Peters Creek, Alaska
    Posts
    13,468
    Welcome to the CosmoQuest forums, Trevor. I have moved your post from the thread, "Venus photographed from Moon on Apollo 14" to a thread of its own. If this post is intended to dispute the Apollo record, please make that clear in your next post. Also, if you haven't already done so, please read our rules linked in my signature line below, especially rule #13, as it relates to the Conspiracy Theories subforum. Again, welcome.
    Forum Rules►  ◄FAQ►  ◄ATM Forum Advice►  ◄Conspiracy Advice
    Click http://cosmoquest.org/forum/images/buttons/report-40b.png to report a post (even this one) to the moderation team.


    Man is a tool-using animal. Nowhere do you find him without tools; without tools he is nothing, with tools he is all. Thomas Carlyle (1795-1881)

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    NEOTP Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    3,255
    The position of the Earth is different in each shot. Same Earth, same phase, different angle of the camera in relation to the Earth.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    19,640
    It's the same phase, just rotated within the photo format, because the first is taken from the surface, looking up, and the second taken from orbit, looking towards the horizon.
    You can produce a similar effect here on Earth, by taking photographs of the moon at different times of the night.

    ETA: schlaugh posted while I was typing.

    Grant Hutchison

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    19,640
    Quote Originally Posted by grant hutchison View Post
    It's the same phase, just rotated within the photo format, because the first is taken from the surface, looking up, and the second taken from orbit, looking towards the horizon.
    Just to elaborate on this. The first photograph is taken with the LM facing west shortly after local sunrise (this was the lighting condition for all the Apollo landings). So we see the crescent Earth in "boat" orientation, its illuminated portion pointing downwards towards the sun behind the LM. The second photograph is taken from orbit over a different part of the moon, with the sun high in the sky (as demonstrated by the relative lack of shadows in the landscape below), and the Earth on the horizon. So we see the crescent Earth in "arch" orientation, with its illuminated portion pointing towards the sun overhead. In other words, if you start from the first photographic position and walk about 90 degrees around the moon towards the sunrise, you'll get the second photographic orientation. (The LM, of course, moved between the two positions by orbiting around the moon.)

    Grant Hutchison

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Houston
    Posts
    1,465
    Quote Originally Posted by schlaugh View Post
    The position of the Earth is different in each shot. Same Earth, same phase, different angle of the camera in relation to the Earth.
    Of course that's the case plus an inability to spatially orient images.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Houston
    Posts
    1,465
    Quote Originally Posted by grant hutchison View Post
    Just to elaborate on this. The first photograph is taken with the LM facing west shortly after local sunrise (this was the lighting condition for all the Apollo landings). So we see the crescent Earth in "boat" orientation, its illuminated portion pointing downwards towards the sun behind the LM. The second photograph is taken from orbit over a different part of the moon, with the sun high in the sky (as demonstrated by the relative lack of shadows in the landscape below), and the Earth on the horizon. So we see the crescent Earth in "arch" orientation, with its illuminated portion pointing towards the sun overhead. In other words, if you start from the first photographic position and walk about 90 degrees around the moon towards the sunrise, you'll get the second photographic orientation. (The LCSM, of course, moved between the two positions by orbiting around the moon.)

    Grant Hutchison
    FTFY, unless the time stamp was after liftoff of the ascent stage of the LM.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Peters Creek, Alaska
    Posts
    13,468
    Quote Originally Posted by bknight View Post
    FTFY, unless the time stamp was after liftoff of the ascent stage of the LM.
    The image was taken from the LM, though.
    Forum Rules►  ◄FAQ►  ◄ATM Forum Advice►  ◄Conspiracy Advice
    Click http://cosmoquest.org/forum/images/buttons/report-40b.png to report a post (even this one) to the moderation team.


    Man is a tool-using animal. Nowhere do you find him without tools; without tools he is nothing, with tools he is all. Thomas Carlyle (1795-1881)

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    19,640
    Quote Originally Posted by bknight View Post
    FTFY, unless the time stamp was after liftoff of the ascent stage of the LM.
    Well, thanks, but they really are both taken from the LM.
    The orbital photograph is from Magazine 66, one of a series depicting "Earthrise from the LM on Rev 14"--they're a record of Acquisition Of Signal after separation from the CSM but before Powered Descent Initiation, so were actually taken before landing, and then the same magazine was used for EVA 1. Magazine 64, despite its lower number, was used later, for EVA 2. The OP seems to have the sequence reversed, perhaps because the magazines weren't used in numerical order, and I guess I perpetuated that by referring to the "first" and "second" photographs because I couldn't be bothered cutting and pasting the magazine numbers and just wanted to talk about the reason for the difference between the first and second photographs mentioned in the OP. My bad.


    Grant Hutchison
    Last edited by grant hutchison; 2020-Aug-01 at 06:35 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •