×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Unambiguous Evidence of Water On the Moon

samzenpus posted more than 4 years ago | from the water-and-cheese dept.

Moon 251

Nethemas the Great writes "Information has leaked ahead of the scheduled NASA press conference tomorrow that we have found unambiguous evidence for water on the moon. From the article, 'Since man first touched the moon and brought pieces of it back to Earth, scientists have thought that the lunar surface was bone dry. But new observations from three different spacecraft have put this notion to rest with what has been called "unambiguous evidence" of water across the surface of the moon.'"

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

251 comments

great news (5, Funny)

SkyMunky (249995) | more than 4 years ago | (#29526029)

I'll be thirsty after the long ride.

Re:great news (0, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29526087)

and if you proposed this some time ago, people would say "wow what an idiot you are". they would not say "interesting claim, please find evidence for it" because that would be a level of class far beyond their reach. no, they would have ridiculed you. almost every non-mainstream idea is treated this way by a bunch of narrow-minded fucks, and if you are reading this, there is a good chance you have been that narrow-minded fuck yourself at some time or another. some of these ideas get to become mainstream ideas and those eventually become what "everybody knows" and we forget the inertia that had to be overcome for mostly pointless yet somewhat valid reasons. people never seem to appreciate history very much or else maybe they'd read it and learn to keep more of an open mind. sigh.

Re:great news (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29526179)

You bore me.

Yes Indeed, But Rocket Propulsion Sucks (3, Funny)

Louis Savain (65843) | more than 4 years ago | (#29526259)

Great news indeed. Still, it's depressing to think that we're still using an ancient, dangerous, primitive and very expensive space transportation technology: rocket propulsion. One thing is sure; we'll never colonize the solar system with rockets at the rate we're going.

But rejoice. Soon, a new form of transportation will arrive, one based on the realization that we are immersed in an immense ocean of energetic particles. This is a consequence of a reevaluation of our understanding of the causality of motion. Soon, we'll have vehicles that can move at tremendous speeds and negotiate right angle turns without slowing down and without incurring damages due to inertial effects. Floating cities, unlimited clean energy, earth to mars in hours, New York to Beijing in minutes... That's the future of energy and travel. Check it out.

The Problem With Motion [blogspot.com]

Re:Yes Indeed, But Rocket Propulsion Sucks (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29526635)

It would be nice if you had some _evidence_ that inertia can be ignored.

Re:Yes Indeed, But Rocket Propulsion Sucks (3, Funny)

Louis Savain (65843) | more than 4 years ago | (#29526653)

Yes, it would be nice, wouldn't it? But Rome was not built in one day. Have patience. Inertia can be ignored, even under extremely powerful acceleration, if every atom in the ship and its occupants are accelerated simultaneously and equally.

Re:Yes Indeed, But Rocket Propulsion Sucks (3, Funny)

Cillian (1003268) | more than 4 years ago | (#29526917)

Your views intrigue me and I would like to subscribe to your newsletter

Re:Yes Indeed, But Rocket Propulsion Sucks (1)

somersault (912633) | more than 4 years ago | (#29526989)

Sure, but I would think it's quite a task to move even a 2D array of atoms "simultaneously and equally", let alone an entire 3D object..

Re:Yes Indeed, But Rocket Propulsion Sucks (4, Informative)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 4 years ago | (#29527153)

Jump off a building. Seriously. Your atoms are not accelerated quite simultaneously and equally due to the slight incline of the gravitational plane, but the difference is almost negligible (ignoring air resistance), and so you don't feel any acceleration (fall into a small black hole and the differences become important and you become spaghetti). You won't be injured until you hit the ground and the atoms in your feet are the only ones being accelerated, with the others being brought to stationary by the electromagnetic force propagating through your body. The same effect can be achieved in mass drivers with ferromagnetic projectiles in a vacuum.

The grandparent is an idiot who has read too much science fiction, but his ideas are theoretically sound. The practical problems are huge, however, not 'just around the corner'.

Re:Yes Indeed, But Rocket Propulsion Sucks (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29526787)

Forgive me for being an ass, but i read parts 1 and 2 of your writing, and frankly it just sounds like a bunch of hot air. you just state what a bunch of other people thought, and some crazy sci-fi fantasies of your own, no fact, no science, no proposed experimentation... in other words, all I hear is "Blah Blah Blah"...

Re:Yes Indeed, But Rocket Propulsion Sucks (1)

HBoar (1642149) | more than 4 years ago | (#29526827)

Go ask a physicist to explain why two objects in relative inertial motion remain in motion. You will get either one or both of the following answers. 1. Nothing is needed to keep them in motion. Newton proved it already. 2. Physics is not about the why of things but the how.

Wow. I'm pretty sure most high school students could give you a much better explanation than that.... That's quite enough to put me off reading the rest of that article...

Re:Yes Indeed, But Rocket Propulsion Sucks (4, Funny)

Ant P. (974313) | more than 4 years ago | (#29526903)

And then we can have magic flying hamburgers that zoom into your mouth when you give them the secret whistle!

Re:Yes Indeed, But Rocket Propulsion Sucks (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29527177)

I read flying magic mushroom....

Re:great news (2, Funny)

Ronald Dumsfeld (723277) | more than 4 years ago | (#29526947)

I'll be thirsty after the long ride.

Really?

What they don't tell you is that the only reason there is water on the Moon is because Neil Armstrong needed a pee.

Re:great news (2, Funny)

The Grim Reefer2 (1195989) | more than 4 years ago | (#29527271)

I'll be thirsty after the long ride.

Really?

What they don't tell you is that the only reason there is water on the Moon is because Neil Armstrong needed a pee.

So that's where the Sea of Tranquility came from.

Re:great news (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29527077)

at least we finally know why there were whalers on the moon!

feta? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29526031)

moon cheese in a nice brine.

conference photo (-1, Troll)

Profane MuthaFucka (574406) | more than 4 years ago | (#29526039)

Here's a photo from the press conference depicting the what NASA scientists consider to be unambiguous evidence of water on the moon.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_zvG-hZ8apQc/SXzMC02PoqI/AAAAAAAAF84/W24ztrdeZCA/S520/hairyass.jpg [blogspot.com]

Re:conference photo (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29527429)

It says "hairyass.jpg" Please put some pride and effort into your trolling.

Scam (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29526043)

That's just Buzz Aldrin's piss.

Humanity to the Moon (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29526055)

I hope that the Indians are able to establish a lunar colony; they certainly have the expertise.

It's unfortunate that America never got to finish what it started, but guess that's just the world we live in.

Re:Humanity to the Moon (5, Funny)

Mr. Roadkill (731328) | more than 4 years ago | (#29526095)

I hope that the Indians are able to establish a lunar colony; they certainly have the expertise.

The casinos might take off, that's a business that will attract customers no matter where you build one. If they've gone and bought Rotary Rocket's [wikipedia.org] intellectual property, the ATV is certainly the right shape too. But there are precious few bison up there...

Re:Humanity to the Moon (4, Funny)

MichaelSmith (789609) | more than 4 years ago | (#29526149)

And here I was looking forward to eating a nice curry on the moon. I had the wrong Indians all along.

Re:Humanity to the Moon (1)

CarpetShark (865376) | more than 4 years ago | (#29526691)

And here I was looking forward to eating a nice curry on the moon. I had the wrong Indians all along.

Actually, Native Americans have been lying to Americans all along. When anyone else visits, they're treated to really amazing curry, which puts Southern Asia's to shame.

Re:Humanity to the Moon (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29526731)

Is it .. then Welcome to Mars..... Indians would be eating Biryani there !!

Not enough (5, Insightful)

MichaelSmith (789609) | more than 4 years ago | (#29526075)

The water these missions have found is present in very small quantities. Extracting it would require a lot of energy. The hope with polar water is that there might be masses of the stuff in some craters so that you could at least get a kilo of water from 20 or so kilos of regolith. Water in those quantities would be of use to humans. But we haven't seen it yet.

Re:Not enough (5, Interesting)

TubeSteak (669689) | more than 4 years ago | (#29526229)

The water these missions have found is present in very small quantities. Extracting it would require a lot of energy.

Unlimited energy is available on the moon.
You can run a stirling engine indefinitely based on the temperature differential between sunlight/radioisotopes and shade.
Alternatively, you could go solar.
Weight is your only real limit.

Re:Not enough (2, Funny)

derGoldstein (1494129) | more than 4 years ago | (#29526303)

Unlimited energy is available on the moon.

They said that about earth. And look what happened with that.

Re:Not enough (4, Insightful)

Keeper Of Keys (928206) | more than 4 years ago | (#29526695)

Erm, we haven't actually run out yet. You see there's this big glowy thing in the middle of our solar system bombarding the Earth with fresh energy every day.

Re:Not enough (1)

MichaelSmith (789609) | more than 4 years ago | (#29526323)

The water these missions have found is present in very small quantities. Extracting it would require a lot of energy.

Unlimited energy is available on the moon.

If your time is unlimited, yes. In practice there will be an economic trade off between mining water and importing it from asteroids.

Re:Not enough (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29526837)

If it's easier to get water from asteroids - why not just go to the asteroids?

Re:Not enough (1)

lena_10326 (1100441) | more than 4 years ago | (#29526231)

There would be concentrated areas, so you'd go after those and build a supply line (such as a train) to transport it long distances.

Re:Not enough (1)

MichaelSmith (789609) | more than 4 years ago | (#29526297)

There would be concentrated areas

But we don't know. Experience on Earth, where water accumulates, doesn't apply.

Re:Not enough (2, Interesting)

QuantumG (50515) | more than 4 years ago | (#29526301)

It's such a shame that responses like yours are likely to be the result of this announcement. "We found evidence that water is widespread on the Moon" in no way invalidates "We found evidence that there is *abundant* water in the permanently shadowed craters at the poles of the Moon".. in fact, it's exactly the opposite. That's where water will be mined on the Moon.

Ob: (1)

ciderVisor (1318765) | more than 4 years ago | (#29526597)

The water these missions have found is present in very small quantities. Extracting it would require a lot of energy.

This is the bond of water. We know the rites.
A man's flesh is his own; the water belongs to the tribe.

No surprise (5, Funny)

ctrl-alt-canc (977108) | more than 4 years ago | (#29526077)

Since Apollo expedition brought back petrified wood [slashdot.org] from the moon, water was abundant there many years ago.

Re:No surprise (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29526113)

That's because we never actually went to the moon. The evidence is in the lighting of the photos and the way the video broadcasting was done.

Re:No surprise (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29526147)

Troll

Re:No surprise (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29527103)

Offtopic

Re:No surprise (3, Insightful)

andre_pl (1607319) | more than 4 years ago | (#29526841)

Didn't the mythbuster's determine that the moon landing was entirely plausible? They disproved the myth about the lighting not being possible without multiple sources.

You mean (0, Troll)

Fotograf (1515543) | more than 4 years ago | (#29526105)

they didnt found water in rock brought from Hollywood Hills, they thought it is stupid dry there, now they believe that probably there will be some water, maybe even life?

Its a pity we have never been there (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29526123)

If only we had gone to the moon.. we could have brought some samples back and stuff.

Pity that we only went to the desert and faked the whole thing.

Re:Its a pity we have never been there (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29526603)

But we had been to Neptune ... they are still returning ..since ...

BREAKING NEWS! (1, Insightful)

Spit (23158) | more than 4 years ago | (#29526143)

Stable substance composed of two of the most common and reactive elements in universe, common in the universe! News at 11.

Re:BREAKING NEWS! (5, Insightful)

venicebeach (702856) | more than 4 years ago | (#29526217)

Clearly not common enough to assume that it was present in this particular location without direct evidence.

Re:BREAKING NEWS! (2, Insightful)

CarpetShark (865376) | more than 4 years ago | (#29526699)

Whether it is common enough to assume presence is not clear at all. What's clear is that we didn't assume it.

Re:BREAKING NEWS! (2, Interesting)

religious freak (1005821) | more than 4 years ago | (#29526239)

I actually was under the impression that due to the low gravity and lack of atmosphere, water was thought to be unstable on places like the moon... obviously, given this report, this is not the case, but I thought that was the old line?

Re:BREAKING NEWS! (3, Informative)

MichaelSmith (789609) | more than 4 years ago | (#29526273)

...and ultraviolet light from the sun which breaks the water molecule down into oxygen and hydrogen. Water is unstable on the surface where it gets exposed to light but it should be stable in shadow on the surface and under ground. The problem is that almost no places on the surface have remained shadowed for hundreds of millions of years (except possibly the polar craters) and shallow subsurface still get rotated to the surface by meteor impacts, while deep places are... deep and hard to reach.

Re:BREAKING NEWS! (1)

Spit (23158) | more than 4 years ago | (#29526713)

Water as a liquid isn't stable in vacuum and it evaporates, but UV doesn't decompose it. Comets are water.

Re:BREAKING NEWS! (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29526329)

Er.. (polite cough) By volume, precisely nothing is common in the universe.

Re:BREAKING NEWS! (1)

CarpetShark (865376) | more than 4 years ago | (#29526715)

I think you mean, by average density. By volume, most things are abundant. But then again, with no universe-independent reference data, we can't really measure in such terms.

Re:BREAKING NEWS! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29526407)

NASA should have just asked you first instead of doing this sciency evidence stuff. What other information are you hoarding?

Heavily rumoured (3, Interesting)

barath_s (609997) | more than 4 years ago | (#29526157)

There have been persistent reports in the Indian press over the last 3 days that Nasa's Moon Minerology Mapper on board India's Chandrayaan-1 had found water, and that the Thursday press conference would reveal it. Glad to have the embargo lifted early. http://www.examiner.com/x-21670-Houston-Space-News-Examiner~y2009m9d22-Did-Chandrayaan1-confirm-ice-on-the-Moon [examiner.com] http://www.rttnews.com/Content/GeneralNews.aspx?Node=B1&Id=1074265 [rttnews.com]

Bottled Lunar Water (0, Flamebait)

dr1982 (1161843) | more than 4 years ago | (#29526165)

In stores now: Bottled Lunar Water! It's new, it's out of this world! ($500,000 per bottle)

The Future..... (2, Funny)

IHC Navistar (967161) | more than 4 years ago | (#29526211)

Snake Oil/Dietery Supplement salesmen from the future:

"Lunar Water! Boosts your immune system! Eliminates Earthly toxins! Alleviates impotence, back pain, arthritis, digestive irregularity! Strengthens bones, teeth, and joints! BUT IT NOW! *ONLY* $250,000,000! Operators are standing by!

Re:The Future..... (1)

kahizonaki (1226692) | more than 4 years ago | (#29526373)

Oh, not a bad price at all! Only $250,000,000 (I assume USD?). Man, I remember back when I was kid and you could buy a car (yea, you remember those things from history podcast?) NEW for $40,000. Those were the days.

Re:The Future..... (1)

IHC Navistar (967161) | more than 4 years ago | (#29526657)

Yeah, my grandpa says he bought his classic 1993 pickup truck for $12,500, and that a gallon of diesel was $1.99 a gallon back then. That old vintage rig still has the original radio..... He says it's an AM/FM Cassette deck or something. I hate the music though. Every time I go over to his house, he's listening to some really old dude called Van Halen or something. He even has something called a "286" that he uses to play this boring game called Tetris.....

Mis-Interpretation of the Data? (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29526225)

... "While the probe was still active, its NASA-built Moon Mineralogy Mapper (M3) detected wavelengths of light reflected off the surface that indicated the chemical bond between hydrogen and oxygen" ... ... "At noon, when the sun's rays were strongest, the water feature was lowest, while in the morning, the feature was stronger." ...

From this they seem to draw the conclusion that the water is moving.

If they are measuring reflection, that includes such of sunlight and all other incoming light. Including that from the earth (sunlight reflected by the earth to the moon). The part of the light reflected from the earth does not depend on the intensity of the sunlight reaching the moon, but the earth. In other words: With increasing sunlight intensity the background noise of reflections from the earth is reduced.

I hope they got some backside measurements, and that there really is some water. But what was presented in the article doesn't really convince me.

Re:Mis-Interpretation of the Data? (1)

MichaelSmith (789609) | more than 4 years ago | (#29526451)

They could reject that by looking for correlation with the position of the sun in the sky relative to the Earth and moon, ie, are we looking at night or day side?

It was the Indians who helped NASA find water (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29526251)

"India's first lunar mission has found evidence of large quantities of water on its surface, The Times newspaper reported on Thursday."

from http://www.hindustantimes.com/Is-there-water-on-moon-NASA-to-reveal/H1-Article1-457426.aspx

Re:It was the Indians who helped NASA find water (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29526449)

Mod parent up please

Original article is here:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/science/space/article6846639.ece

Re:It was the Indians who helped NASA find water (4, Informative)

volcanopele (537152) | more than 4 years ago | (#29526667)

Using a US-built instrument. Please leave nationalism out of this...

Re:It was the Indians who helped NASA find water (5, Insightful)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 4 years ago | (#29527183)

The subject of the grandparent's post (which, by the way, you copied in yours) was 'It was the Indians who helped NASA find water.' Note the word 'helped.' Note that he explicitly credited 'NASA' (which, for those watching at home, is American). When the grandparent gives credit to both of the nations involved and draws attention to the fact that it was a collaborative venture, cries of nationalism are a little hollow.

Re:It was the Indians who helped NASA find water (1)

milosoftware (654147) | more than 4 years ago | (#29527087)

My first thought was "Big Indians or Little Indians"? Weird how your brain gets wired after a few years of hackin'.

I think it's a sign from the Tiki Gods that it's time for coffee...

No moon (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29526355)

There is no moon, it's just a big conspiracy to make us believe there is! The moon is just made in a big movie studio!

Proves that moon landing was a hoax! (0, Troll)

noidentity (188756) | more than 4 years ago | (#29526369)

The fact that they've had to search this hard for evidence of water being on the moon is clear evidence that the moon "landing" was a hoax. After all, they would have had water on the lander, and thus brought water to the moon, giving clear evidence of it being there.

Re:Proves that moon landing was a hoax! (1)

Eternauta3k (680157) | more than 4 years ago | (#29526463)

They are just doing this so it's less suspicious when you read "Unambiguous evidence of Cheetos on the moon". That's what you get when you cut NASA funding.

Re:Proves that moon landing was a hoax! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29526477)

Somebody hasn't paid attention in geology class apparently.

Just like there is "Water on the moon", there is "water in the Sahara desert."

The water is likely to be chemically bound in the regolith of the moon's surface, much like it is chemically bound in the silica structures people call "sand grains", commonly found in deserts all over the world.

Need a stronger example?

Epsom salt. More than 1 third of it's weight is chemically bound water. It itself, however, is dry.

And now (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29526409)

1) discover water on Moon
2) put it into small bottles, and add some CO2
3) ???
4) Profit!

Summary: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29526525)

Scientist1: hey, we found oxygen
Scientist2: hey, we found hydrogen too
Marketing: Hmmm oxygen and two hydrogen is H2O. Water! Bingo, we're in the money!

Links to Chandrayaan-1 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29526555)

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/science/space/article6846639.ece

We have discussed this quite a bit now, in fact its actually doing good.

http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/11/12/1811258
http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/11/14/1648203

In other News (1)

Sadahari (1379211) | more than 4 years ago | (#29526707)

India has launched seven satellites in 1200 seconds. http://www.voanews.com/english/2009-09-23-voa18.cfm [voanews.com] Google finds a way writing an api to search /objects/ located in space, for doing this they shown willingness working with ISRO. Next time you google black hole .. It will direct you to it [where you get sucked off]than showing a mere ass hole, or black lady or black music album. kudos.

Re:In other News (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29526773)

noh, now find 7 asteroids.

Mod me funny haha.

Unambiguous? (1)

digitig (1056110) | more than 4 years ago | (#29526723)

The article says it's water or hydroxyl (although it quietly drops the alternative for a while and just calls what they're picking up "the water signal"). I'm no chemist, but hydroxyl != water, right? So it's not unambiguous?

Could be ethanol (1)

Calaf (78730) | more than 4 years ago | (#29527107)

Alcohols have a hydroxyl group, so it could also be ethyl alcohol (C3C2OH).

Re:Could be ethanol (1)

yorugua (697900) | more than 4 years ago | (#29527159)

Alcohols have a hydroxyl group, so it could also be ethyl alcohol (C3C2OH).

Ethyl alcohol? you mean the kind of alcohol found in Alcoholic beverages? Now we are talking!! This will surely spark a new race to the moon!

Re:Could be ethanol (1)

Calaf (78730) | more than 4 years ago | (#29527351)

Moon vodka would be fun for a while, but the lack of water would make for a nasty hangover. Still, it would deserve investigation (in the name of science of course).

Re:Unambiguous? (4, Informative)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 4 years ago | (#29527197)

The scan works by looking for the OH bond, as I recall, which resonates on a particular frequency. I may be talking nonsense now, because it's a few years since I looked at this tech, but it basically works on the same principle as your microwave oven. That emits microwaves that cause the OH bonds to resonate, exciting the molecules and generating heat. This works by causing the OH bonds to resonate (in exactly the same way) and then picking up the IR that they emit as they return to their non-excited state. All that it can conclusively say is that there are molecules containing OH bonds present, but the simplest molecule containing this bond is water and so it's very probable that they've found water. Even if they haven't, they've found something that can be turned into water relatively easily, given sufficient power (e.g. a lunar solar array).

A new idea (1)

Dollyknot (216765) | more than 4 years ago | (#29526977)

The high cost to the human races colonisation of space is caused by
the complexity and danger of reaching escape velocity.

The Space Shuttle turned out to be an expensive dangerous white elephant, the reason the Shuttle was so expensive is, because of its complexity with millions of different manufactured parts.

There is another route, we can reach the edge of space no problem Burt Rutan proved this with Space Ship one when he won the 'X' prize by reaching over 100 km twice in one week.

Yes the Shuttle was 'reusable' but in name only. They could not have turned that around in a week.

One idea could be to create rocket fuel on the moon, this latest discovery of water on the moon means there is rocket fuel on the moon.

Use the rocket fuel to fuel a space moon tug, use the moon tug to accelerate 'Space Ship One' to escape velocity in a vacuum where it is safe to do and also the moon tug could be used to decelerate SS1 in a vacuum, again much more safe

Then we can use the moon as a fuel station, there are asteroids of ice, in the asteroid belt put rocket motors on the ice asteroids and fly them to the moon.

The moon is the door to the solar system.

ChandraYaan .... (2, Insightful)

CalcuttaWala (765227) | more than 4 years ago | (#29527001)

Chandrayaan, the moon probe sent by the Indian Space Research Organisation, carried the NASA-built Moon Mineralogy Mapper (M3) that finally located water. This is a big boost to the Indian space program

Fromage! (1)

sitarlo (792966) | more than 4 years ago | (#29527281)

Come on, everyone knows the moon is made out of cheese. I must say it is amazing that we actually know so little about the moon. If there was water on the moon, one would think we would have found it by now.

Do not underestimate the dangers! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29527319)

Astronauts landing on Moon now have to be very careful [dhmo.org].

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...