Friday, December 13, 2013

Moon dust - II


 above image - Moon dust from Wikipedia [  ].

"..........In 5 to 10 billion years, 3 or 4/10,OOOths of an inch per year would produce 20-60 miles [32 to 96.5 km) of dust. In view of this, our men at NASA were afraid to send men to the moon. Landing there, they would be buried in dust and quickly suffocate! So first NASA sent an unmanned lander to its surface, which made the surprising discovery that there is not even 20 feet [32 km] of dust on the moon! But in spite of that discovery, Neil Armstrong was decidedly worried about this dust problem as his March 1970 flight in Apollo 11 neared. He feared his lunar lander would sink deeply into it and he and Edwin Aldrin would perish. But because the moon is young, they had no problem. There is not over 2 or 3 inches [5.08 or 7.62 cm] of dust on its surface! That is the amount one would expect if the moon were about 6-8,000 years old............." [evolution facts site:]

I did some quick calculations about Moon Dust question....I had only to perform the counter-calculations ….. well if we assume the highest value given of 7.62 centimetres (and there's no reason to question it if we see the images of the astronauts walking on the moon)..... if we divide it with the four billions year [calculations: references] which is about the Earth and Moon age dictated by Evolutionism (an age approximated in defect).....we get an erosion of about (see calculations below) 0.02 nanometres per year which is 20 picometres per year.... if we assume that the diameter of an atom goes from 30 to 300 picometer [Wikipedia: Atomic radius], this is from 0.030 to 0.300 nanometer, and the elementso typical of lunar rock have a radius largely over 100 picometer (Calcium, Aluminium, Silicon, etc.) and we understand that it is impossible for an atom of the Moon's rocks to loose pieces of itself (ionizatioin or nuclei scission) every year, ….. it is quite evident that we have to wait from 5 to 8 years of exposition at the cosmic rays such as UV rays, X and Gamma rays, high energy particles, solar wind, dredful termal excursions of hundreds of degrees in order to obtain an average superficial erosion of exposed Moon's rock of the thickness of about the average size of an atom raging from Silicon to Calcium!!!.......Magic Rocks?....The only explanation you can dare to oppose is about a recent local catastrophe (asteroid, volcano, etc.) which caused emersion of new rocks.... but a such local scenario seems to be the almost total scenario of the entire Moon surface....

You can try also another counter-calculation. …. try only to divide the biggest value of Moon dust thickness (0.076 meters) for the age of Earth as Creation of God, therefore 0.076 meters divided for 6,000 years and you get an average thickness of year erosion about of: 1.26 exp -5 this is a layer of 12.6 millionth of meter of dust per year lost by the lunar rocks.

Of course i assumed the Moon Dust as exclusively coming from the Moon rocks by radiation effect of erosion, and didnt mention the dust as product of micrometeorites, which could work more effectively on a Moon rock weakened by ionizing radiations.:

Wednesday, December 11, 2013

Moon Dust - I

In the complete vision of the effect we must assume therefore two further factors:

  1. part of Moon dust as part of micrometeorites.
  2. the larger volume of Moon dust respect the solid compact rock, in fact the dust is not compact like the rock from where it comes, it present many void inter spaces which increase the volume.

Therefore the volume of the Moon dust, in order to get a more realistic dimension of the erosion of Lunar rock, should be diminished and this would even present a minor average layer of rock eroded from the surface of Moon Rocks by only considering the ionizing radiation effects.

Of course Evolutionist Scientist would oppose that the layer of dust present a shield against the penetration of ionizing radiation and therefore rendering impossible the building of “miles over miles of Moon dust”: the above layer of dust absorbs the radiation, shielding the below rock. I accept of course this objection, but it doesnt take in mind that in any case the upper layers of dust are continually eroded and therefore their particles are continually decreasing of dimensions therefore it would be perceived a superficial layer of nano particles or smaller size, but moreover it doesnt take in consideration that rock surfaces who are not in plain and therefore the dust from there coming falls to the ground , have the vertical or oblique surfaces continually exposed to the radiation, and  after four billions year should disappear from the Moon leaving there a landscape more similar to the one of desert's dunes with gently mountains entirely covered by dust, and rare rock spiers completing the erosion before to sink forever in a planet of dust.

But this is Evolutionist Science, the Science of Satan's tricks. In the fifties, when the space programs for the Moon (which were not mere Walt Disney movies or Charles Bonestell drawings), have been not yet established the missile technology was all controlled by the military  and the Moon was only a weapon used to propagate Evolutionism.... the Cold War of the Evolutionist Science against Creationism... well known chemist and science-fiction author Isaac Asimov was a soldier of this war and performed his duty obeying to the Evolutionist Religion [today in the documentaries of FOCUS channel he is worshipped as “prophet of science fiction” by  Evolutionist scientist  Michio Kaku]...:

  "I get a picture, therefore, of the first spaceship [to the moon], picking out a nice level place for landing purposes, coming slowly downward tail-first and sinking majestically out of sight." *Isaac Asimov, Asimov on Science: A Thirty-Year Retrospective (1989), pp. xvi-xvii (This was *Asimov's first published science essay (1958), reprinted in a 1989 book.) [in the same page quoted above]
"Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,..." [Rom 1:22 KJV]
So case closed? Absolutely not. It will take next some other interesting observations on it.

above image: if the dust comes from space, why that plane surface of emerging rock has not been covered by dust? Is it emerged only few years before from the around dust? By which event if the around dust has apparently conserved the "billion years" old consistency? Or maybe,,, maybe the thermal excursion can supply the moving mechanism to move dust grains and then make them fall in the lowest point of terrain??
[   ]


remember the sizes and scales, you have to transform centimeter in meter as nano or picometer are referred to meter, therefore 7,62 centimeter are 0.076 meter. When you divide 0.076 with 4 billions years you get just an expression in meters, i.e. in billionths of meters in this case 20 picometers are 0.02 nanometers and a nanometer is a billionth of a meter therefore a layer of 0.02 billionths of a meter and 1 meter is 3.28084 feet.

No comments:

Post a Comment