home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Xref: sparky sci.space:16106 alt.sci.planetary:335
- Path: sparky!uunet!ornl!rsg1.er.usgs.gov!darwin.sura.net!wupost!cs.utexas.edu!qt.cs.utexas.edu!news.Brown.EDU!pilsner!plutchak
- From: plutchak@pilsner.geo.brown.edu (Joel Plutchak)
- Newsgroups: sci.space,alt.sci.planetary
- Subject: Re: Lunar "colony" reality check
- Date: 19 Nov 1992 17:32:57 GMT
- Organization: Brown University Planetary Geology
- Lines: 21
- Message-ID: <1egj49INNqel@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>
- References: <1992Nov10.152154.9709@eng.ufl.edu> <1992Nov14.004211.12960@monu6.cc.monash.edu.au> <1992Nov19.020207.11499@gucis.cit.gu.edu.au>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: pilsner.geo.brown.edu
-
- In article <1992Nov19.020207.11499@gucis.cit.gu.edu.au> wharvey@gucis.cit.gu.edu.au (Wayne Harvey) writes:
- >That would lead to the assumption that the moon would
- >be of a different composition than Earth, with possibly greater concentrations
- >of elements (mineable (sp?) quantities). This would change the picture
- >somewhat, when you assume that the only mineral explorations done on
- >the lunar surface were conducted in the equivalent of the Sahara.
-
- Could you clarify that last statement? Start with defining
- "mineral explorations" and what "conducted in the equivalent of
- the Sahara" means.
- I know that imaging data from which one can infer mineral
- composition is not very abundant for the Moon, but the Galileo
- encounter(s) and Earth-based telescopic studies have contributed
- somewhat to our understanding of the composition of the lunar
- surface. See various recent publications for further information,
- e.g. proceedings of the Lunar & Planetary Science Conferences, the
- American Geophysical Union conferences, and Science magazine.
- (And look for more results from next month's second Galileo
- encounter of the Earth/Moon system.)
- --
- Joel Plutchak, Research Programmer/Analyst
-