NASA moon impact deemed success; no debris plume seen by astronomers

By Andrew Nusca | Oct 12, 2009 |

NASA may be in an industry that’s larger than life, but when it comes to producing blockbusters, the agency’s success is in the eye of the beholder.

Last Friday, NASA scientists sent a two-ton hunk of metal barreling toward the moon’s surface in an attempt to find lunar ice.

But the spectacle of such destruction was not seen by onlookers.

Deep Impact it was not, at least from Earth’s vantage point.

Though the millions watching outside Ames Research Center and on television saw no plume of debris from the impact, which occurred at 4:31 a.m. on a boulder at the moon’s south pole, NASA’s Lunar Crater Observation and Sensing Satellite (LCROSS) mission was deemed a great success by scientists.

NASA officials confirmed that the Centaur rocket made a crater of more than 60 feet in diameter on impact. They said spectrometer data recorded a “flash” upon impact that researchers investigating.

“We just don’t know right now what we saw entirely,” said Tony Colaprete, the mission’s project scientist, to the L.A. Times. “We got spectrometer data, and that’s what really matters.”

NASA scientists are analyzing spectroscopic changes detected around the impact site to determine whether water was present. Using spectrometers, the scientists will break down the light from the collision to reveal chemical compounds that may be in the plume of debris from the impact.

It could take months to comb through the collected data, but the hope is that the large quantities of hydrogen at the moon’s south pole, found by the Lunar Prospector in 1998, do in fact signal the presence of water.

Meanwhile, National Geographic asks: Are lunar crashes worth the damage?

 
Reply to Story

SmartPlanet TalkbackShare your ideas and expertise on this topic

Subscribe to this discussion via RSS

  •  
    1

    zackers

    10/20/09 | Report as spam

    RE: NASA moon impact deemed success; no debris plume seen by astronomers

    One thing I never heard NASA talk about was just how definitive a false indication of water would be. It seems to me that a negative result from a single shot like this does very little to prove that water does not exist on the moon. Nor did NASA put a lot of emphasis on what could be learned about the composition of the surface beyond whether or not water exists.

    Ultimately, the science may be useful no matter what, but it's just another bad PR job by NASA...

  •  
    2

    macbraughton

    10/20/09 | Report as spam

    RE: NASA moon impact deemed success; no debris plume seen by astronomers

    Why do I feel like this article making it sound like NASA didn't conduct a legitimate experiment.

    Astronomers are looking through telescopes or other instruments from the earth. This system captured spectrometer data from the scene of the experiment. So, really, this is a "SO What" article.

  •  
    3

    arc-djt@...

    10/21/09 | Report as spam

    RE: NASA moon impact deemed success; no debris plume seen by astronomers

    Well, it seems very interesting that NASA has been so silent regarding the outcome of this experiment. I think that they were very surprised by the outcome of the impact and the lack of any plume as predicted. I am also very disappointed in the fact that preliminary spectronometer results have not been issued under the guise that it will take months to analyze the data, sounds like a failed experiment to me. Really doesn't ring true to me, preliminary data is pointing somewhere and this highly public experiment should have a quick followup while interest is at a peak, not 6 monthes from now. Dare I say it "coverup".

  •  
    4

    slurpee

    10/23/09 | Report as spam

    RE: NASA moon impact deemed success; no debris plume seen by astronomers

    Hmmm, did anyone else actually look at NASA's report on this? Yes, there was a small plume of ejected material, but that is information too, especially regarding the composition of the rocks on the moon.
    Check out:
    http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/LCROSS/main/LCROSS_impact.html
    and the links on that page.

The following tags are supported in Smartplanet comments:
<b></b> <i></i> <u></u> <pre></pre>

Leave a Reply

  1. Name: You are currently: a Guest |
advertisement

Quick Poll

advertisement

Larry Dignan

Larry Dignan is Editor in Chief of ZDNet and SmartPlanet as well as Editorial Director of ZDNet's sister site TechRepublic. He was most recently Executive Editor of News and Blogs at ZDNet. Prior to that he was executive news editor at eWeek and news editor at Baseline. He also served as the East Coast news editor and finance editor at CNET News.com. Larry has covered the technology and financial services industry since 1995, publishing articles in WallStreetWeek.com, Inter@ctive Week, The New York Times, and Financial Planning magazine. He's a graduate of the Columbia School of Journalism and the University of Delaware.

For daily updates, follow Larry on Twitter.

Larry Dignan

Larry Dignan has nothing to disclose. He doesn't hold investments in the technology companies he covers.

Andrew Nusca

Andrew J. Nusca is an associate editor for ZDNet and SmartPlanet. As a journalist based in New York City, he has written for Popular Mechanics and Men's Vogue and his byline has appeared in New York magazine, The Huffington Post, New York Daily News, Editor & Publisher, New York Press and many others. He also writes The Editorialiste, a media criticism blog.

He is a New York University graduate and former news editor and columnist of the Washington Square News. He is a graduate of the Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism. He has been named "Howard Kurtz, Jr." by film critic John Lichman despite having no relation to him. A native of Philadelphia, he lives in New York with his fiancée and his cat, Spats.

Follow him on Twitter

Andrew Nusca

Andrew J. Nusca does not hold any investments in the technology companies he covers.
Smart Takes is a regular digest of the day's news headlines viewed through a SmartPlanet lens, offering an editor's take on breaking stories and opinion from around the Web and highlighting information that will make you smarter.