China's Chang'e 3 Lander and Yutu Rover Camera Data Released

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

China's Chang'e 3 Lander and Yutu Rover Camera Data Released

Posted by timothy on Tuesday February 2, 2016 @01:48AM from the practically-like-being-there dept.

AmiMoJo writes: Detailed high resolution images from the recent Chinese moon mission have been released. Links to the original Chinese sites hosting the images are available, but Emily Lakdawalla of the Planetary Society has kindly organized them in English. Images show the lander, the rover and the surface of the earth. An interactive map is also available, built from data collected by the mission.

56 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

how much did it cost them by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-02 01:55 · Score: 0

To rent the American Lunar Landing movie stages?
What about the people? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-02 01:56 · Score: -1

Another moon landing, yet no humans on the moon... again...
Those millions of dollars spent researching moon rocks would be much better spent feeding the starving people on planet earth.
1. Re:What about the people? by jeffb+(2.718) · 2016-02-02 02:07 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  The money is being spent feeding scientists and engineers, and all the people from whom they buy things.
  Sure, we've taken a limited amount of material entirely out of Earth's biosphere. But I understand that lunar landers are typically pretty tough and tasteless, no matter how you prepare them.
2. Re:What about the people? by Thanshin · 2016-02-02 02:52 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  Those millions of dollars spent researching moon rocks would be much better spent feeding the starving people on planet earth.
  The millions of dollars spent paving your country's roads would also be better spent feeding the starving people. And the million spent in movies, sports or producing reality shows.
  Why is it always science that has to justify its usefulness for the good of humanity compared to feeding the poor? Why not every other human venture, of which the immense majority add a minuscule value compared to space exploration?
3. Re:What about the people? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-02 03:10 · Score: 0
  
  Too right.
  if it was not for science we would all be sitting in caves crapping into a holes.
  And all the people who stave that the money could be spent feeding others etc are the very same people who do not give all the hard earned monry away to feed people. Do they see a starving person and give then a $1000 so the needy can eat and cloth themselves. No, these fuckers was past and expect others to donate.
4. Re:What about the people? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-02 04:16 · Score: 0
  
  You have just described the basic principle of "other people's money".
5. Re:What about the people? by Applehu+Akbar · 2016-02-02 04:29 · Score: 1
  
  " But I understand that lunar landers are typically pretty tough and tasteless, no matter how you prepare them."
  But what the hipsters hate is that if you boil them first, they still taste better than kale.
6. Re:What about the people? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-02 05:11 · Score: 0
  
  Hmpf, another mis-moderation due to stuck focus.
7. Re:What about the people? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-02 06:10 · Score: 0
  
  if it was not for science we would all be sitting in caves crapping into a holes.
  Aren't you supposed to crap OUT of a holes?
surface of the earth by OzPeter · 2016-02-02 01:58 · Score: 2

Images show the lander, the rover and the surface of the earth.
The point of faking a moon landing is to hide the fact that you never made it there.

--
I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
1. Re:surface of the earth by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-02 11:40 · Score: 0
  
  Its a bit hard to tell from your comments who's fake moon landing you are referring to China's or Americas?
Very good imaging by rmdingler · 2016-02-02 02:00 · Score: 4, Interesting

Congratulations China. Chinese exploration of the lunar surface will hopefully lead to diverse international interest in development of national space programs.
It is good to see the fascination with footprints on extraterrestrial soil crosses cultural lines.

--
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
Ernest Hemingway
1. Re:Very good imaging by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-02 02:12 · Score: 1
  
  Gag. Another lame imitation of more advanced US missions. I hope they don't think the territory is theirs. Ya, know, like the South China Sea.
2. Re:Very good imaging by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-02 02:30 · Score: 0
  
  Gag. Another lame imitation of more advanced US missions. I hope they don't think the territory is theirs. Ya, know, like the South China Sea.
  You willing to stand up and stop them?
  If no one has the stones to do that, they'll take it. Because they live in the real universe.
3. Re:Very good imaging by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-02 04:26 · Score: 0
  
  I live in an 11-dimensional holographic universe, you insensitive clod!!
4. Re:Very good imaging by schlachter · 2016-02-02 05:12 · Score: 1
  
  soon NASA will be designing the missions and space craft and China will handle building them and executing the missions.
  
  --
  My God can beat up your God. Just kidding...don't take offense. I know there's no God.
5. Re:Very good imaging by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-02 05:53 · Score: 0
  
  What the sh1t hits the fan, piles of sand harboring terrorists and pirates will be no refuge against the US navy.
6. Re:Very good imaging by k6mfw · 2016-02-02 09:14 · Score: 2
  
  Gag. Another lame imitation of more advanced US missions.
  
  Well, yes and no. Chinese have the best high res surface images from a rover, US has rovers on Mars, none on the Moon. US has excellent photos from manned missions but those are more than 40 years old. US has high res images from orbit but when considering surface images from a rover, the US has none and will not have any for years to come. First step is to dump the lunar phobia. Imagine something of Mars rover technology that can visit and analyze soils from places like craters that never receive sunlight. I want to have a rover visit the Apollo landing sites to observe how materials have degraded from more than 40 years of sunlight exposure. And to see if which flags are still standing.
  It is interesting to see these lunar surface images, they don't circulate around the internet that much. Again, it seems a lunar phobia among Americans to avoid taking about the Moon with exception of the grand Apollo missions (which this country can no longer do).
  
  --
  mfwright@batnet.com
7. Re:Very good imaging by rmdingler · 2016-02-02 11:19 · Score: 1
  
  I would love it if the Americans and the Chinese forge a great alliance going forward, including the Europeans, Australians and Russians... anyone who'll join.
  If we could stumble past this tribalism between nations, maybe we could get on to hating people on other planets.
  
  --
  Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
  Ernest Hemingway
grandmother moon lifts oceans for us by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-02 02:14 · Score: 0

who believes they are not effected by her alternating magnetic resonance? waves to lunar visitors...
1. Re:grandmother moon lifts oceans for us by jeffb+(2.718) · 2016-02-02 02:33 · Score: 1
  
  who believes they are not effected by her alternating magnetic resonance?
  [raises hand]
  I'd certainly grant that my life is affected by the Moon's gravitational effects, but its magnetic effects are pretty tiny, and I can't see how one would consider them "resonance".
  As for being effected -- no, I'm pretty sure I was effected by much more down-to-earth influences. Okay, maybe strong tides were a necessary condition for life to arise on Earth, so perhaps we were "effected" by the Moon's gravity, too. But not magnetism.
2. Re:grandmother moon lifts oceans for us by thoromyr · 2016-02-02 02:38 · Score: 1
  
  i certainly am not effected by alternating magnetic resonance, lunar or otherwise. I am affected by all kinds of things, though, including what I ate this morning
Copyright by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-02 02:19 · Score: 0

How can this and other tools like Google translate exist when by definition copyright requires the author's permission to publish a translation of the original work? I am not arguing for copyright. I am just trying to understand the legal justification in these cases, if any, such as fair use.
1. Re:Copyright by thoromyr · 2016-02-02 02:52 · Score: 2
  
  what does it mean to publish? Certainly, google translate *transforms* text, but it is only doing a transformation, it is neither "publishing" nor is it "making available". If google translate made available a document that was not otherwise available then that would amount to publishing. What they do is not publishing.
  Although some authors try, they have no legal grounds for dictating how something they publish is consumed. For example, I might read a book in a silly voice. This definitely offends some overly sensitive authors, but they have no legal grounds for preventing me from doing so. A translation is, in a legal sense, a mechanical transformation. Its purpose is to not alter, but rather preserve, meaning and intent. It does not creatively alter the original and so is less affecting than reading a book in a silly voice. Historically, "translation" has gone hand-in-hand with publication -- after all, why would someone go to the effort of translating a work without securing the right to publish it and benefit from those sales?
  When you say "how can this [tool] exist" you only specify google tools. If you are intending to refer to the blog posting then if the images are in fact copyrighted then it would be up to the copyright holder to take legal action to enforce their rights. They are under no obligation to do so, much less any other entity.
  You are also assuming that everything is "protected" by copyright, but this is not the case. There's this thing called "the public domain". Now, true, it is small and growing only ever so slowly, but it does exist. In particular, in the US if the government produces something on the public dime then it is in the public domain. Well, I suppose it can get complicated, but that is a basic premise. And, while credits are listed for photographs in the blog post, there is no indication of copyright. That does not mean the photos are not copyrighted, but it does provide anyone offended by their republication the opportunity to notify the creator.
  In short: not everything is under copyright "protection" and for those that are the "protection" largely consists of publication and redistribution (the right to copy), not for how it is presented (whether that is read in a silly voice or something else).
  QED
2. Re:Copyright by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-02 03:58 · Score: 1
  
  The files reposted on the blog are under copyright. Following the source links on the blog indicates "The service agreement states that you can use the files as long as the purpose is for research or education and is non-commercial." Now what "non-commercial" means and if it applies to a private blog is another question.
  Google Translate does not merely "transform" text. It "translates" works, thus the name Google "Translate". The argument relating to the word "transform" and its definition is changing the subject of the question. Given your statement that publishing is "making available" the translation, then Google Translate tool is certainly "making available" a translated works.
  You are right in that it is up to the copyright owner to enforce their rights, and you are right about works in the public domain. I am taking as the answer to the question to be at this point no one has challenged the legality of either the blog or Google Translate in court and that is why they exist.
Re:how much did it cost them by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-02 02:23 · Score: 0

They actually dredged most of it up out of the south china sea.... US dumped it there to destroy the evidence of the moon landing being faked... next thing you know china is building an island there and all the sudden has a rover on the moon....
But, but, but... by advocate_one · 2016-02-02 02:28 · Score: 1

according to the wingnut con theorists, the Americans were kicked off the moon by the aliens that were already there...

--
Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
1. Re:But, but, but... by 110010001000 · 2016-02-02 02:43 · Score: 1
  
  Lies. America never made it to the moon at all. Neither did the Chinese. Take a look at the Chinese photos. Do you see any stars??? No stars on a moon with no atmosphere or clouds? One that is completely dark? I can step outside of my double wide at night and see tons of stars here on Earth, even with my porch light on. Obviously these photos were taken on a soundstage.
2. Re:But, but, but... by jfbilodeau · 2016-02-02 02:49 · Score: 2
  
  Of course! Those 'scientist' worry about making the details of the lander and the moon surface 100% realistic but forget to photoshop a couple of stars in the background. Silly 'scientists'.
  
  --
  Goodbye Slashdot. You've changed.
3. Re:But, but, but... by Thanshin · 2016-02-02 02:55 · Score: 1
  
  Obviously they hide the stars to avoid people from locating the lander.
  Otherwise, taking into account the absolute lack of security or military forces in the region, it could be stolen.
4. Re:But, but, but... by Crowd+Computing · 2016-02-02 03:16 · Score: 1
  
  I've always been curious about why the absence of stars is often cited as proof that the Apollo landing was a massive government conspiracy. Sure, nobody had yet invented Photoshop or The Gimp, but even then you could superimpose two sets of different images via multiple exposure or other purely analog techniques.
5. Re:But, but, but... by lbmouse · 2016-02-02 03:24 · Score: 1
  
  Plus if it was truly being driven remotely by the Chinese, it would have it's turn signal constantly on.
6. Re:But, but, but... by 110010001000 · 2016-02-02 03:25 · Score: 1
  
  The government slipped up and didn't think of adding stars when they took the shots! They also forgot to turn off the airconditioning which is why the flag waved. How does a flag wave on the airless moon???
7. Re:But, but, but... by Blaskowicz · 2016-02-02 03:27 · Score: 1
  
  Nope. Inbetween the stars there are more stars, so all they had to do was to color the sky white.
8. Re:But, but, but... by 110010001000 · 2016-02-02 03:30 · Score: 1
  
  Like they do with chemtrails.
9. Re:But, but, but... by yodleboy · 2016-02-02 05:56 · Score: 1
  
  I always tell people to go outside at night and shine a floodlight on the driveway. put an object in the middle. take a picture of said object and make sure to have the sky in the frame. report number of stars seen...cameras are cool, but they ain't magic. All it takes is watching a full moon through a telescope and forgetting to slip a filter in there to illustrate just how damn bright the lunar surface is...I think i have permanent after-images.
10. Re:But, but, but... by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-02 06:53 · Score: 0
  
  The government slipped up and didn't think of adding stars when they took the shots! They also forgot to turn off the airconditioning which is why the flag waved. How does a flag wave on the airless moon???
  We decided not to put stars in because we couldn't compute their relative positions in the time we had. We didn't want some conspiracy nut to come back with, "hey, judging from these star locations, the photo was taken in early spring from the northern hemisphere on Earth".
  We paid those Myth Buster guys plenty to "prove" a flag can wave in a vacuum, I'm disappointed you hadn't heard about that.
11. Re:But, but, but... by k6mfw · 2016-02-02 09:30 · Score: 1
  
  Why do you say it's aliens that kicked the Americans off? They were either native Lunariens or first settlers that simply got there first, and standing up for their rights of land ownership.
  
  --
  mfwright@batnet.com
12. Re:But, but, but... by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-02 09:44 · Score: 0
  
  It's because the moon is so bright. Simple as that really. Go outside at night in the darkest place you can find and take a photo of a bright object and the sky in the background. See how many stars you see....
13. Re:But, but, but... by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-02 09:49 · Score: 0
  
  Not too hard to wrap your mind around, really...
consider reflective effects by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-02 02:54 · Score: 0

parsing word grammar is a symptom?
now i just have to figure out by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-02 03:11 · Score: 0

whether i'm looking at upper or outer mongolia. surely, china will emulate this aspect of nasa?
gravity most cumbersome magnet of all? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-02 03:14 · Score: 0

effects every move we make? not much metal in photons?
Out my window by Sooner+Boomer · 2016-02-02 03:39 · Score: 1

Images show the lander, the rover and the surface of the earth.
The surface of the Earth ? I can see that out my window! Why send a rover to the Moon?

--
Chaos maximizes locally around me.
Obligatory Joke by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-02 03:43 · Score: 0

So is *this* moon landing fake too? :-)
Re:how much did it cost them by bobbied · 2016-02-02 03:59 · Score: 1

Why bother? All you need is some Portland cement, black/grey backgrounds and a really bright light. I'm sure the Chinese can come up with that stuff.

--
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
Why all the dicks? by jtownatpunk.net · 2016-02-02 03:59 · Score: 0

Seems like everyone who lands a rover on a foreign body in the solar system uses it to draw a dick in the dirt.
1. Re:Why all the dicks? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-02 07:59 · Score: 0
  
  Well, you see what you want to see. Or fear. I'm not sure which in this case!
What's with the bright yellow? by Muad'Dave · 2016-02-02 04:06 · Score: 1

In the "Tracks in the Regolith" image, there are yellow streaks in the tire tracks that look like artifacts from color correction or brightness (over-) enhancement.

--
Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.
1. Re:What's with the bright yellow? by 110010001000 · 2016-02-02 04:41 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  The Moon is made of cheese. That is the cheese peeking through the layer of dust.
2. Re:What's with the bright yellow? by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · 2016-02-02 05:47 · Score: 1
  
  Green cheese, not yellow.
  
  --
  (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
3. Re:What's with the bright yellow? by yodleboy · 2016-02-02 06:00 · Score: 1
  
  you guys! it's not green cheese as in color, it's green cheese because the methane from the moon cows just goes into space!
4. Re:What's with the bright yellow? by Muad'Dave · 2016-02-03 01:03 · Score: 1
  
  According to Wallace and Gromit, the moon is made of Wensleydale.
  
  --
  Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.
Surprisingly good imaging!! by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-02 05:03 · Score: 0

Actually, this is amazing imaging.
I would never have expected anything near a 4:3 aspect ratio. 40:3, maybe, but certainly not 4:3.
Kudos.
Image Quality by fourthrail16309 · 2016-02-02 06:21 · Score: 2

How come these pictures look so good, but everything we see from NASA looks like it was taken with a 1968 camera?
China tech by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-02 08:33 · Score: 0

soon NASA will be designing the missions and space craft and China will handle building them and executing the missions.
So like it always has been? We create the tech and China steals/copies it? Don't get me wrong, it's nice to see someone using the tech since we aren't anymore.