Slashdot Mirror


Sealed Cache of Moon Rocks To Be Opened By NASA (nydailynews.com)

"Scientists are hoping to unlock some of the universe's mysteries through 50-year-old moon rocks," reports the New York Daily News -- specifically, three samples that spent that half century sealed in airtight canisters. One Apollo 18 sample from 1972 contains 1.8 pounds of a vacuum-sealed lunar core that is a stratified layer of rock that will be studied by six research teams. About 842 pounds of lunar rocks and soil have been brought back to Earth over six missions. Although a great deal of it has found its way to science labs, technological breakthroughs should allow for a more thorough comprehension of the satellite's chemical and geological composition...

"When the previous generations did Apollo, they knew the technology they had in that day was not the technology we would have in this day," said NASA Administrator Jim Bridenstine. "So they made a determination that they would preserve samples. ⦠I'd like to thank, if it's OK, the Apollo generation, for preserving these samples, so that our generation could have this opportunity."

An anonymous Slashdot reader writes, "That's remarkable considering how often moon rocks were misplaced over the years."

57 comments

  1. I'm almost certain by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    That rocks from the moon are more than 50 years old.

    1. Re:I'm almost certain by Charbroiled++PENIS · · Score: 0

      What I'm more curious about is how a mission that happened NaN years ago could have manufactured these 50-year-old moon rocks.

    2. Re: I'm almost certain by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This could easily be the plot from one of the alien movies.

    3. Re:I'm almost certain by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What I'm more curious about is how a mission that happened NaN years ago could have manufactured these 50-year-old moon rocks.

      Pretty sure they used the same technology that "manufactured" the tire tracks all over the moon that you can see from Earth.

      Thank you for proving once again that ignorance, is fucking timeless.

    4. Re: I'm almost certain by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You canâ(TM)t actually resolve the tracks on the moon from a telescope on earth. You can see them from orbiting satellites around the moon.

    5. Re: I'm almost certain by MerlTurkin · · Score: 1

      You can NOT resolve the tire tracks or any other landing objects from Earth. FACT. Now the LRO spacecraft has on the other hand.

  2. Only 50 years old? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I thought that these rocks could have been billions of years old.
     
    Let the Trump bashing stories continue. These science-based articles have no foundation in reality. Oh, wait...

    1. Re:Only 50 years old? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Imagine thinking we went to the moon in the first place. The absolute state of space nutters.

    2. Re:Only 50 years old? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The absolute state of space

      What an empty statement

  3. If only there was a way by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    If only there was a way to get hold of more samples of moon rocks. Then we wouldn't need to preserve samples of them in vacuums for future generations.

    1. Re:If only there was a way by r2kordmaa · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty convinced that one of the first commercial Moon mining operations will be bringing back plain old rocks for the express purpose of auctioning off tiny pieces to be used in fancy jewelry etc. "Give your significant other the Moon, limited supply, available for limited time only!". For a period it could exceed mass value of cut diamonds.

  4. Apollo 18 ??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    Apollo 18 ? Really ?

    1. Re: Apollo 18 ??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      See, the conspiracy theory was true! Rhere was an Apollo 18 mission!

    2. Re:Apollo 18 ??? by rossdee · · Score: 1

      They're using BASE 9

    3. Re:Apollo 18 ??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, 1972... Don't you remember? Actually it only made to the first skylab mission, and that was in '73

    4. Re:Apollo 18 ??? by fox171171 · · Score: 3, Funny

      Apollo 18 ? Really ?

      Apollo 18? I was on that mission. Back in those days we didn't have a lot of computing power, but it was pretty amazing what you could do with a Commodore 64.

    5. Re:Apollo 18 ??? by oogoliegoogolie · · Score: 1

      The website says "Apollo 18" so it must be true.

    6. Re:Apollo 18 ??? by pcjunky · · Score: 1

      I watched the last Apollo mission launch from Titusville. That was Apollo 17.

  5. The was no Apollo 18. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    At least not one that flew to the Moon.

    1. Re:The was no Apollo 18. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And I'm also sure those rocks are more than 50 years old, too.
      Is there an editor here?

    2. Re:The was no Apollo 18. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, and he's quite old now. He worked on the Moon Hoax script, too.

  6. That movie was terrible by Scholasticus · · Score: 2

    There have been many very bad "horror in space" movies, but that one was among the worst.

    1. Re:That movie was terrible by dargaud · · Score: 1

      In its defence it was very low budget. And I've seen much worse.

      --
      Non-Linux Penguins ?
  7. Science has enabled by Grand+Facade · · Score: 1, Informative

    mankind to overpopulate and ruin the earths ecosystems.
    It's no longer profitable to do stuff here so they are moving on to the next closest body to exploit.

    --
    Rick B.
    1. Re: Science has enabled by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then why do football players make more money than scientists? Scientists should be the wealthiest people on the planet.

      Maybe, greed, corruption and fake news have something to do with it. AE911Truth dot Org

    2. Re:Science has enabled by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's plenty of available planets in space; it's not like we'll run out. The hard part is getting to them making them support humans.

    3. Re:Science has enabled by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Implied we will now ruin the moon's ecosystems? For Science!

    4. Re:Science has enabled by religionofpeas · · Score: 1

      There's plenty of available planets in space; it's not like we'll run out. The hard part is getting to them making them support humans.

      Getting there is also hard. Beyond Mars is pretty much impossible, and Mars itself is so small it's barely useful, even if we could make it support humans.

    5. Re:Science has enabled by Megol · · Score: 1

      We. Aren't. Overpopulated. It's a myth and a bad myth at that. The problems are elsewhere even if an increased population of course increase need for resources.

    6. Re:Science has enabled by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The surface area of Mars is almost exactly the same as the land area on Earth.

    7. Re:Science has enabled by Solandri · · Score: 1

      Agree on polluting the ecosystem. But nearly all of the world's population growth is happening in developing countries. Some developed nations like Japan are even experiencing a population decrease (which can have interesting effects on things like the housing market). Even in the U.S. with its minuscule 0.6% population growth last year (among the highest in developed countries), roughly half of that is due to immigration, only half due to natural population growth.

      Economic development and progress in science and technology are the solution to overpopulation - it makes people stop having as many kids.

    8. Re:Science has enabled by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The surface area of Mars is quite different, I assure you, it's far less forgiving and there is nowhere quite like NY.

    9. Re:Science has enabled by religionofpeas · · Score: 2

      We. Aren't. Overpopulated. It's a myth and a bad myth at that

      We are overpopulated because our use of resources far exceeds their replacement rate.

    10. Re:Science has enabled by religionofpeas · · Score: 1

      Economic development and progress in science and technology are the solution to overpopulation - it makes people stop having as many kids.

      Nature, ..erm... , finds a way. Even in first world countries, where population is not showing a net growth, you can see a mix of people with zero children, and people with 5+ children. The first group will die out in one generation, the other group will multiply by 5+, and will dominate in 5-10 generations.

  8. Uh, Apollo 18? by Steve1952 · · Score: 3, Informative

    Hate to nitpick, but the "public" Apollo missions stopped at Apollo 17. You just blew their cover!

    1. Re:Uh, Apollo 18? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Saturn V launches are hard to cover-up. Especially when your neighbor with a few thousand nukes, is very interested in watching for signs of orbital launches, in case they are in their direction.

  9. That's not the most significant thing... by argStyopa · · Score: 3, Interesting

    ...it's that they were prescient enough to know that all the bullshit about space bases and stations aside, by Apollo 18 it was clear that the US government was likely stupid enough to simply 'give up' on space and 50 years later these would be the only pristine samples we'd have available by then. /weep

    --
    -Styopa
    1. Re:That's not the most significant thing... by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · · Score: 1

      They were SO stupid they gave up on Apollo 18 before it even happened (and vacuum-sealed bits of rocks from the front lawn, probably...)

      --
      "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
    2. Re:That's not the most significant thing... by Solandri · · Score: 1

      I wasn't aware that the U.S. government gave up on space.

      Compared to unmanned spacecraft, landers, and rovers, sending people into space incurs enormous additional costs completely disproportional to the small increase in science gained. If/when we can get launch and life support costs down to something reasonable (currently it costs nearly 50 people's lifetime productivity just to send one person into space once), then we can begin manned space exploration in earnest. But in the meantime, unmanned space exploration gives us much better bang for the buck.

    3. Re:That's not the most significant thing... by sabt-pestnu · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty sure there are more pristine samples where those came from.

  10. MOON SPIDERS! by l0n3s0m3phr34k · · Score: 3, Insightful

    First, I had to double-check my calender that it isn't April 1st. Then I double-checked NASA's website to make sure Apollo 18 never happened. I also RTFA, just to make sure it says "Apollo 18", and it sure does. Not sure just who to attribute this FAIL to; NYDN or Slashdot.

    NASA better be careful, that bag is probably full of moon spiders.

  11. Re:Aperature Science has enabled ... Portals! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Quoting the infamous Cave Johnson, CEO of Aperature Science, from his 1981 recordings:

    "The bean counters told me we literally could not afford to buy seven dollars worth of moon rocks, much less seventy million. Bought 'em anyway. Ground 'em up, mixed em into a gel."

    "And guess what? Ground up moon rocks are pure poison. I am deathly ill."

    "Still, it turns out they're a great portal conductor. So now we're gonna see if jumping in and out of these new portals can somehow leech the lunar poison out of a man's bloodstream. When life gives you lemons, make lemonade. [coughs] Let's all stay positive and do some science."

    "That said, I would really appreciate it if you could test as fast as possible. Caroline, please bring me more pain pills."

    /portal2spoilers

  12. Now is the Right Time by crow · · Score: 1

    So the question for NASA is when should they open this last supply of moon rocks for study. The longer they wait, the more advanced our science will be, but also the longer they wait, the longer we go without the knowledge that today's science can unlock. Well, obviously now is the right time. Why? Because soon the cache will be worthless when SpaceX returns new samples, so this is the last chance to do real science from the Apollo missions.

    1. Re:Now is the Right Time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was going to ask this. Won't we have even better technology next year? Let's keep waiting. Or is the real story, "Hey, what's in this old canister I found in Bob's office?"

    2. Re:Now is the Right Time by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Keep the box closed. Those aren't moon rocks, they're eggs!

    3. Re:Now is the Right Time by hackertourist · · Score: 1

      It's not really the "last supply" though. The samples (hundreds of them) were bagged individually and then packed in containers (IIRC 9 containers in total). These were sealed on the Moon surface, so the inside of the container is a vacuum.

      6 containers were unpacked and made available for study right away. 3 containers were left sealed. The proposal from TFA is to open one of the 3 sealed containers and use one of the (many) samples in this container.

    4. Re:Now is the Right Time by r2kordmaa · · Score: 1

      Well, for a long time it looked like new Moon missions and samples weren't coming for a long time yet. So it made sense to keep most of it bagged up. Now it looks like Moon missions are about to go forward soonish again, so it makes sense to crack open some of the goodies.

    5. Re:Now is the Right Time by Hodr · · Score: 0

      Probably ought to let some outside of the government agencies examine samples. Since we keep finding out moon rocks given to other countries end up being terrestrial. To keep from giving more ammo to the conspiracists.

  13. A great deal? by Anubis+IV · · Score: 4, Informative

    Although a great deal of it has found its way to science labs [...]

    In the early 2000s I was doing some work with a NASA contractor and had the good fortune of being able to suit up and go into the clean room/vault where all of these samples are kept at JSC. In walking around, it struck me how many samples were in the vault vs. in the cases in the clean room where they could be worked on. After I asked, I was informed that roughly 95% of the samples were still in “pristine” condition in the vault, meaning they had been left entirely untouched in their original nitrogen-rich environment ever since getting back from the moon.

    95%.

    All of the research up to that point, over three decades’ worth, including the samples sent out to scientists, had been done on just 5% of what was brought back.

    Mind you, this post isn’t a critique or commentary. This is just me trying to give some context to that comment from the summary.

  14. FIFTY YEARS? by p51d007 · · Score: 1

    They've been sealed, not looked at or studied in FIFTY YEARS?

    1. Re:FIFTY YEARS? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, it ain't to exciting to study petrified wood, as the top guys know the Apollo landings were faked and so does anyone else with half a brain when looking at the video photo of the Astronauts jumping around like idiots on wires.

      https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/space/6105902/Moon-rock-given-to-Holland-by-Neil-Armstrong-and-Buzz-Aldrin-is-fake.html

  15. NASA Rocks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Way to go NASA. #Tron25yrlater

  16. Meh. Just some more rocks. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My father was a graduate student at an American university when his department received a batch of moon rocks. The professors were scared of slicing such precious stones. My father looked at them, said they just looked like more rocks (he was an ex-geologist) and offered to slice them up on the diamond saw.

    He let me hold and look at one before he did. I was probably too young to appreciate the great effort that got them. My reaction, too, was that it was just another rock.

    My mother washed the moon dust out his hair afterwards. It is is a pity they did not filter and collect it. Auctioning the dust on ebay would have been good fun.