Is the imprint of Neil Armstrong's footprint still on the moon?

Hello wambiewonders,

According to NASA:

- "The first footprints on the Moon will be there for a million years.
There is no wind to blow them away."

"Apollo 11 -- First Footprint on the Moon" (07.08.04)
NASA
http://www.nasa.gov/audience/forstudents/k-4/home/F_Apollo_11.html

- "The footprints left by the astronauts in the Sea of Tranquility are
more permanent than most solid structures on Earth. Barring a chance
meteorite impact, these impressions in the lunar soil will probably
last for millions of years."

"30th anniversary of Apollo 11 : 1969 - 1999" (Last Updated: 24 May 2005)
NASA
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/planetary/lunar/apollo_11_30th.html

- "The most famous thing Neil Armstrong left on the moon 35 years ago
is a footprint, a boot-shaped depression in the gray moondust.
Millions of people have seen pictures of it, and one day, years from
now, lunar tourists will flock to the Sea of Tranquility to see it in
person."

"What Neil & Buzz Left on the Moon" (July 20, 2004)
NASA
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2004/21jul_llr.htm

- justaskscott


Search strategy --

Searched on Google for:

footprint moon site:nasa.gov
footprints moon site:nasa.gov

---

Request for Answer Clarification by wambiewonders-ga on 27 Jul 2005 04:36 PDT

So there is no definitive answer.. no one has returned to the site to
confirm the existence and no one thought to preserve on of the most
monumental fotprints in history... surely there has been advances in
telescopes that could pick up such a historical site... could the
Hubble telscope be positioned to check the lunar landing site?

---

Clarification of Answer by justaskscott-ga on 27 Jul 2005 09:55 PDT

I'll trust NASA's view -- unless someone can cite another NASA
document or a scientific article that presents a contradictory view.

---

Request for Answer Clarification by wambiewonders-ga on 28 Jul 2005 01:09 PDT

Thanks for the fast reply.. Would it be possible for the Hubble
telescope to focus on the lunar landing site to verify the assumptions
forwarded or is its' focal length inappropriate for such a small
distance?
Rob and the Wambiewonders. 
Wamberal Public School. Australia

---

Clarification of Answer by justaskscott-ga on 28 Jul 2005 08:59 PDT

You might wish to post a separate question, for anyone to comment on
or attempt to answer, concerning the Hubble telescope's capabilities
in this regard.  The pricing guideline for questions is at:

http://answers.google.com/answers/pricing.html

The answer given above assumes that the footprints left behind
survived the takeoff of the lunar lander.  When it took off from the
moon it would have fired its engines, creating a wind which may or may
not have eliminated the footprints left by the astronauts, at least
the ones near the lander.  If they survived that, then I agree, they
could last for millions of years.

Another unknown is the rate of erosion by meteoric bombardment. Direct
hits by micrometeorites, and by ejecta from strikes nearby, could
concievably have significantly erased the astronauts' bootprints.

I've found data returned by Lunar Orbiters 2 thru 5 on the incidence
of micrometeoroids in the Moon's neighborhood. By this data, there is
an average of 1.04 such hits per day per square meter. If we estimate
the area of an Apollo boot print at about 1/6m^2, and with an elapsed
time of about 13,156 days since Apollo 11 landed, it's likely that
Neil Armstrong's boot prints each have had 2,280 impacts by
micrometeorites. It's strongly possible that all soil imprints left by
the Apollo astronauts are severely eroded.

You would not see anything in that detail from Hubble's current orbit.

From a NASA website post:  http://sm3a.gsfc.nasa.gov/messages/676.html

"For a telescope with a circular collecting area of diameter D (2.4 m for
Hubble), the smallest feature that one can resolve at wavelength L
(550 x 10^-9 m for visible light) is given roughly by:

resolution = 1.4 L/D = 3.2 x 10^-7 radians

This estimate gives the "diffraction limited" resolution, or the resolution
based on light's wave-like characteristics. It is difficult to improve
upon this limit.

The distance to the Moon is roughly 240,000 miles. Hubble's resolution
corresponds to a physical dimension of

size = x = 0.08 miles = 405 feet = 124 meters

at the Moon's surface ... roughly the size of a football field.

This is quite a bit larger than any of the artifacts you would want to see
on the lunar surface, so even Hubble's tremendous clarity is not enough for
what you would like to do! If we had an aircraft carrier at the lunar
surface, then Hubble could probably get a pretty good look at it."

You have to remember that these things Hubble looks at are solar
systems billions of miles wide, and even then, we are looking at a
more macroscopic based view of what's going on...