We had a thread about that museum where you got to touch stuff and that kid destroyed something valuable. But yes, interacting with an artifact is transformative. I have a bunch of flown space hardware. It's the same as unflown hardware for all intents and purposes, but it's still magical to hold it in your hand.
See, there you go being all hero-worshippy and emotionally compromised.
Everything you missed was well worth missing.
This is for people sunbathing on the test range. Obviously those doses are extreme.
In the old measurements, 0.137 rem, not rads. 0.032 rads per day absorbed dose, tweaked through the biological effect factors for the radiation types present on the Moon giving 0.137 rem biological dose equivalent or 1370 µSv. So no, not especially biologically significant.
Know who else isn't a doctor? All the conspiracy theorists who say the radiation on the Moon would prevent human exploration. Nor are they health physicists, or scientists of any kind.
Think of those at Chernobyl.
I remember touching Kufu's pyramid for the first time, and feeling the weight of all the years, anf of the culture that created them, and it almost made me cry (ok, delete the "almost"). The moon landing is a similar feeling - all that knowledge, all that time, from the first prehistoric astronomers to that? It is awe-inspiring.
Until Donnie signs an Executive Order to make it US Territory...
Well there's your mistake. It's "Chemo". "Kemo" is cheaper, of course.
Same thing happened to me when Sue was at the Science Center in here in St. Louis. It may have been suicide.
Do you think Tim Finch et. al. reads these posts?
The problem is that too many people think of those at Chernobyl and consider that to be the baseline for all radiation exposure. This gives rise to what I named years ago as the Radiation Boogey Man. Without a correct understanding of how properly to handle the numbers associated with radiation and its mitigating factors, it's easy to just say any amount of radiation is something to be scared about.
It's almost always either conventional wisdom or some third-party summary.
Since you mentioned it, the Surveyor missions provided NASA with measurements of radiation coming off the lunar surface.
Even the claimants who can actually look up numbers then go on to fail to properly reckon the dosage. They really want there to be a simple answer obtained straightforwardly.
Not only that, but when they see the range of values, they're going to cherry-pick the extremes and say something like: "temperatures in the kitchen get as high as 180 degrees Celsius! Anyone walking into the kitchen would have been killed in minutes! The cake is a lie!"
That's Weaver's dishonest approach to solar radiation. During extreme solar events, radiation levels can be dangerously high. But Weaver simply omits the conditions under which those happen and suggests instead that they would have made lunar exploration impossible.
All my attempts at baking are effectively fraudulent.
