physics
#hubble#jwst#telescope

Hubble/JWST Should See Landing Sites

❌ The Claim:

“Advanced telescopes like Hubble or JWST should be able to photograph Apollo landing sites if they were real”

Common variations of this claim:

  • “Why can't Hubble see the landing sites?”
  • “JWST should show the equipment”
  • “Modern telescopes would prove it”
  • “No telescope photos of landing sites”
⚡

Quick Comeback

It's basic physics! Hubble's resolution is about 96 meters at lunar distance, but the largest Apollo equipment is only 4.2 meters wide.

You'd need the lunar module to be 23 times larger to see it as even a single pixel. To see details, you'd need a telescope 1.2 miles wide - physically impossible to build!

📖

Extended Explanation

Telescope resolution isn't about magnification - it's about the fundamental physics of light diffraction that cannot be avoided.

Hubble's 2.4-meter mirror has a resolution of 0.05 arcseconds in visible light, which equals about 96 meters at lunar distance. The Apollo Lunar Module descent stage measures only 4.2 meters wide, making it far too small to resolve.

JWST's larger 6.5-meter mirror is designed for infrared wavelengths where its resolution is actually comparable to or worse than Hubble's visible-light capability.

To see Apollo equipment as even a single pixel from Earth would require a 21-meter telescope, and to see actual details would need a telescope approaching 2 kilometers in diameter - physically impossible with any current or foreseeable technology.

NASA's Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter can photograph the sites clearly because it orbits only 31 miles above the surface - over 7,700 times closer than Earth-based telescopes.

🔎

Full Breakdown

Optical Resolution Physics and Telescope Limitations

Optical resolution is governed by fundamental physical laws that create absolute limits on what telescopes can observe at lunar distances.

The Rayleigh Criterion The **Rayleigh criterion** defines the minimum angular separation at which two point sources can be distinguished. For a circular aperture:

Îļ = 1.22Îŧ/D

Where: - Îļ = angular resolution in radians - Îŧ = wavelength of light - D = aperture diameter

Hubble Space Telescope Specifications [Hubble's 2.4-meter mirror](https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/why-cant-the-hubble-space-telescope-see-astronauts-on-the-moon/) operating at **550nm visible light** achieves:

- Angular resolution: 0.05 arcseconds - Linear resolution at lunar distance (384,400 km): 96 meters per pixel - Theoretical minimum detectable object: 48 meters (half-pixel)

Apollo Equipment Dimensions Apollo hardware maximum dimensions:

- Lunar Module descent stage: 4.2 meters wide - Command Module: 3.9 meters diameter - Lunar Rover: 3.1 meters long - ALSEP scientific equipment: 1.5 meters typical

These dimensions require resolution improvements of 23-64 times to achieve single-pixel detection.

Required Telescope Specifications To resolve Apollo equipment would require:

Single-pixel detection: 21-69 meter diameter mirrors Detail resolution: 1.2-2.0 kilometer diameter telescopes

These specifications far exceed engineering feasibility for space-based telescopes due to: - Material strength limitations - Launch vehicle payload constraints - Optical alignment precision requirements - Thermal stability challenges

James Webb Space Telescope Comparison JWST's **6.5-meter segmented mirror** is designed for **infrared wavelengths (1-28 Ξm)** where its resolution is actually **comparable to or worse** than Hubble's visible-light capability due to longer wavelengths.

Ground-Based Telescope Limitations Earth-based telescopes face additional **atmospheric limitations** that restrict resolution to approximately **1 arcsecond** without adaptive optics, making lunar surface observation even more challenging.

Independent International Verification International lunar missions have independently verified Apollo landing sites through **close-proximity orbital observation**:

- India's Chandrayaan-1: High-resolution surface mapping - Japan's SELENE (Kaguya): Detailed topographic analysis - China's Chang'e missions: Surface imaging and composition analysis

These missions provide definitive evidence that Earth-based telescopes cannot deliver due to fundamental physical constraints, orbiting at distances 7,700+ times closer than terrestrial observation platforms.