Are you familiar with how light decreases intensity over distance and the inverse square law?
https://home.ifa.hawaii.edu/users/ba...rsesquare.html

Riddle us:

- If the moon gives off 1 lux when viewed from earths surface…
- And the moon is over 200,000 miles away…
- How many lux does the moon give off when viewed from the moon itself?

Let’s see where this goes…


Edit: here’s your answer



So? What do you think?
Is it humanely possible that people can walk on a surface over 100 QUADRILLION in lux and have fine eyes? The camera pics on the moon wont be over exposed?

Stop kidding yourselves. Simple math and physics shows this is impossible

Not a mathemagician, but if you're on the surface of the moon, you're only looking at the light reflected from your immediate area. Not the total light reflected from the entire bright side of the moon. So you're receiving much more light from the parts of the moon you can see, but you're able to see far less of the moon.

Lux = lumens per square meter

In other words, it already takes into account the surface area in question. Whether you are standing on the moon and looking at it thru a pinhole (small area) vs with just your naked eyes (large area), the lux doesnt change

About 3.5 candles.

They jumped before it got to them, which is why they looked like they were bouncing in the video.


or their suits had lights on them

You can go blind from staring at 100,000 lux for too long (if im not mistaken thats equivalent to looking straight at the sun from earth)

Now try 100 quadrillion lux

What are the chances the entire world, all of academia and its scientists will say tomorrow 'OMG, look at this 2-bit mistake we incredibly overlooked all these years....it's all fake!", because of some random post on the misc.

Oh wait it wont happen, and this is nonsense and false. And lest you think OP is even attempting any original thinking or making these (baseless) calculations himself, heck no- they are ripped from mindless conspiracy youtube videos and online posts.Yes. OP's calculations (and by OP's, I mean not OP's, see above) wrecked by first response.Apparently you dont understand what illuminance is. The square meter in the unit of lux is not the area of the source, it's for the area of the surface the light is hitting (e.g. surface of earth). He is correct that the entire calculation is baseless since the ~.1-.3 lux value of a full moon on a clear night here on earth is a result of the light reflected off the entire moon...yet if someone was standing on the moon and looks down, they are looking at just a tiny bit of moon. The moon is not a point source of reflected light you can apply the inverse square law at will. Calculations in the OP are baseless. We also know how bright the lunar surface is from actual on-surface measurements thanks to the men who were on the moon. This is mindless.

In for idiocy later

I've always wondered about that OP, also I wonder why the moonlight is colder than the shade when measured with Lazer thermometer. I would have thought the moonlight would be warmer than the shade at night if the moon was lit by the sun?

Forgive English I am Russia. OP need take optic class. It piss.This right.

Core principle idiot question answer Dirac Delta Distribution. Idealized model. In short range need moar physic. It piss.