Paper detail

How well do we know the polar hydrogen distribution on the Moon?

A detailed comparison is made of results from the Lunar Prospector Neutron Spectrometer (LPNS) and the Lunar Exploration Neutron Detector Collimated Sensors for EpiThermal Neutrons (LEND CSETN). Using the autocorrelation function and power spectrum of the polar count rate maps produced by these experiments, it is shown that the LEND CSETN has a footprint that is at least as big as would be expected for an omni-directional detector at an orbital altitude of 50 km. The collimated flux into the field of view of the collimator is negligible. Arguments put forward asserting otherwise are considered and found wanting for various reasons. The maps of lunar polar hydrogen with the highest contrast, i.e. spatial resolution, are those resulting from pixon image reconstructions of the LPNS data. These typically provide weight percentages of water equivalent hydrogen that are accurate to 30% within the polar craters.

preprint2013arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.