嫦娥五号发现水否定了阿波罗登月？看看原文怎么写_风闻

原论文文章封面（想要的可以私信）

这是那篇中国科学家发表的月球样本中1吨样品（估计 - 很多新闻都漏这个词）含有 120 克水的原始论文，在这篇论文的概述部分，他的描述是这样的：

We report analysis results of the reflectance spectra (0.48 to 3.2 m) acquired by the Chang’E-5 lander, which provides vital context of the returned samples from the Northern Oceanus Procellarum of the Moon. **We estimate up to 120 parts per million (ppm) of water (OH +H2O) in the lunar regolith, which is mostly attributed to solar wind implantation.**A light-colored and surface-pitted rock (named as CE5-Rock) is evident near the lander. The reflectance spectra suggest that CE5-Rock could be transported from an older basalt unit. CE5-Rock exhibits a stronger absorption, near 2.85 m, than the surrounding regolith, with estimation of ~180 ppm of water if the model for estimating water content of regolith is applicable to rock samples, which may suggest an additional source from the lunar interior. The low water content of the regolith may suggest the degassing of mantle reservoir beneath the Chang’E-5 landing site.

大意是，通过光谱分析得到的结果，从嫦娥五号着陆器获得的样本，【估计】水（以OH+H2O为代表，应该是分子形态）含量是百万分之120，这也是就是各大媒体报道的 1 吨月岩有 120 克水的来源。科学家归咎的原因是太阳风的注入。

这篇文章实际还有其他更有意思的地方，与阿波罗登月争议有关。

有一些反登月分子在这个新闻发布的时候高呼找到了阿波罗造假的证据，可实际呢？这篇论文还真有提到阿波罗样品的地方，让我们看看原文——注意是原文，如何描述的：

RESULTS ANDDISCUSSION

The spectrum of CE5-Rock exhibits a strong absorption at 2.85 m because of the presence of OH/H2O (Fig. 2). By contrast, most of the lunar regolith at the landing site exhibit no/weak absorptions at ~2.85 m, similar to the Moon Mineralogy Mapper (M3) spectra over the region (Fig. 2). The 2.85-m absorption band in the rock spectrum is about twice stronger than that in the regolith spectra, as shown in both their original and the continuum-removed spectra (fig. S4), indicating potentially higher water content in the rock. The water content of each LMS target was estimated (Fig. 1B), on the basis of the absorption features near 3 m in the thermally corrected spectra (8). The effective single-particle absorption thickness (ESPAT) at 2.85 m was calculated for each of the LMS spectra to derive the water contents (see Materials and Methods). The laboratory studies on hydrous minerals revealed that the absolute water contents can be linearly correlated with the ESPAT values at 2.85 m (13, 14), and the linear coefficient varies with the particle size of lunar analogs (9, 14). The uncertainty of the estimated water content from ESPAT is ~20% (9). **We used the mean particle size of lunar regolith of 60 to 80 m in our modeling, which is similar to the particle size of the regolith determined by mass at the six Apollo and Chang’E-5 landing sites (15, 16).**The derived water content of the regolith at the Chang’E-5 landing site varies from nearly undetectable [<~30 parts per million (ppm)] to around 120 ppm (Fig. 1B and table S2). The water contents are less than 30 ppm in most measured regolith spots except for D12 and D17 (Fig. 1), which may be due to the disturbance of the top layer of the more space-weathered/solar wind–implanted regolith (17) by the lander exhaust and the subsequent sampling process. The unsampled areas of D12 and D17 may have been shielded by the CE5-Rock from the lander exhaust (fig. S5) and thus retain the top space-weathered layer that contains higher water content. We predict that higher water content may be found in surface regolith than that from the subsurface of the returned borehole samples if the original stratigraphy is preserved.**The estimated water contents of the regolith in the landing area are in agreement with those measured in the Apollo regolith samples (18) and the orbital observations (9,  19). Similar to the Apollo regolith samples (18, 20), water in the regolith at Chang’E-5 landing site likely originates mainly from solar wind implantation (18).**To calculate the water content of CE5-Rock, two scenarios were considered in terms of the particle size. The reflectance near 3m of CE5-Rock is mostly from the top 1-mm layer (the optical depth of light near 3 m), because most of the light that propagates beyond the optical depth (approximately in millimeters) cannot be reflected to the sensor. In this case, the derived water content is around 70 ppm (table S2), which is similar to that observed in the surrounding regolith. Thus, it is difficult to determine whether the water came from solar wind implantation or the rock itself derived originally from the lunar interior. Alternatively, the top surface of CE5-Rock may have been space-weathered to fine particles (e.g., 60to 80m), and the derived water content is around 180 ppm, which is much higher than those of the surrounding regolith (Fig. 1B). The excess water signature in CE5-Rock may suggest extra sources of water in addition to solar wind implantation.

我只翻译（渣翻译，欢迎纠错）主要部分：

使用了与阿波罗六个着陆点的月表样本类的数据，嫦娥五号着陆场表层含水量几乎不可测。大部分测量表层的含水量都小于 30ppm，论文认为这是被着陆器排气和取样时产生的干扰所致。

在第二段，论文原文还写了科学家的预测：如果保留原始地层，则地表表土中的含水量可能高于返回钻孔样品的地下含水量。**着陆区表土的估计含水量与阿波罗表土样品和轨道观测中测得的含水量一致。**与阿波罗表土样本类似，嫦娥5号着陆场表土中的水可能主要来自太阳风注入。

-------- 华丽的分割线 --------

所以，某些人脑补精神很强，但总犯臆想的错误，有这个精力去读读原文，去学习知识，比炮制阴谋论来说对社会更有用啊。

什么？你弄不到原文？拜托，我咋就找到了呢？