I know timfinch has problems reading them, but I did find this graph (figure Number 2) that conclusively shows the lunar surface dose rate for Apollo 11 to be less than 5cGy/year -
http://prediccs.sr.unh.edu/papers/schwadron2011JE003978.pdf
That means less than 50mGy/year and less than 1mGy/week. This computes to less than .143mGy/day.
So, timfinch, now that you have your requested data, do you concede that your assumptions regarding the dose rates experienced by Apollo 11 were incorrect?
Dang. 5 days before I get a chance to see timfinch's acknowledgement of the error in his initial complaint.
No one can see it (I hope), but I couldn't even type that and keep a straight face.
What persuades you that tim/ben/alien orifice will ever acknowledge any error? He/she/it/housecat came close in this very thread but promptly ran away.
Nothing, hence my laughter while writing that. I can see where I wasn't clear regarding the reason for my laughter (could have been gloating, having anatomical disturbances, etc.). I am sure he will attempt some sort of spin or twist, but the data IS there. And just for further clarity, the line I used for data is described in the reference thus:
"The lens dose behind 0.22 g/cm2 Al is an excellent proxy for the combined dose from the D1-D2 detector [Spence et al., 2010] of the CRaTER instrument. Calculation of the dose is detailed in Appendix A."