I recently found several papers on this topic (after one
of my friends repeated the standard nonsense at a talk).
Unfortunately, I mailed all of the papers to him and kept
none. I will try to get the references from him (also,
unfortunately, after toe surgery, I am on crutches and
I cannot just walk over to the library to get the stuff).
I will try to recall from memory what the papers said
about the lunar regolith (lunar dust). Back in the 50's
there was only one measurement on the meteoritic influx
(perhaps based on the Gegenshein?) and it was at least
3 orders of magnitude too high (maybe 5 to 7?). Using
these numbers and 4 billion years, Tommy Gold calculated
a substantial (kilometers thick) regolith covering the
Moon. However by the time (late 60's) that the actual
landing took place, almost no one believed the old
meteoritic influx numbers, but there was still enough doubt
to put large saucer shaped feet on the first lander. With
direct measurment and after a few moon quakes (provided best
by the deliberate crash of the orbiter), the thickness of the
lunar regolith, was found to be consistent with 4 billion
years and the current meteoric fluxes (with guesses about
how it increased in the past).
My memory of these old papers isn't perfect, and any mistakes
reflect not on the issue of the thickness of the regolith but
my biases. I found it very telling that it was hard to find
references that even mentioned the thickness arguments. It
simply wasn't an issue.
Wayne
Wayne Slattery
Los Alamos National Laboratory
MS-F664
Los Alamos, NM 87545-0010
(505)667-0797 Day
(505)662-2874 Evening
(505)665-3561 FAX