• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Merged Apollo "hoax" discussion - continuation thread

I understand that the temperature if the shock wave a short distance from the heat shield was notably higher. Still, the ablation process was carrying the heat away from the surface of the heat shield, which was the whole idea.
 
An ablative heat shield is thermally comparable to boiling water in a paper cup - the cup will never reach flame temperature as long as water is turning to steam and carrying the heat away.
 
ApolloGnomon said:
An ablative heat shield is thermally comparable to boiling water in a paper cup - the cup will never reach flame temperature as long as water is turning to steam and carrying the heat away.
Click to expand...

I did that very experiment in my eighth grade Science Class about 40 years ago in order to demonstrate how alabative heat sheilding works.

It is too bad that 'Anders Lindman' was not there to dispute the fact.
 
Foster Zygote said:
Then how is Suni Williams able to defy gravity?

Click to expand...


Amazing video. It made my day.

Once again, reality proves to be being more awe-inspiring than any of the fatuous beliefs & speculations of woos/CTists. Anyone longing for evidence of "Chariots of the Gods" need look no further than the ISS.
 
Anders Lindman said:
Are nuclear missiles supposed to do a reentry through the atmosphere? Anyway, nuclear weapons are a hoax it seems to me.
Click to expand...

Everything is a hoax, it seems to you. That was literally the first thing I learned posting on this forum.

Anyway, I mostly can't tell if you're being serious anymore. Is this post supposed to be tongue-in-cheek?

If not, WOW.
 
Breaking news....

Somebody has put together solid evidence that the dose received by Apollo crafts passing through the Van Allen radiation belts, would be quite harmless.

Unfortunately for Jarrah White, it's by way of one of his most hilarious of blunders. Youtuber Lukepemberton highlights his major error here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zfYQyHMfCvs

It's quite a short video, but basically Jarrah has taken the energy and mass figures and multiplied them together instead of dividing them to arrive at the correct number of grays. His figure is a colossal 3,672 grays per hour exposure. When the division yields 0.65 grays per hour:jaw-dropp

Whoops.
 
Erock said:
Unfortunately for Jarrah White, it's by way of one of his most hilarious of blunders.
Click to expand...

It's not too far off his other comical mistakes trying to reason quantitatively about radiation exposure. Here is the epic thread he tried to open on IMDb to debate me on the subject, and from which he ran in terror back to his walled garden at YouTube.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0446557/board/thread/133905495?p=1

For those who don't want to suffer the indignity of the entire thread, at a certain point he misinterprets solar radiation information from various events during Apollo's operational period 1969-1972 and tries to argue that these should have been fatal to the astronauts. His misinterpretation revolves around his inability to convert between the figures presented in the data he obtains from NOAA and actual radiation exposure estimates. He simply doesn't understand the math of how that works -- or really math in general. He has yet to demonstrate a working knowledge of elementary physics, much less the degree of understanding required to comprehend space engineering.

White has been given the opportunity to present his "findings" on space radiation to qualified university professors etc. in his area. But he constantly ignores the invitation. All he's being asked to do is show up. He won't do it. That indicates pretty strongly that he knows his ignorant handwaving won't actually hold up in the real world.

Erock said:
I'm sure it has other errors in it, so if anybody can be bothered to wade through his 22 minute video...
Click to expand...

Meh, I almost never watch his videos or comment on them. In the past it has tended only to feed his rather unhealthy fixation on me personally, and upon others such as "Svector" and Phil Plait. That often ends up in rather heated, foul-mouthed angry posts from him, so I pretty much leave him to his own little fan club.
 
Erock said:
Somebody has put together solid evidence that the dose received by Apollo crafts passing through the Van Allen radiation belts, would be quite harmless.

Unfortunately for Jarrah White, it's by way of one of his most hilarious of blunders. Youtuber Lukepemberton highlights his major error here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zfYQyHMfCvs

It's quite a short video, but basically Jarrah has taken the energy and mass figures and multiplied them together instead of dividing them to arrive at the correct number of grays. His figure is a colossal 3,672 grays per hour exposure. When the division yields 0.65 grays per hour:jaw-dropp

Whoops.
Click to expand...

Oh that IS an epic fail. I had never heard of the Gray unit but a very quick check of wiki reveals its 1 J/kg. It takes no more than grade 8 math to see that if one knows the joules and the kilogram mass that Grays would be joules divided by kilograms.
 
JayUtah said:
White has been given the opportunity to present his "findings" on space radiation to qualified university professors etc. in his area. But he constantly ignores the invitation. All he's being asked to do is show up. He won't do it. That indicates pretty strongly that he knows his ignorant handwaving won't actually hold up in the real world.
Click to expand...

It just means he knows that the university professors are all part of the Conspiracy. Every last one of them. :tinfoil
 
Matthew Cline said:
It just means he knows that the university professors are all part of the Conspiracy. Every last one of them. :tinfoil
Click to expand...

Naturally. :rolleyes:

But then you'd think someone like Jarrah White, with his superior knowledge of astrophysics, would be easily able to confound those charlatan professors of physics and thereby prove to all his fans that he really is the genius they proclaim him to be.

I think some conspiracists believe their own hype to a certain extent. But then there are those who know what they're doing, know they are charlatans, and carefully control their public exposure to scrupulously avoid being detected. In my opinion Jarrah is one of them. As is James Fetzer. The careful, calculated ways in which they avoid having their claims tested where their fans can see it speaks to intent, not just being misled or uncertain.
 
Just a somewhat simplistic question.

I know the human organism is fairly tolerant of some types of radiation, especially with it's "self repair" capability, but more sensitive to others. I also understand that micro circuitry is pretty sensitive to some types.

My question is what types of radiation are we dealing with in each case? I suppose I'm looking for a brief overview, knowing that the term "radiation" immediately conjures up Hiroshima and the like in a lot of CT minds...

I appreciate any inputs.
 
mrbusdriver said:
My question is what types of radiation are we dealing with in each case?
Click to expand...

Typically from charged particles -- electrons and protons in the Van Allen belts and fast-moving protons that comprise galactic cosmic radiation (i.e., GCR or "cosmic rays"). To a lesser extent x-rays and helium nuclei from the Sun.

The x-rays are of energies far lower than we generate on Earth for seeing through things and are either well attenuated by spacecraft skins or don't have any considerable biological effect. Helium nuclei don't generally penetrate a sheet of tin foil. (See, those hats they wear actually afford some protection!) As such they wouldn't even penetrate the skin. The charged particles (electrons and protons) are the primary danger because they are of energies that allow them to penetrate to blood-forming organs in the body and be absorbed there, and thus to have a biological effect if endured unprotected over a sufficient number of days.

Solar events such as flares and coronal mass ejections are a different story. They contain more intense x-rays and high fluxes and energies of particles that would be quite hazardous in the short term, even protected within the spacecraft. However, events of this magnitude occur roughly only six times per year and are directional in a way that would potentially miss Earth-Moon space. While a few occurred during Apollo's operational period, none occurred while a mission was being flown. The Apollo spacecraft provides shield thicknesses, at various material compositions, of 7-15 cm. This is quite sufficient to attenuate to biological safe levels the ongoing charged-particle load described above. In a solar event the CSM would have been turned with its tail toward the particle front, putting the bulk of the service module between it and the crew compartment.
 
The usual suspects are already accusing Nvidia of adjusting the lighting parameters (e.g., surface reflectivity) to make the photos come out the way they "should."

Honestly I contemplated doing something similar back when I first started writing my web site. I had access at the time to bleeding edge computer graphics hardware and techniques. But after doing a few demonstrations I realized that there's no way I could substantiate to everyone's satisfaction that I hadn't fudged the numbers.
 
Well...unless there was a lot more sophistication in the later stages of the render than is described by the article, you'd practically have to "tweak it" in order to get a decent replica.

I didn't see anything in the article about a film model, especially not one that compensates for the shifting of the response curves in the push and pull darkroom methods used to bring out the most detail possible.
 
The knee jerk accusation of fakery sounds good for the half second before you think about it. If the moon landings were faked, and the picture of Aldrin descending was faked, and this nvidia image is faked by nvidia, how many more generations of new conspirators will need to be paid to keep making fake images to represent the hoax? It's like the "cartoon" complaints about the Purdue 9/11 impact FEA, in that pretty soon a college freshman could reproduce the work between classes on a random laptop using freeware. The alleged Eebil Conspirators would need to prevent this from happening anywhere forever and forever. And the Amazing Theorists would still refuse to do their own simulations that prove whatever hair brained counter historical claim they've glommed onto.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom