Merged Apollo "hoax" discussion - continuation thread

[Peter May]

You talk as if your word were proof. It's not proof as you might be lying.

I maintain that this is such a basic, self-evident issue that nobody has to ask an expert to confirm it. If anyone wants to, I guarantee the objective expert will find the pro-Apollo camp's position laughable.

Here's an example of billowing dust in atmosphere.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E6FH7x0wB_I
(4:30 time mark)

Your position is that, if some dust-free sand is transported and placed, the erosion caused by transporting and placing it will be enough to create enough dust to cause dust clouds when it's driven over. The fact that this is wrong is very self-evident. The sand would have to be beaten with sledge hammers for hours and hours to create that much dust. Any twelve-year-old could explain this.

You people aren't fooling anybody. This issue is simply too basic.

Wrong.
If you do not understand this you should.


The truth has no political affiliations or aspirations, it cannot be bent by belief, it has no masters, nor is it open to debate. It remains simply the truth.

Ergo.
There can be no "clouds" as you suggest as there is no air. The dust is not supported by this medium, therefore the dust follows a trajectory determined by the action of the wheels with the dust and the local lunar gravity etc. OK
Think of it as many thousand of tiny golf balls being played by many thousands of number 9 irons.

Do you get it?

 

[JayUtah]

He went "off-script" at least one other time when he walked over to Little West Crater for photographs. He thought geologists would be interested and it was a very short trip.

The geologists were ecstatic. This is why we get better science when we send intelligent, creative, curious humans on exploration missions.

Especially on Apollo 11 where there was no precedent for lunar surface operations, the flight plan wasn't etched in stone. According to Aldrin's debriefing

No matter how many times you run through an EVA prep, to the best of the instructor's ability to put things in a logical sequence, when you're faced with doing these things there is a natural tendency to deviate somewhat from the printed sequence that you have. It's a rather complex operation. Nobody writes a checklist to tell you in the morning when you get up all the sequences you go through to put your clothes on, brush your teeth, shave, and all that. If you had one sitting there you wouldn't follow it the same every day. You would make small deviations just based upon what seems appropriate at that time. It is a very difficult thing to build a checklist for.

Each astronaut then goes on to describe many departures from the checklist order and the reasons for it. This was absolutely invaluable, and the reason for debriefing. The mission planners and instructors needed this feedback regarding what worked and what didn't. Armstrong and Aldrin were the first to try these checklists on the lunar surface, and NASA trusted them to note things that may have made sense back in someone's office on Earth -- or in the training rooms in full gravity, artificial light, and so forth -- but which didn't make sense once everything was apparent.

In this case Armstrong found that the LEC (the system of straps and pulleys used to ferry equipment down from the LM cabin) didn't work too well in lesser gravity, and was hard to use. The lesser weight of the straps meant there was too much slack, which meant they tangled more. So once he got it sorted out and working, he wanted to get all the equipment down at once. Otherwise he would have had to tie off his end of the strap and go do the contingency sample in daylight, then walk back and figure out the LEC all over again. That meant getting the camera down earlier than expected, and the only place to put the camera safely was on the RCU (chest unit). Hence he took a brief pan while the camera was attached.

 

[LaurelHS]

The geologists were ecstatic. This is why we get better science when we send intelligent, creative, curious humans on exploration missions.

And better photographs, like the unscheduled Earthrise photography on Apollo 8.

 

[Dcdrac]

Do not need to wait the LRO has shown the pictures:

http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/apollo/revisited/

 

[JayUtah]

What is this, a pissing contest.

Apparently so. You have taken it upon yourself to offer corrections.

How exactly the Apollo era systems in effect computed a double integration is beside my point which is not open to contention.

I was speaking specifically of the Apollo guidance system. If you're going to offer an incorrect correction, don't tell me it's suddenly beside the point when you're wrong.

This is what the systems must do by definition.

No. Orbital models do not double-integrate an acceleration.

And of course in the Apollo era, the earth based dishes provided the location of spacecraft at moon range distances to within tens of feet. The accelerometer systems became in effect back ups.

No, the MSFN did not provide seamless coverage. The inertial system was the primary system, which was corrected every so often from MSFN downtracks. And it could operate autonomously.

Just kidding there Jay. Read your posts. I am assuming you are a guy. Quite capable young man, complimenti!

Yes, as I said I do this for a living. What exactly do you do?

 

[JayUtah]

Maybe they got so upset because stamps so examined could be shown to have not been irradiated. Perhaps the radiation would not be much, but stamps taken into space would show a signal, etched into the backing gum, paste , of the stamp.

No, that's not how radiation works.

Love to hear some feedback.

My feedback is a recommendation to take some remedial physics classes.

 

[JayUtah]

Sure it is how radiation works.

Nope. Irradiated objects do not "store up" the radiation.

 

[Jrrarglblarg]

Sure it is how radiation works. We can do the experiment here on Honolulu today. I'll take one stamp and put it out in the RADIATION, out in the sun, gum side up. I'll take another and keep it in my room for the rest of the afternoon. It is 12:40 now and will report back tomorrow.

Science begins with observation.

That has as much to do with how "radiation" works as putting a stamp next to a RADIO.

 

[FramerDave]

My friends and I came up with a new conspiracy angle on Apollo sitting around the wall at Haleiwa last evening. Recall how upset everybody got when the Apollo 15 astronauts took the stamps into space and sold them on earth? Maybe they got so upset because stamps so examined could be shown to have not been irradiated. Perhaps the radiation would not be much, but stamps taken into space would show a signal, etched into the backing gum, paste , of the stamp.

I personally think we'll have to wait until 2026 to settle this, but anybody out there have a comment on this one? Love to hear some feedback. Our first original foray into such a field of suggestion.

Cheers!

I'm sure Oahu has some good home improvement stores. You may want to head to one over the weekend and pick up a good sturdy ladder.

 

[JayUtah]

You could say that our claim is stamps taken into space on a 9 day trip would have telltale features that stamps remaining here on earth would not have.

Such as?

 

[JayUtah]

HonoluluFilly, I can't help notice you backing away from the guidance and navigation question. You do realize that vast majority of space flight is unaccelerated, don't you? You do realize that the vast majority of state-vector manipulation is integrating an orbital model, don't you?

I also can't help notice you backing away from the Armstrong photography question. Did you finally locate the crew debriefing and realize that the flight plan and checklists were not as sacrosanct as you told us they must have been?

 

[Jrrarglblarg]

I may be wrong, tough I doubt it. Do you honestly believe that stamps taken into space could not be shown to have features different to stamps remaining on earth due to more electromagnetic exposure?

First you're talking about radiation, then you're talking about sunlight and now you're talking about electromagnets? What, exactly, are you thinking "radiation" means?

 

[JayUtah]

See, I got you thinking.

No, I'm calling you on your hopelessly naive physics claim. You are claiming that irradiated postage stamps would somehow be detectably altered. I'm going to pin you down on what exactly you think those alterations would be. My guess is that you don't have the faintest clue and that you're going to continue to wave your hands in the hope of avoiding scrutiny.

 

[JayUtah]

For example, X rays are filtered by our atmosphere. Would X-rays leave a mark on stamps? YES THEY WOULD!

Describe exactly what "marks" they would leave on the stamps. I'm a professional engineer, so be very specific.

 

[JayUtah]

Even though I am doing the stamp experiment, it is running right now, it was proposed a bit tongue in cheek, but the X-ray angle is deadly serious and a great point.

You didn't answer his question. Please describe exactly what you think "radiation" would be in this case, and exactly what effects you think would be observed in an irradiated object.

 

[LaurelHS]

Apollo 15 was not the only mission that carried objects to the Moon that were later distributed to people on Earth. Michael Collins wrote about this in Carrying The Fire (Chapter 11). He said he carried mementoes in his Personal Preference Kit that belonged to other people, including a half-inch long container with 50 tiny ivory elephants in it that an unnamed man would give to his co-workers later. HonoluluFilly, why wasn't "everybody" upset about this? Maybe because your theory doesn't have merit? Just asking.

P.S. The word is "moi," not "muah." And we have no obligation to respect your credentials if you refuse to say what they are.

 

[JayUtah]

The person that posed the original query was asking about inertial systems. ALL INERTIAL SYSTEMS WORK THAT WAY.

No, they don't.

My post was one to emphasize that and it is a point above reproach.

No, you spoke of "the computer" in response to the poster's question about how Apollo did it. Here's your rapprochement:

Another idea for you. Integrate the accelerations twice. X one give the velocity, X 2 gives the position. The computer did just that, integrated the accelerations X 2 to give the position.

 

[JayUtah]

I am irradiating my stamp now. Unfortunately, I don't have an X-ray source. Nevertheless, more to come.

You aren't answering any of the pertinent questions. What do you consider applicable "radiation" in this case, and what effects do you believe you will observe?

 

[JayUtah]

Well I am not going to tell you what I am, but I outrank you.

Nope. You patently don't know what you're talking about.

 

[LaurelHS]

Yeah, but "outrank" is such a vague term. He could be better as chess than you, for example. Or maybe he wears more expensive socks.