[geocentrism] Re: Feasibility
- From: "Robert Bennett" <robert.bennett@xxxxxxx>
- To: <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 13 Feb 2005 12:27:12 -0500
Dr. Jones,
The Moon landing feasibility seems to be a stumbling block to progress.
Although why this is a prime issue isn't altogether evident, a review of
Apollo 20analysis.pdf was still done, at the location cited below:
#1
re: Fig. 1
Fig.1 oversimplifies the Earth-Sun HC model, at the risk of throwing the
baby out with the bath water (an aphorism here in the colonies).
If you want to compare the GC and HC viewpoints, the spinning (sic) Earth
can't be ignored.
In Fig. 1 the orbital period of the Earth is 365.25 days CCWise and the
motion of the Earth's center (or centre)is Right to Left or CCWise. The Sun
would have the same CCW period but L to R, as seen in Fig 1, from the
Earth's center.
The Earth's spin should also be shown as CCWise in Fig. 1, with a period of
24 hours. The surface point facing the Sun (local noon)would be moving L to
R, so the Sun would be seen moving R to L,CW, with period of 24 hrs, due to
the spinning motion alone.
THE OBSERVED MOTION OF THE SUN SEEN FROM THE EARTH IN THE HC MODEL IS THE
COMBINED EFFECT OF ORBITING AND ROTATION.
The total angular velocity, W, of the Sun seen from the Earth's surface is
the sum of the angular velocities of orbit and spin:
Let CW be +, CCW be -
W = Worb + Wspin = -2pi/365.25days + 2pi/24 hours = 2pi/24 *(1 -
1/365.25) in rad/hour
This is positive, so the Sun moves L to R as seen from the rotating HC
Earth, not R to L.
This also shows the difference between the solar and sidereal day....
The GC view of Fig. 2 shows the incorrect direction for the Sun's motion as
observed, and also incorrect for the HC predicted direction as viewed from
Earth.
#2
re: equation 3
The escape velocity from Earth given by Eq. (3) assumes only the Earth
exists, as in the first 3 days of the Hexaemeron, where gravity reaches zero
at infinity.
The realistic value uses 5/6 the distance to the Moon as the zero gravity
point, so the escape velocity for a Moon trip is less than 11.18 km/s (but
not much less).
#3
"in a geocentric system it would be acting very briefly on 3 or 4 occasions"
The Moon's gravity acts very briefly and occasionally in a GC system ????
How so???
#4
"the final speed of 27,580 mph assumes that all 3rd stage fuel has been
burnt and so leaves nothing for future maneuvering"
The 3rd stage of the Saturn V was left behind in Earth orbit and has no
relevance to the Moon trip.
The command module includes solid fuel thruster rockets that allow
mid-course corrections and retro rockets that slow the space probe for lunar
orbit insertion (neither earth or lunar orbits are shown in Fig. 3 or 4).
The orbiting command module launches the Lunar Lander, which has similar
solid state rockets, to make the final descent to the Moon. WARNING: all
this is alleged by NASA.
#5
re: reference 13
Why is rocket data from a medical school preferred to NASA?
#6
"From this analysis it is clear that, if geocentrism is accepted, then
safely landing on the Moon is impossible... "
From the analysis so far it's very much less than clear - a huge leap of
disbelief - why a Moon landing is impossible...
Has some evidence or logic been omitted from the document? Does this refer
to the rest of the document?
#7
"the lunar vehicle ..... is hurtling at 27,580 mph toward a Moon moving at
2325 mph and the necessary reduction in speed far exceeds the capacity of
the craft (8709 mph from Table 1)"
a- the necessary speed reduction (alleged by NASA)is to lunar orbit (alleged
by NASA)speed (about 7000 mph), not to 0 mph.
b- Table 1 shows the rocket capability for the 3 stage rocket, NOT FOR THE
COMMAND MODULE ROCKETRY (alleged by NASA). Table 1 is not applicable to the
lunar approach.
#8
"... we assume the laser beam reaches its target, 238,000 miles away, with
the same beam width that it started with."
NASA makes no such claim. The laser beam is transmitted through an optical
telescope; the beam width at the Moon is about 4 miles. WARNING: this is
alleged by NASA
#9
"the reflector must be precisely orthogonal ..... to the observatory
telescope."
a- The reflector must be only within the 2 mile radius of the transmited
beam. Only those photons which are reflected at the angle of aberration for
the transverse motion of Earth and Moon will be reflected back to the
transmitter. (theta = arctan(v/c) )
b- Detailed tracking isn't necessary; the Moon doesn't rotate relative to
the Earth. Once found, the telescope locks onto the target using the Moon's
angular velocity alone.
c- Extremely sensitive filtering and amplification equipment is used to
detect the return signal, which is far too weak to be seen with the human
eye. Even under good atmospheric viewing conditions, only one photon is
received every few seconds. WARNING: this is alleged by NASA
Just as with deep space astronomy and weak sources, the signal can be
composed from long time exposures with CCD detectors, which can detect
individual photons.
#10
"Laser ranging to the Moon has been done, though, ..... with
backscattering...."
If it's accepted that laser light reflected from the Moon's albedo
(reflected surface light) is then detected on Earth, why isn't the
reflection from the fused silica target cubes accepted? The cubes have
higher reflectance than the natural albedo.
#11
"the LM is fundamentally uncontrollable (the absence of an atmosphere making
no difference to this fact, because the LM has no aerodynamic features
anyway) - ..."
LM attitude control is implemented through 16 rocket engine thrusters (100
pounds thrust each) equally distributed in clusters of four around the
ascent stage. Each cluster is located so that it will exert efficient torque
to rotate the LM about its center of gravity. The thrusters are capable of
repeated starts and very short (fraction of second) firing times. The
appropriate thrusters are selected by the guidance computer during automatic
operation and manually by the astronaut during manual operation.
In addition, there are 2 main rocket engines - one for descent, one for
ascent. All of this - alleged by NASA
#12
"It would not be possible to survive the numerous solar flares which
occurred during the Apollo missions without extremely large, heavy
shielding"
Astronauts working outside the International Space Station (ISS) are exposed
to about 27 times as much radiation annually than people on Earth, but the
levels are still very low for space, Canadian researchers announced Tuesday.
To date, the greatest threat to significant exposures to astronauts existed
during the Apollo Program. It is only fortuitous that no significant SPEs
occurred during the lunar missions.
Preliminary results from a year-long study funded by the Canadian Space
Agency (CSA) (note: not NASA) show that astronauts were subjected to lower
than expected levels of high-energy proton and electron radiation sent from
the Sun over the last five months.
Fortunately, most SPEs are relatively short-lived (less than 1-2 days),
which allows for relatively small volume "storm shelters" to be feasible. To
minimize exposure, the crew would be restricted to the storm shelter during
the most intense portion of the SPE, which may last for several hours. Storm
shelters with shielding of approximately with 20 g/cm2 or more of water
equivalent material will provide sufficient shielding to protect the crew.
#13
"The Russians had already determined that, to survive the radiation on the
lunar surface would require lead suits at least a metre thick"
'20 g/cm2 or more of water equivalent material' is less than 2 cm of lead.
Guess the Russians tend to exaggerate, or they might be radiation
hypersensitive. Or they just wanted to scare us from going to the Moon.
Note the Russian space agency is not NASA, but they got the facts wrong.
#14
"The doses of ionized radiation that the astronauts would have received
during their passages through the Van Allen belts are far too high to
survive. Indeed, prior to Apollo 11, no human or animal had been sent as far
up as the start of even the lowest belt"
Yes, there is deadly radiation in the Van Allen belts, but the nature of
that radiation was known to the Apollo engineers and they were able to make
suitable preparations. The principal danger of the Van Allen belts is
high-energy protons, which are not that difficult to shield against. And the
Apollo navigators plotted a course through the thinnest parts of the belts
and arranged for the spacecraft to pass through them quickly, limiting the
exposure.
The Van Allen belts span only about forty degrees of earth's latitude --
twenty degrees above and below the magnetic equator. The diagrams of
Apollo's translunar trajectory printed in various press releases are not
entirely accurate. They tend to show only a two-dimensional version of the
actual trajectory. The actual trajectory was three-dimensional. The highly
technical reports of Apollo, accessible to but not generally understood by
the public, give the three-dimensional details of the translunar trajectory.
Each mission flew a slightly different trajectory in order to access its
landing site, but the orbital inclination of the translunar coast trajectory
was always in the neighborhood of 30°. Stated another way, the geometric
plane containing the translunar trajectory was inclined to the earth's
equator by about 30°. A spacecraft following that trajectory would bypass
all but the edges of the Van Allen belts.
This is not to dispute that passage through the Van Allen belts would be
dangerous. But NASA conducted a series of experiments designed to
investigate the nature of the Van Allen belts, culminating in the repeated
traversal of the Southern Atlantic Magnetic Anomaly (an intense, low-hanging
patch of Van Allen belt) by the Gemini 10 astronauts. warning: alleged by
NASA
#15
"The 'Lunar Rover' vehicle could not have been transported to the Moon
inside the LM, even in a folded state. There is simply nowhere near enough
room. This, in turn, means that James Irwin was not always a -Christian"
The folded Rover appears to be about 10 ft long, 6 ft wide and 4 ft high.
see http://www.nasm.si.edu/galleries/attm/la.a17.5.html which shows the
folded rover and the storage compartment. Warning: alleged by NASA
#16
"I believe that it is physically impossible to leave the LM through the exit
hatch, wearing a pressurized space_ suit and bulky backpack"
Why ? What's the size of the hatch, suit and backpack?
#17
"There is no way to cool the astronauts' space suits"
http://hightechscience.org/orlan_cooling_suit.htm
http://hightechscience.org/portable_cooling_unit.htm warning: alleged by
NASA
#18
"James Collier has clearly demonstrated that footage of the `Lunar Rover'
was taken on the World (see the video, "Was It Only A Paper Moon.")"
http://www.lunaranomalies.com/fake-moon.htm A defense of NASA, but by NASA
critics, not by NASA
#19
"Apparently an average domestic, programmable washing machine has more
memory than the Apollo on-board computers were claimed to have had"
How much memory does an average domestic, programmable washing machine have?
How much power did the Apollo on-board computers (alleged by NASA) have?
#20
"There was insufficient power available to transmit radio and television
broadcasts back to the World over such a distance"
How much power was needed? How much was allegedly available?
#21
"Edwin Aldrin, when asked the straightforward question, "What is it like to
walk on the Moon," has on several occasions broken down and left the room in
tears. Neil Armstrong, to my knowledge, has never discussed it."
Buzz Aldrin Interview: Scholastic students interviewed Buzz Aldrin, the
second man to walk on the moon, on November 17, 1998.
............
What did it feel like to walk on the moon? Is its surface different from
that of Earth?
The surface of the moon is like nothing here on Earth! It's totally lacking
any evidence of life. It has lots of fine, talcum-powderlike dust mixed with
a complete variety of pebbles, rocks, and boulders. Many pebbles, fewer
rocks, and even fewer boulders naturally make up its surface. The dust is a
very fine, overall dark gray. And with no air molecules to separate the
dust, it clings together like cement. If you examine it under a microscope,
you can see it's made up of tiny, solidified droplets of vaporized rock
resulting from extreme velocity impacts, like an asteroid from outer space
hitting the surface over millions of years.
Was being on the moon different than you expected it to be?
I expected the unexpected and went with an open mind. I think the visual
scene was described by my words on first landing ? "magnificent desolation."
Magnificent for the achievement of being there, and desolate for the eons of
lifelessness.
.........
In the 33 years since he became the first human to walk on the moon,
Armstrong has done nothing to capitalize on his fame and everything in his
power to diminish it. He has declined all but a handful of interview
requests. And, in those rare instances when he has agreed to be questioned,
his answers have been noteworthy for their blandness and lack of emotional
oomph.
Neil Armstrong Interview with Stephen Ambrose Featured in Quest Space
History Magazine
Reflecting on going to the moon, Mr. Armstrong said, "We were really very
privileged to live in that thin slice of history where we changed how man
looks at himself and what he might become and where he might go. So I'm very
thankful that we got to see that and be part of it."
And then there's Armstrong's modesty, a deep personality trait. The word
most used to describe Armstrong by those who have interviewed him is
"self-deprecating."
"Neil feels that all of the attention [on him] is misplaced," says Andrew
Chaikin, author of A Man on the Moon: The Voyages of the Apollo Astronauts
(Viking Penguin), who interviewed Armstrong for more than two hours in 1988
for his book.
"We focus on the guys who [walked on the moon] because it's the most
dramatic story," Chaikin says. "But the real legacy of Apollo is what those
400,000 people [working for and with NASA] accomplished over a decade."
For Armstrong, those workers are the true heroes.
............
Even if the claim is true, what does this all prove?
Pax Christi,
Robert
> -----Original Message-----
> From: geocentrism-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:geocentrism-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Dr. Neville Jones
> Sent: Thursday, February 10, 2005 8:20 PM
> To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [geocentrism] Feasibility
>
>
> I have updated a paper I wrote on the feasibility of the Apollo
> "landings." You may obtain it via
>
> www.midclyth.supanet.com
>
> on the home page, under "Moon landing feasibility." (NASA section.)
>
> In particular, please note figures 3 and 4, which some of you
> have asked for.
>
> Neville.
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun!
>
>
>
-- No attachments (even text) are allowed --
-- Type: image/jpeg
-- File: solarpr[1].jpg
Other related posts:
