Thnx ik houd wel van dat soort docu's!quote:Op vrijdag 10 maart 2017 18:41 schreef Lavenderr het volgende:
Video: de eerste kolonies rond een andere ster
Op dit moment is het al grensverleggend om kolonies op Mars te stichten. Deze video gaat over een nog veel gedurfder plan: de mensheid en ander aards leven verspreiden tot ver buiten het Zonnestelsel. Het plan begint met een kolonieschip van 2 kilometer lang dat met tien procent van de lichtsnelheid beweegt.
Hm,quote:Op zaterdag 11 maart 2017 18:31 schreef ATuin-hek het volgende:
Ik weet niet waar je dit vandaan hebt, maar dit alles valt prima uit te rekenen. Je kan bijvoorbeeld uitrekenen bij welke phase angle je moet vertrekken om bij de maan (of een planeet) uit te komen.
De raket duwt recht van onderen. Waarom zou het verbindende frame dan breken?
There is, acutally. Als je goed kijkt zie je dat het allemaal wat gladder/schoner was.
Uit een gasfles.
Dat het in dat zonlicht zat betekend niet automatisch dat het instantaan aan die temperatuur zat. De LM had ook weer zijn eigen temperature control.
Dat klopt, de vlam met de gebruikte brandstof is vrijwel kleurloos.
What gives you that idea? Dat kan allemaal prima.quote:Op zondag 12 maart 2017 10:23 schreef Heiwa het volgende:
2. Spacecrafts going to the Moon, Mars or asteroids. They are all fake! Propaganda. Just to impress stupid people. They cannot orbit anything. They have to start from Earth/LEO/EPO, stop and restart at target (Moon, Mars, asteroid) and return and stop back on Earth and it is not possible. You cannot carry the fuel (energy) with you to do it and ... you are lost anyway. You don't know where you are in 3D space during the trip/trajectory.
Geweldig, die vent denkt, net as flat earther Eric Dubay, dat kernbommen niet bestaanquote:
Hm, sorry. I meant ' It is 100% faked and done in a hollywood studio.quote:
The speed after trans-Earth injection was maybe 2 640 m/s. But in what directions? Everything is unclear. The Moon was at this time still orbiting around the Earth at 1 023 m/s speed, so one way or another the CSM had to reduce that tangential speed in Moon orbit to 0. It would appear they got away from behind or aft side the Moon into the radial course towards Earth, while the Moon continued its circular, orbital course around Earth.quote:
That is utter nonsense.quote:Op zondag 12 maart 2017 12:27 schreef Heiwa het volgende:
There is no atmosphere on the Moon to diffuse the light. Everything directly exposed to the Sun should be bright white = light reflected. And everything not directly exposed to the Sun should be pitch black = no light. All photos should be bright white/pitch black. But they aren't.
Can you provide the results of your experiment in a vaccuum chamber that proves both statements?quote:I confirm there is no atmosphere on the Moon. So there is no diffusion of light there. I also confirm you cannot take pictures on the Moon with a modified Hasselblad camera. It stops functioning, when in the -150°C cold shade and then being exposed to +150°C sunshine. It cracks up."
So your house is lit with torches and candles?quote:the only light source on the Moon is the Sun! Neil and Buzz didn't bring any torches or candles with them.
Since when produces a candle a bright light?quote:If you make a giant room and suck all the air out, how do you shine a bright light into it? A candle? It will not burn in vacuum. And how do you operate your camera in it? Are you all right? If not, consult a doctor!
So you don't know? Which proves again that your previous statement is bollocks.quote:light in vaccum - how does it behave, if not in vacuum?
Since you don't know how light behaves in a vacuum, you can't make that conclusion.quote:That the two Apollo 11 clowns were taking photos of themselves on the Moon is just a joke. The light was not correct. Their photos should be bitch black or bright white!
Hm, but there was no atmosphere to diffuse the light on the Moon. On the Moon there is only vacuum! Compare Earth where the light from the Sun must pass through 120 000 m of atmosphere full of atoms of all kind before hitting ground and sometimes with clouds in between. It is a big difference, i.e. the light conditions differ. IMO the Apollo 11 pictures were taken in atmosphere ... on Earth. But the photos show a gray surface. Gray surface of the Moon? Isn't it black? Or white? Or yellow? And Buzz used fill cards to light up the shady areas with Moon light 1969.quote:Op zondag 12 maart 2017 13:02 schreef Wantie het volgende:
That is utter nonsense.
Can you provide the results of your experiment in a vaccuum chamber that proves both statements?
Nope, you can't
So your house is lit with torches and candles?
Since when produces a candle a bright light?
How about a lamp?
You are aware that the early types of lamp were using a vacuum bulb?
So you don't know? Which proves again that your previous statement is bollocks.
Since you don't know how light behaves in a vacuum, you can't make that conclusion.
The problem with your argument is that you seem to believe that color and gray scales of surfaces are caused by diffusion in the atmosphere.quote:Op zondag 12 maart 2017 13:18 schreef Heiwa het volgende:
Hm, but there was no atmosphere to diffuse the light on the Moon. On the Moon there is only vacuum! Compare Earth where the light from the Sun must pass through 120 000 m of atmosphere full of atoms of all kind before hitting ground and sometimes with clouds in between. It is a big difference, i.e. the light conditions differ. IMO the Apollo 11 pictures were taken in atmosphere ... on Earth. But the photos show a gray surface. Gray surface of the Moon? Isn't it black? Or white? Or yellow? And Buzz used fill cards to light up the shady areas with Moon light 1969.
As far as I am concerned Buzz is an alcoholic that sees everything a bit hazy.
Which I explain at my popular website.
However, the main reason that Apollo 11 never visited the Moon is the fuel! It didn't have enough fuel to do the trip. Another reason is the re-entry and landing in Earth. It is impossible! satellites never return safety. They always burn up!
What is wrong with that? If the light from Sun is 100% reflected by anything on the Moon, it is WHITE. And if it is not reflected at all, it is BLACK. It happens in vacuum.quote:
The moon is white?quote:
yet you can't prove that that happens in a vacuum.quote:And if it is not reflected at all, it is BLACK. It happens in vacuum.
Sure, but color is not determined by the direction of light, its determined by the frequency of light rays.quote:On Earth with atmosphere diffusing the light in all directions
nope, its the same principlequote:, Color photo is a little different.
You tell me! I asked people at NAXA but got wrong numbers.quote:
No it's not. What they basically did was aim just ahead of the moon during TLI. They did this in such a way, that if they did nothing during the rest of the flight, the spacecraft would swing past the moon, be slowed down by it's gravitational attraction, and automatically return to earth. This is known as a free return trajectory.quote:Op zondag 12 maart 2017 12:04 schreef Heiwa het volgende:
The speed after trans-Earth injection was maybe 2 640 m/s. But in what directions? Everything is unclear. The Moon was at this time still orbiting around the Earth at 1 023 m/s speed, so one way or another the CSM had to reduce that tangential speed in Moon orbit to 0. It would appear they got away from behind or aft side the Moon into the radial course towards Earth, while the Moon continued its circular, orbital course around Earth.
Who knows? Evidently the CSM had to reduce the orbital/circular speed orbiting Earth at Moon altitude to 0 and just get a radial speed away from Moon towards location X in space and location B in orbit around Earth.
No it's not. Astronauts could actually use a sextant to navigate in space, using the stars, sun and fixed points on earth for references. They also had an inertial navigation system on board, and could navigate by means of multiple beamed radio waves from earth. That you don't understand how this is done, does not mean it is impossible to do.quote:It is quite complicated to navigate in space, when the islands or moons are moving all the time, and frankly speaking I do not understand how it is done in detail. Only 3D velocity records using Sun (fixed) as base and none are available.
I sail ships, and always know my location with radar, triangulation and sextant. Also, ships sail on a 2D water surface, space craft is in 3D space! How the Apollo space craft knew its location in 3D space is unknown!
Ever fired a weapon at a moving target, either in real life or in a video game? Same thing, aim ahead.quote:The distance travelled during the 150 seconds trans-Earth injection - you have to get out of orbit around the Moon at exactly the right moment and location A and into a radial trajectory towards location X and then Earth overcoming Moon gravity force - was only 292 500 meter (assuming Moon didn't move but during 150 seconds the Moon evidently displaced 153 450 meters).
You probably were at same altitude 115 000 m during the maneuver, but who knows and cares? During this time the Moon and Apollo 11 moved 365 722 meter sideways which you had to consider one way or another. If you had directed your rocket engine in the wrong direction, you would not have been in orbit around the Moon but going astray or crashed. Note that Apollo 11 has no fuel reserves or redundancy. One error and you are finished!
They had a computer to do that for them.quote:The conversation of the asstroholes during the 6 minutes lunar orbit insertion, LOI, burn between 75 hrs 50 minutes and 75 hrs 56 minutes of the flight does not reveal anything dramatic ... except that they can see the Moon while braking backwards with the LM at the end of the spacecraft.
How was it possible? Were the three (crazy?) assholes aboard piloting the spacecraft manually with compass/chart pushing the brake button or pedal in the process looking out through the window like on an airplane? How did they know what was up/down/right/left and the directions of velocity and the force.
Why on earth would you think any substance has to reflect either 100% or 0% in a vacuum? The surface of the moon has variations in albedo, texture etc.quote:Op zondag 12 maart 2017 13:22 schreef Heiwa het volgende:
What is wrong with that? If the light from Sun is 100% reflected by anything on the Moon, it is WHITE. And if it is not reflected at all, it is BLACK. It happens in vacuum.
On Earth with atmosphere diffusing the light in all directions, there are all shades between WHITE and BLACK on photos taken, but not on the Moon, where there is vacuum.
Camera settings and film sensitivity doesn't matter at all. Color photo is a little different.
You sound like a shill paid for supporting some cheap US astronuts fooling around 1969+. Why don't you grow up?
Funny, when I look at the moon or take a picture I see something very different:quote:
That is because that light has been diffused by Earth's atmosphere.quote:
And why wouldn't it be possible? The chemical reactions work fine in space, and the cassettes were radiation shielded.quote:Hm,
In order to take pictures on the Moon with a conventional camera, you must bring the camera to the Moon, take pictures with it, and then bring the camera back to Earth, open the camera, take out the film and develop it, etc. I think I explain quite well at my web site, why it is not possible.
I think you just didn't understand the explanation Which is perfectly fine, as long as you remain open to information, and don't just dismiss it as fake because it's beyond your current level of comprehension.quote:Start to read about Rocket science, Fundamentals of spaceflight and Human (!) spaceflight and the courses I recommend at the Royal Institute of Technology, KTH, Stockholm, Sweden. Ask the teachers there for assistance. I provide the telephone numbers.
The teachers failed completely to establish a simple trajectory of a spacecraft leaving Earth to land on the Moon and to return again to Earth and land there.
One teacher said he had flown up to the ISS several times, done some EVAs there and then returned and landed on solid Earth ground again but asked for details ... nothing.
I have been told he is an actor just playing his role in the show.
What do you think?
Sure they do. It's called a rocket engine. Once you start hitting the atmosphere, drag does the rest.quote:Arianespace puts satellites in high speed high altitude orbits around Earth ... and that is all they can do. It is a one way trip. You cannot stop in or leave orbit and re-enter and land on Earth again.
The satellite has no brakes.
Sure you do. You can calculate the required phase angles, delta-v needed for the burn, how much fuel that will use etc etc. In a way it is easier in space, because once you're going, you just keep going.quote:It is not possible for a satellite to leave orbit around Earth to fly off to another heavenly body like the Moon or a planet and land there. You don't know how to apply the extra forces required and you do not have the fuel required for it. You will get lost at once.
Again, sure they do. I keep saying this, because there are answers to all these problems you see.quote:It is of course the famous n-body problem with no solution but experts say it is easy anyway.
And if they fly away in the wrong direction, they say it is easy just to stop and change course. But not how to do it. How do you turn 90° in space? Turn a wheel? Fire a rocket? NASA doesn't know how to turn a spacecraft 90° in space!