|
Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today. |
11th May 2013, 10:23 AM | #361 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 370
|
Gravitational acceleration affects all parts of the spacecraft equally. As far as an object in freefall and all its components are concerned, there's no acceleration. Accelerometers won't tell you anything about your orbit, no matter how you integrate their output. They only tell you about changes to your orbit.
|
11th May 2013, 10:55 AM | #362 |
Scholar
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 69
|
|
11th May 2013, 11:42 AM | #363 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,830
|
|
__________________
Facts are simple and facts are straight, facts are lazy and facts are late, facts don't come with points of view, facts don't do what I want them to. ************************** Apollo Hoax Debunked |
|
11th May 2013, 12:13 PM | #364 |
Muse
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Debunking Linkbarf
Posts: 761
|
|
__________________
The less they know the more they blow. |
|
11th May 2013, 12:20 PM | #365 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 47,040
|
|
11th May 2013, 01:41 PM | #366 |
Guest
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 12,673
|
1) are these lick-and-stick or peel-and-stick stamps?
2) did you control for temperature and humidity? 3) Is this adhesive softening a permanent change or does the adhesive firm up again over time? 4) Which stamps do you think replicate the exposure of stamps inside a container inside the C/SM, the ones exposed to direct sunshine or the ones left in the dark? |
11th May 2013, 02:45 PM | #367 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 25,301
|
Hello Patrick
The only way that radiation can have a permanent effect on something is if the something is DESIGNED that way. For example a film emulsion is permanently affected by exposure to light and heat. You can only see that effect when the film is developed. Experiment: 1. Take four brand new rolls of colour film from the same four pack. Number them 1 to 4 2. Put No. 1 and No. 2 the oven at 150°C for one hour. 3. Take out the two film rolls from the oven and allow them to cool down to room temperature. 4. Open No 1 and No 3 and examine the film emulsion side (the inside of the film roll). They will look identical. You will not see any noticeable difference 5. Develop No 2 and No 4. You will immediately see the difference. The film emulsion of No. 2 (oven baked) will be much darker and will have a dark olive-green tinge. This is because film emulsion is DESIGNED to be affected by visible light, and a side effect of this is that it is also sensitive to heat, and x-ray radiation (if you have ever had a film ruined by an airport bomb-detecting x-ray machine, you will know this). However, stamp gum is not designed to react to heat, light or radiation, (its designed to react to being made wet, like being licked) so there will be no permanent effect if you expose it to radiation. |
__________________
If you're not a scientist but you think you've destroyed the foundation of a vast scientific edifice with 10 minutes of Googling, you might want to consider the possibility that you're wrong. Its TRE45ON season... convict the F45CIST!! |
|
11th May 2013, 02:47 PM | #368 |
Devilish Dictionarian
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: An elusive house at Bachelors Grove Cemetery
Posts: 20,071
|
|
__________________
"You must not let your need to be right be more important than your need to find out what's true." - Ray Dalio, Principles |
|
11th May 2013, 02:55 PM | #369 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 25,301
|
You might be getting confused with the often made reference to objects in orbit "always falling".
When a spacecraft is in Earth orbit, the occupants feel "zero G". This is not because the spacecraft is in space "per se" its because it is "always falling" toward the Earth with precisely enough forward velocity (about 8km/sec) to keep it falling towards a surface that is curving away from it, effectively, the Earth's surface is falling away at the same rate that the spacecraft is falling towards it. Here's a snip from a web page that explains orbits quite well "An object's momentum and the force of gravity have to be balanced for an orbit to happen. If the forward momentum of one object is too great, it will speed past and not enter into orbit. If momentum is too small, the object will be pulled down and crash. When these forces are balanced, the object is always falling toward the planet, but because it's moving sideways fast enough, it never hits the planet. Orbital velocity is the speed needed to stay in orbit. At an altitude of 150 miles (242 kilometers) above Earth, orbital velocity is about 17,000 miles per hour. Satellites that have higher orbits have slower orbital velocities." http://www.nasa.gov/audience/forstud...-orbit-58.html |
__________________
If you're not a scientist but you think you've destroyed the foundation of a vast scientific edifice with 10 minutes of Googling, you might want to consider the possibility that you're wrong. Its TRE45ON season... convict the F45CIST!! |
|
11th May 2013, 02:55 PM | #370 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 370
|
This is nothing new or profound. A likely easier way would be to measure the apparent acceleration at the top and bottom of the box, or the tension in a vertical rod or distance between two spheres free-falling within the box. But this is all irrelevant: converging acceleration vectors and tidal forces are a result of the mass distribution of planets, not due to some aspect of gravitational acceleration or violation of the equivalence principle.
|
11th May 2013, 04:02 PM | #371 |
Scholar
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 69
|
Thanks for the response.
I follow what you are saying but I think it's possible I am getting over pedantic over the definition of acceleration that I learned at school (many years ago!). Acceleration and Vectors were constantly drilled into us during physics classes and followed up by integration/differentiation in what my mates joyously called sums lessons (Maths A level). |
11th May 2013, 04:17 PM | #372 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 1,696
|
Yeah. Technically, from the reference frame of the body being orbited, the accelerometers are being accelerated - but relative to the ship's own reference frame, they are not. And since their reference frame is the same as the ship's, they will measure zero acceleration even though, from the frame of reference of an observer, they are being accelerated around in an orbit.
|
11th May 2013, 04:44 PM | #373 |
Muse
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 819
|
Ok. So your stamp* has been exposed to visible light, UV and infrared energy, and maybe the odd cosmic ray. Of any changes observed in the stamp, which changes do you attribute to each type of EM radiation? And how do you come to those conclusions? Is the type, amount and duration of exposure equivalent to what would be experienced on an Apollo mission? How do you reach those conclusions? Do you have a stamp or stamps from Apollo 15 to compare?
* Do you really plan to have a sample size of one? |
__________________
"You're likely to be the next one to get sucked up in a spaceship and butt-diddled and dropped off at the Seven Eleven." mayday "If you want to see what baby oil does to lactating breasts pm me your email." mayday |
|
11th May 2013, 06:10 PM | #374 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 11,097
|
|
11th May 2013, 06:28 PM | #375 |
Safely Ignored
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 16,392
|
If the box were large enough you might build a Foucault pendulum inside and demonstrate that it revolves over time.
Of course that doesn't demonstrate any failing in the equivalence between remaining still in a gravitational field or accelerating. It merely shows that seeming to remain still is deceptive when we are sitting on the surface of a revolving planet. |
11th May 2013, 09:15 PM | #376 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 11,097
|
You could add the slow changes in motion to the accelerating box and make the Foucault pendulum behave the same way as a box on the surface of a rotating planet.
|
13th May 2013, 09:03 AM | #377 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: The great American West
Posts: 24,911
|
|
13th May 2013, 10:24 AM | #378 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: The great American West
Posts: 24,911
|
The weather was nice, so I took the weekend off to be out in the desert before it really and truly becomes a desert. Sorry if this is a repeat of the pending arguments our newcomer has posed.
It is suspicious that Neil Armstrong photographed before taking contingency sample The allegation is that because the lunar surface checklist called for Armstrong to obtain the contingency sample before retrieving the camera and taking pictures, and Armstrong did these steps out of order and never gave an accounting for it, it is a suspicious portion of the Apollo record. The premise given later is that the checklist and astronaut drills should have been considered involiable or at least second-nature, hence Armstrong's behavior is suspicious. That NASA never called him to account for that behavior is allegedly further suspicious. The premise that checklists and training drills were sacrosanct fails logically because it is a begged question. It fails factually because information was provided that NASA considered no such thing. In fact, information was provided that NASA's belief was actually to the contrary. Hence there is nothing suspicious about Armstrong going "off script." The premise that Armstrong never accounted for his behavior is factually false. Citations to the appropriate debriefing were provided. This claim seems to be abandoned without being withdrawn or conceded. There exists a trove of documents to be declassified and made available in 2026, and they will shed unfavorable light on Apollo's authenticity The allegation is that Lyndon Johnson classified such documents, that they will be declassified in the year given, and that they relate at least in part to Apollo. None of these premises was substantiated by any form of evidence. They remain speculation. The proponent seems to recognize this and although he characterizes his belief as speculation, he does return to that statement of belief quite often. If it is to be considered a premise to or background for some other claim, it must be substantiated in all three elements (existence, subject matter, and release date). Function of Apollo guidance system The proponent made specific claims about how Apollo's guidance system worked. Specifically the claim was that it updated the state vector by integrating acceleration to arrive at velocity, the integrating velocity to arrive at position. A correction was given, specifically that due to the design of the Apollo guidance platform, acceleration during powered flight was reckoned outside the computer and presented to the software as velocity. The proponent pressed the issue and changed the argument to be allegedly one of how those quantities relate abstractly in Newtonian physics. This is a correct assessment of Newtonian physics, but it is still incorrect to imply that the AGC implements the abstract model verbatim. In fact this is a common mistake made by people who try to understand production hardware based on cursory examination of the underlying basic principles. The relevance of this claim to Apollo would seem to be that the prevailing discussion of Apollo here at JREF recently has emphasized the guidance system as a fertile ground for claims that it could not or did not work. The propenent appears to be continuing to ignore his original claim in favor of trying to foist the straw man as "indisputable fact" that his critics must respect. We await commentary on the original claim. Effect of "radiation" on Apollo 15 first-edition covers It was proposed that the stamps Apollo 15 exposed to the space environment should, if authentic, exhibit observable properties. The proponent was asked several questions regarding this methodology, during which questioning he either ignored the questions, answered that he did not know how it work, or made answers that got wrong some basic scientific facts such as the nature of the radiation allegedly involved, its strength and other physical properties, and its expected or likely effect. The proponent offered an experiment he said would validate the hypothesis, but refused to explain exactly how. He conducted the experiment anyway and reported the results, but has not explained how this constitutes any sort of valid scientific methodology to vet the method he propose to use to test the Apollo 15 stamps for authenticity. Nor does he explain how or why he would have access to those specimens. This claim seems to be a going concern, but the proponent seem uninterested in critics' concerns and questions. |
10th June 2013, 07:49 AM | #379 | ||
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 2,201
|
Apollo "hoax" discussion Part II
No worries, of course....even your "repeats" are educational.
<SNIP>
|
||
12th August 2013, 08:51 AM | #380 |
Thinker
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 142
|
You've got it from me. We all know the "shining code", where a lot of hints are shown, that Stanley Kubrick was involved. I found a new sublingual message in the scene, where Wendy discovered, that Jack typed nothing else than "All work and no play, makes Jack a dull boy". It begins at 1 min 03 sec and ends at 1 min 48 sec http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jeOevu4zC5o Do you see it ? regards Hans |
__________________
Do not trust your brain |
|
12th August 2013, 10:00 AM | #381 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: The great American West
Posts: 24,911
|
No. I don't know you.
Quote:
As with the Bible Code, the da Vinci Code, or any other such fanciful "code" that assigns unsupported meaning to contrived coincidences, the Shining Code is merely a tacked-on attempt to invent something for one's own attention and profit.
Quote:
|
12th August 2013, 10:22 AM | #382 |
Thinker
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 142
|
I can read the messages from Kubrick and I checked what he pointed out :
1.) Something is wrong on the set. 2.) The truth is in the mirror. 3.) See Apollo 12 And there is a lot which is wrong in the set and the pics in the golden surfaces of the visors show the truth. In the movie 2001 he checked out, how to make a projection at the glas of astronaut bowmans helmet. But it does not work really good. Did he use the frontprojection system to send pictures at the visors? I think it must be possible. Hans |
__________________
Do not trust your brain |
|
12th August 2013, 11:16 AM | #383 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: The great American West
Posts: 24,911
|
Originally Posted by quote
Quote:
|
12th August 2013, 11:17 AM | #384 |
Man of a Thousand Memes
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 6,474
|
I've seen the Bible/da Vinci/Shining Code approach by conspiracy theorists a lot more recently and it really lends credence to the belief that they are severely out of touch with reality and unable to differentiate between fact and fiction.
While I don't believe this approach is by any means recent, it makes me stop and think. Who would be stupid enough to pull off the perfect conspiracy and remove all evidence of it and then turn around and intentionally leave encoded clues of it for all to see? Sounds so stupid, don't you agree? |
__________________
"There is no special treatment for guns." ~WildCat, confirmed gun owner. |
|
12th August 2013, 02:46 PM | #385 |
Philosopher
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 9,071
|
|
12th August 2013, 08:18 PM | #386 |
Man of a Thousand Memes
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 6,474
|
Is there a particular reason why the quoted posts got moved from a thread about when lunar landing hoaxes got started to here?
|
__________________
"There is no special treatment for guns." ~WildCat, confirmed gun owner. |
|
12th August 2013, 11:24 PM | #387 |
Thinker
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 142
|
Something moved me here. A wormhole ? As much as I understand is nobody able to see what is pointed out in the clip. "I found a new sublingual message in the scene, where Wendy discovered, that Jack typed nothing else than "All work and no play, makes Jack a dull boy". It begins at 1 min 03 sec and ends at 1 min 48 sec http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jeOevu4zC5o Do you see it ?" |
__________________
Do not trust your brain |
|
12th August 2013, 11:57 PM | #388 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 8,607
|
|
__________________
@tomhodden Never look up an E-book because this signature line told you. Especially not Dead Lament (ASIN: B00JEN1MWY). Or A Little Trouble (ASIN: B00GQFZZQW). |
|
13th August 2013, 12:36 AM | #389 |
Thinker
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 142
|
|
__________________
Do not trust your brain |
|
13th August 2013, 01:54 AM | #390 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 8,607
|
Oh.
So you admitted the posts were moved by a "wormhole" then continued to talk about you theories in a thread that is about the murder of JFK, knowing it was off topic? OK. My mistake. I will report your posts as being off topic and hopefully a mod will put them where they belong. (AAH hopefully). |
__________________
@tomhodden Never look up an E-book because this signature line told you. Especially not Dead Lament (ASIN: B00JEN1MWY). Or A Little Trouble (ASIN: B00GQFZZQW). |
|
13th August 2013, 03:07 AM | #391 |
Thinker
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 142
|
Yes, thank you for your help. In the meantime, I am waiting here.
I see, that you'v got headashes when looking at that clip I pointed out. Did you read something about "artificial intuition" since we had discussed it ? When I saw the clip, I've got the idea, that this part of the movie is the best to store a message. But only "All work and no play..." could be read hundredwise and nothing else. there are lots of fails in typing, but this leads to nothing. And then I saw it. After all, I must say, that Kubrick knows a lot about that stuff. Regards Hans |
__________________
Do not trust your brain |
|
13th August 2013, 03:14 AM | #392 |
Thinker
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 142
|
Somebody thought that this thread is the right one. JFK started the moon project. After he was murded, the moon project was obvisiouly murded too. I never thought about a connection like this. So thank you to the unknown person or software, who casted me to this beach. regards Hans |
__________________
Do not trust your brain |
|
13th August 2013, 03:55 AM | #393 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Republic of Ireland
Posts: 23,499
|
What on earth is moon hoax nonsense doing in a JFK assassination thread?
|
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive? ...love and buttercakes... |
|
13th August 2013, 03:59 AM | #394 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 8,607
|
|
__________________
@tomhodden Never look up an E-book because this signature line told you. Especially not Dead Lament (ASIN: B00JEN1MWY). Or A Little Trouble (ASIN: B00GQFZZQW). |
|
13th August 2013, 05:36 AM | #395 |
Thinker
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 142
|
Now you do not know what to do, isn't it. That's a real funny situation. I came here on a legal way. I was moved by the mods or by the software into that topic. There is no reason to hurt me. Meanwhile, try the moon stuff. It is as interesting as the JFK assassination. regards Hans |
__________________
Do not trust your brain |
|
13th August 2013, 09:03 AM | #396 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 6,140
|
|
__________________
So I've started a blog about my writing. Check it out at: http://fourth-planet-problem.blogspot.com/ And my first book is on Amazon: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B077W322FX |
|
13th August 2013, 11:48 AM | #397 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: The great American West
Posts: 24,911
|
|
13th August 2013, 12:08 PM | #398 |
Thinker
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 142
|
A convincing arrival was not possible because I am landed here without knowing how and why. I have a tiny discovery in the case and wanted to hear your opinion. How I judge you, you have already viewed the video clip and unfortunately can not see anything, right? So, I will not bother you longer, I'll move on. The JFK video clip is certainly interesting, maybe I'll study it later. stay in touch Hans |
__________________
Do not trust your brain |
|
13th August 2013, 12:13 PM | #399 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 1,696
|
|
13th August 2013, 05:52 PM | #400 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: N.Cal/S.Or
Posts: 9,580
|
|
__________________
---------------------- Anything goes in the Goblin hut... anything. "Suggesting spurious explanations isn't relevant to my work." -- WTC Dust. "Both cannot be simultaneously true, and so one may conclude neither is true, and if neither is true, then Apollo is fraudulent." -- Patrick1000. |
|
Thread Tools | |
|
|