As far as I recall, Clavius state that Mauldin refers to 2 metre lead shielding being required for interstellar travel in his book, Prospects for Interstellar Travel. Is this what you're referring to? In which case, do you have a source that shows he was actually referring to traveling to the moon and back, rather than interstellar travel? (I don't have a copy of his book, but given the title I think it's safe to assume that he is indeed talking about interstellar travel, and the 2 reviews of the book seem to back that up).



I was under the impression that Jodrell Bank tracked Apollo 11 with their smaller 50 foot dish (the main dish was being used to track Luna 15)?

Source


Source


Is Percy claiming this didn't happen? If so, what is his claim, and what evidence does he have to back it up?

Nasa used jodrell bank to track russias sputnik 1, as they did not have the correct equipment at that time.
HERE

Look at slides 24, 30 and 36 from my link. In each case the LM is a bright spot casting a shadow to the left. The rover tracks can be picked out by comparing the photo with the traverse map in slide 37.

Have you any evidence for a "picture of a box full of matches"? The best I've seen claimed for military reconnaissance satellites is about 0.15 m. There are civil satellites that can manage 0.5 m.

None of the recent probes have been designed to picture Apollo equipment. They are science missions with the cameras there to get maps of the whole lunar surface. Apollo only took high-resolution pictures of the areas under its ground tracks, which were mostly of the near-equatorial regions. Because of the lighting requirements for landing, much the same hemisphere was in darkness for all the Apollo missions. The new missions are in polar orbits and will be there long enough to map the whole surface in sunlight.

It may seem strange to you, but the scientific benefit of viewing Apollo equipment is negligible, given that much better pictures of all the sites taken from the surface are available. The Apollo hoax theory is not something that anyone with scientific training accepts.

Hinode's resolution is better than the Kaguya camera because the entire satellite has the single mission of picturing the sun and carries a large telescope for this purpose. Kaguya carries a much broader range of scientific instruments, so has to carry a smaller camera to make room for the other instruments.

Well, we can see you have been to the site. If you would rather not take the opportunity to call out to his face the person you have been ragging on these past few posts, I guess that's your business.

I'd like to take the opportunity to remind everyone that problems with posters from other sites should be taken up on the sites in question, not here on Unexplained Mysteries.

My apologies to AtomicDog for the interruption.

Scientists are the most curious people in the world.Observing the apollo wreckage may not have scientific value,but I am pretty sure that scientits,you and me are very, very curious to see the untouched scenario of the "giant leap of mankind" in the last century, after 40 years.
I am sorry friend,but your theory about not carrying a decent high resolution camera or telescope in order to have more room for other "important" instruments is absolutely pathetic.Remember that the kaguya´s most important task is to send HD VIDEOS AND PICTURES of the moon surface.

That's not what it's owners claim, note where "surface topography" comes in the list:


http://www.selene.jaxa.jp/index_e.htm
As for the HDTV being for science, it's more a technological test and PR tool:

You should have included the rest of the phrase from where you got the description of the mission." "KAGUYA" consists of a main orbiting satellite at about 100km altitude and two small satellites (Relay Satellite and VRAD Satellite) in polar orbit. The orbiters will carry instruments for scientific investigation of the Moon, on the Moon, and from the Moon." ( http://www.selene.jaxa.jp/index_e.htm ) .If the main satellite is responsible to capture the images from the moon,and if the other 2 satelittes will make the required lunar experiments,we don´t have the lack of room that you defend in your theory.

What are you expecting? 10 metres per pixel is quite a high resolution in terms of the moon.

Dunno, cheese.
I'd have to investigate that.
I think you could do that, though.

I never cared much.
I knew who was tracking the flight, and providing the data and audio and video, and that was all I cared about at the time.

It wasn't a secret.

I should say that you're correct about the curiosity of the vast majority of scientists. That's why they're scientists.
However, they are also rational, disciplined people who understand what's important to be curious about.

No serious sceintists cares about imaging Apollo lunar landing sites with any clarity from lunar orbit, or telescopically, because they already know that we have about 6000 high quality photographs of the lunar surface, from the lunar surface, taken by men who were standing on the lunar surface.

Asking for funding to image Apollo sites from orbit (which would be one hell of a photographic accomplishment) would meet with laughter...and perhaps a loss of employment for the petitioner, because the idea is ludicrous beyond belief.

It is a useless project. Science doesn't go for satisfying some sentimental curiosity about what amount to historical sites, and science does not need any proof about something that is a known fact. Science is about discovering the unknown. Apollo is known...in equisite detail. We don't need pictures of the landing sites from orbit (if such a thing could actually be done with any real clarity at all, which is highly doubtful).


...HBs want to see the flags (which most certainly aren't there anymore in any intelligible form), the LM descent stages, LRVS, junk bags, PLSS's and all that. The idea is astoundingly un-real.

Spacecraft are scientific instruments. They are also expensive, and designed to maximize the scientific potential. Imaging Apollo lunar surface exploration sites has no scientific value. Don't expect any real scientific organization to waste its money trying to do that which is pointless.

People get fired for even suggesting such waste.

As has been said, several ideas have been put forth. It's certainly not wind, because the film itself rather conclusively proves that this was filmed in a vacuum.

I'd suggest going back in this thread until around November 5-10. There you will find the detailed discussions regarding this thing.


My idea was this...





A simple and miniscule settling of the flag pole along it's yaw axis, causing the slight motion.
It's already been thoroughly fleshed out. I'd suggest you go back a month and check it all out.

Yea...

One wonders what we need anything for when we have things like this:

(AS17-134-20377)



..taken sometime in the early evening hours (EST) of 11 December 1972 in a magical place called Taurus Littrow on the surface of the Moon...with a really good camera!

Does anyone think we could actually get close to this with some orbital imaging?
Why would we need any orbital imaging when we have this?
Is there something about the AS-17 landing site that we could discover visually from lunar orbit, that we can't see here...taken from an altitude of perhaps 4 1/2 feet?

Agreed wholeheartedly

Ah! Another MSTie! Welcome, Torgo! I'll get out another pack of hamdingers!

""As far as I recall, Clavius state that Mauldin refers to 2 metre lead shielding being required for interstellar travel in his book, Prospects for Interstellar Travel. Is this what you're referring to? In which case, do you have a source that shows he was actually referring to traveling to the moon and back, rather than interstellar travel? (I don't have a copy of his book, but given the title I think it's safe to assume that he is indeed talking about interstellar travel, and the 2 reviews of the book seem to back that up).""

Well its never safe to assume anything if you pick up your info at Apollohoax and Moon Base Clavius from somebody with such an obvious agenda as Jay Windley. Yes I have a source.

"Solar (or star) flares of protons, an occasional and severe hazard on the way out of and into planetary systems, can give hundreds to thousands of rem over a few hours ***at the distance of the earth.*** Such doses are fatal and millions of times greater than the permitted dose"

"Cosmic particles are dangerous, ***come from all sides,*** ***and require at least 2 meters of solid shielding all around living organisms***. ***Earth's atmosphere provides the equivalent of 10 meters of shielding***."

"By comparison, solar flares can deliver GeV protons in the same energy range as most cosmic particles but at much higher intensities. ***Increase of energy accounts for most of the increased radiation danger because GeV protons or their products will penetrate several meters of material.***"

- John H. Mauldin, p226 Prospects For Interstellar Travel



""I was under the impression that Jodrell Bank tracked Apollo 11 with their smaller 50 foot dish (the main dish was being used to track Luna 15)? ""


TRACKING and LISTENING IN to a radio transmission allegedly from a spacecraft on a journey to the Moon are NOT the same thing. As I've already tried to make clear several times.


""Is Percy claiming this didn't happen? If so, what is his claim, and what evidence does he have to back it up?""

Percy reported the facts as they happened. Jodrell Bank TRACKED LUNA 15 with the 250 foot dish NO DOUBT requested by and paid for by the Russians because they COULDN'T THEMSELVES.


You now seem to be the star of a video from Mr White along with another member here.

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=EJuuraAMAUs

James Van Allen seems to have conveniently changed his opinion on those belts because he originally assumed only a launch from the poles would have been safe because of what he discovered in 1958.

"Explorer I ran into a belt of intense radiation at 600 miles. The satellite carries a Geiger tube to count cosmic rays. **At 684 miles the tubes registered 140 counts per second.** ***The Geiger tubes had been knocked out by radiation too intense for them to handle***. *The satellites passed through radiation 35,000 counts per second. The belt may extend outward 8,000 miles.* ***Lead shielding would reduce the dose to a supportable level***." Time Magazine May 12, 1958

"Explorer 3 completely confirmed the results obtained by its predecessor, and it also confirmed Van Allens theory. *Up to a height of 300 miles there was an gradual increase in the number of charged particles*. **Then up to 600 miles there was a more rapid increase**. ***Above 600 miles the counters became jammed.***"

**Van Allen estimated that the actual particle numbers might be anything up to 35,000 per second**, which was far too high to be dealt with by any self-respecting Geiger counter."

Space- Patrick Moore 1972

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=oZ65d30kYME

" Another effect of cosmic particles is permanent damage to retina and neural cells which do not replace themselves. At the rate astro-nots saw flashes in their eyes in unshielded spacecraft they could lose most vision and brain function in a few years"

John H.Mauldin Prospects For Interstellar Travel *

I think its safe to assume Mauldin MUST? be referring to Interstellar travel here because NASA unfortunately weren't very forthcoming exactly where Apollo 17 carried out this expt.

http://lis.arc.nasa.gov/lis/Experiment_App/A17_5.html

SUPRISED?

Was it LEO? Van Allen Belts? Orbiting the Moon?

Your guess is as good as Alan Beans!


*John H Mauldin holds a be bachelor's in engineering, a masters in Physics, a Ph.D., gave lectures at several universities, and during his time at NASA worked on their Voyager program and extensively studied the sun.

Read the Kaguya website again. One of the two small satellites is purely a communications relay, the other has a radio link to map the moon's gravity in conjunction with the main satellite. All other experiments are in the main satellite.

The Russians had been tracking their own moon missions since 1959 and planetary missions since 1961, why would they need Jodrell Bank? Jodrell Bank were not popular with the Russians after they released pictures received from Luna 9 on the moon in 1966 before the Russians themselves did.

So why worry about a few days?

"The Russians had been tracking their own moon missions since 1959 and planetary missions since 1961, why would they need Jodrell Bank? Jodrell Bank were not popular with the Russians after they released pictures received from Luna 9 on the moon in 1966 before the Russians themselves did."


Well somebody requested and PAID Jodrell Bank to track Luna 15 on the 250 ft dish because Jodrell Bank is not a charitable organisation as a member has already pointed out in this thread!

""So why worry about a few days?""

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=oZ65d30kYME

http://lis.arc.nasa.gov/lis/Experiment_App/A17_5.html

Was it LEO? Van Allen Belts? Orbiting the Moon?

The mice were examined post-mission, so their exposure was to all phases of the flight. The astronauts' reports of flashes were generally from parts of the flight when they were trying to sleep, simply because the flashes were more obvious with the eyes shut.

Jodrell Bank is an academic institution funded from the UK government science council with considerable autonomy in choosing what to observe. It also has a long history of co-operating with the USA in tracking deep-space missions, which certainly involved the use of US receiving equipment and possibly also funding. I very much doubt if they ever received funds from the Russians. This was the Cold War, the Russians were generally secretive about their space missions and the West was interested in getting independant verification of Russian activities.

FACT- Cosmic radiation flashes are seen in LEO by STS Astronauts and CONFIRMED by expert on the Van Allen belts Alan Bean
FACT- NO OTHER human being has ever claimed to have been sent through the Van Allen belts apart from Moon bound Astronauts. Seeing as Van Allen had already discovered this-

"Explorer I ran into a belt of intense radiation at 600 miles. The satellite carries a Geiger tube to count cosmic rays. **At 684 miles the tubes registered 140 counts per second.** ***The Geiger tubes had been knocked out by radiation too intense for them to handle***. *The satellites passed through radiation 35,000 counts per second. The belt may extend outward 8,000 miles.* ***Lead shielding would reduce the dose to a supportable level***." Time Magazine May 12, 1958

"Explorer 3 completely confirmed the results obtained by its predecessor, and it also confirmed Van Allens theory. *Up to a height of 300 miles there was an gradual increase in the number of charged particles*. **Then up to 600 miles there was a more rapid increase**. ***Above 600 miles the counters became jammed.***"

**Van Allen estimated that the actual particle numbers might be anything up to 35,000 per second**, which was far too high to be dealt with by any self-respecting Geiger counter."

Space- Patrick Moore 1972

Where is the corresponding data relating to these findings in either the dosimeter radiation readings * for each Apollo mission or that experiment carried out by Apollo 17?

* i.e. a gradual then RAPID increase up to 600 miles out and then a OFF THE SCALE count!

CAN YOU PROVIDE SOME EVIDENCE THAT THEY WEREN'T IN FACT IN LEO WHEN IT WAS CLAIMED THEY TRAVELLED THROUGH THE BELTS AND ON TO THE MOON?

"Jodrell Bank is an academic institution funded from the UK government science council with considerable autonomy in choosing what to observe. It also has a long history of co-operating with the USA in tracking deep-space missions, which certainly involved the use of US receiving equipment and possibly also funding. I very much doubt if they ever received funds from the Russians. This was the Cold War, the Russians were generally secretive about their space missions and the West was interested in getting independant verification of Russian activities."

BLAH,BLAH,BLAH, Cold War, BLAH,BLAH,BLAH.

Please provide a list of ALL radio telescopes that had the capability to track Apollo spacecraft in 1969 APART from those OWNED AND OPERATED by NASA.

Please provide evidence of PAYMENT to Jodrell Bank for tracking Luna 15 other than your suppositions.

Complete lack of observations in LEO - Apollo would have been a bright and obvious satellite.

Here's an amateur account of tracking and listening in on Apollo 17 to the moon:
http://www.svengrahn.pp.se/trackind/Apollo17/APOLLO17.htm

Here's a Russian account of tracking and getting TV from Apollo missions (use a translator if you don't read Russian):
http://www.novosti-kosmonavtiki.ru/content...rs/271/03.shtml

Here's some astronomers' accounts of tracking Apollo:
http://www.astr.ua.edu/keel/space/apollo.html

The amateur tracker linked in the post above used a 9 m antenna, this is small by radio astronomy standards.

The two Australian telescopes that tracked Apollo, Honeysuckle Creek and Parkes, were Australian operated.

The Russian telescope linked in the post above was Russian operated.

I did not say that Jodrell Bank definitely received outside funding for Luna 15. They could have used their normal funds.

The early Explorer counters went off the scale, later instruments were designed to measure higher levels and did not saturate. The maximum levels in the belts were well known by 1969.

"The amateur tracker linked in the post above used a 9 m antenna, this is small by radio astronomy standards.

The two Australian telescopes that tracked Apollo, Honeysuckle Creek and Parkes, were Australian operated.

The Russian telescope linked in the post above was Russian operated.

I did not say that Jodrell Bank definitely received outside funding for Luna 15. They could have used their normal funds".

Don't kid yourself if you think NASA weren't running the show in Australia.

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=m-1wiI7yTD4

"The early Explorer counters went off the scale, later instruments were designed to measure higher levels and did not saturate. **The maximum levels in the belts were well known by 1969**"


Yip they sure were. The Russians knew as well.

You found any data corresponding to a gradual then rapid increase in the readings up to 600 miles THEN OFF THE SCALE in either the Apollo Astronaut dosimeters or the Apollo 17 experiment?

Want to take a wild stab in the dark WHY NASA DIDN'T PROVIDE THAT INFORMATION?

I mean you think they might have been just the slightest bit interested given the findings of Van Allen in 1958.

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=EJuuraAMAUs

"Unless some practical way can be found to shield space travellers against the effects of radiation, manned space rockets can best take off through the radiation-free zone over the poles" - James Van Allen 1959

Whats that all about?

"Solar (or star) flares of protons, and occasional and severe hazard on the way out of and into planetary systems, can give doses of hundreds to thousands of rem over a few hours at the distance of the earth. Such doses are fatal and millions of times greater than the permitted dose. Death is likely after 500 rem in any short time."

"Cosmic particles are dangerous, come from all sides, and require at least two meters of solid shielding all around living organisms. Earth's atmosphere provides the equivalent of 10 meters of shielding."

"By comparison, solar flares can deliver GeV protons in the same energy range as most cosmic particles. Increase of energy accounts for most of the increased radiation danger, because GeV protons or their products will penetrate several meters of material." - John Mauldin Phd, p226 Prospects For Interstellar Travel

For me ,your theory about lack of room to carry a better camera or telescope is out of question.And I still believe that the equipments that Kaguya is carrying can clearly show us that men never went to the moon.Since Japan received 2 atomic bombs on their heads,and became the first atomic laboratory in the world,they are acting as american´s puppets.Japan is crowded of american soldiers and every orders that come from USA are fully accepted by the japanese government.So,if NASA asked JAXA not to show the apollo landing sites,it will be a piece of cake for the japanese to swallow that.

Sorry friend,I disagree.Everything in the world (and out of it) is worthy to be curious about.That is why men reach the progress so fast.God gave us curiosity to go far and beyond.That is what moves us forward.If Galileo didn´t have the curiosity to investigate the heliocentric system,we would be the center of the universe until nowadays.And he was put in prision at that time because of his heresy.Thanks God that we have people in the world that don´t accept all the information as true as soon as they get it.

That's not what the Australians say.
http://members.pcug.org.au/~mdinn/TheDish/


How about a response to all my other examples?

Oh dear, arguments defeated so the retreat to making up stories with no supporting evidence.

Work it out for yourself from the educational page here:
http://image.gsfc.nasa.gov/poetry/weekly/3Page7.pdf

"That's not what the Australians say."

Like I said. Don't kid yourself. Watch the video

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=m-1wiI7yTD4

NASA WERE RUNNING THE SHOW!

"How about a response to all my other examples?"

Well I don't speak Russian.

Is one of those links to a site where somebody spotted an Apollo CSM from the top of a bus?

Thanks but no thanks. I've read it already.

I hope it was just after the sun went down when he was on the top on the bus or its not applicable.

""Work it out for yourself from the educational page here:
http://image.gsfc.nasa.gov/poetry/weekly/3Page7.pdf""


Note: According to radiation dosimeters carried by Apollo astronauts, their total dosage for the entire trip to the moon and return was not more than 2 Rads over 6 days.

Good one.

"Woops ! Somebody forgot to replace the batteries in the dosimeters"


"Solar (or star) flares of protons, and occasional and severe hazard on the way out of and into planetary systems, **can give doses of hundreds to thousands of rem over a few hours at the distance of the earth**. Such doses are fatal and millions of times greater than the permitted dose. Death is likely after 500 rem in any short time."

"**Cosmic particles are dangerous, come from all sides, and require at least two meters of solid shielding all around living organisms**. **Earth's atmosphere provides the equivalent of 10 meters of shielding**."

"By comparison, solar flares can deliver GeV protons in the same energy range as most cosmic particles. Increase of energy accounts for most of the increased radiation danger,** because GeV protons or their products will penetrate several meters of material**." - John Mauldin, p226 Prospects For Interstellar Travel


Throughout all the Apollo moon missions combined a total of 1485 flares occurred. Whereas Apollo 15 absorbed the grand total of 268 solar flares, Apollo 16 absorbed the single-largest flare as this one lasted three days and was higher in intensity than all previous Apollo flares and cosmic radiation


Observations have shown that cosmic rays with an energy above 10 GeV (10 x 109 eV) approach the Earth’s surface **isotropically (equally from all directions)**; it has been hypothesised that this is not due to an even distribution of cosmic ray sources, but instead is due to galactic magnetic fields causing cosmic rays to travel in spiral paths

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_radiation

"Solar flares are on those things you need to take a calculated risk on because they will zap you with radation once they get to you. But you've got a long time, hours, if not a day or more to either come back to Earth, find a shielded place, or prepare yourself".

They had plans for this. **The plan was to turn the bulky end of the ship toward the incoming front of radiation**. **That bulk of the ship had all the fuel in it and could provide plenty of protection for that burst of radiation**"

James Oberg- NASA De-bunker of everything.

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=EJuuraAMAUs

"Explorer I ran into a belt of intense radiation at 600 miles. The satellite carries a Geiger tube to count cosmic rays. At 684 miles the tubes registered 140 counts per second. The Geiger tubes had been knocked out by radiation too intense for them to handle. The satellites passed through radiation 35,000 counts per second. The belt may extend outward 8,000 miles. LEAD SHIELDING WOULD REDUCE THE DOSE TO A SUPPORTABLE LEVEL." Time Magazine May 12, 1958

"Unless some practical way can be found to shield space travellers against the effects of radiation, manned space rockets can best take off through the radiation-free zone over the poles" - James Van Allen 1959

P.S. Hats off to Ralph Rene for his excellent investigation and discovery of what James Van Allen ORIGINALLY claimed, the findings of John H. Mauldin Phd and the solar flares that occured when the Apollo missions were all in LEO.

Solar flares are highly directional. Not all of them are pointed toward the Earth. Also, many of them are low intensity and not really cause for concern. Cosmic rays are not very common and also affect astronauts in LEO. They are not generally a problem because again they are not very common at high intensities. Notice your own sources say they are attenuated by the atmosphere. Any astronaut in LEO or not would be affected by cosmic rays. If they are as bad as you are trying to imply then how can we have space travel at all? It might help if you understood the material you are trying to argue. So far all you are doing is parroting the ignorant arguments of the likes of Percy, Renee, and Sibrel whose only concern for you is how much money they can make off of you.

Another thing to consider, the shuttle and the ISS both pass routinely through a low hanging part of the Van Allen belts. Yet those astronauts are fine. Why do you suppose that is?

This entire radiation arguement is silly and is born out of an absolute lack of understanding of basic physical processes.

Firstly, it's not just the Van Allen belt where this radiation occurs, it happens everywhere - it even gets down to the height of normal airlines at about 40 thousand feet! The radiation that you are talking about is cosmic radiation, more commonly known as cosmic rays. Cosmic rays are basically high energy, charged particles - mostly protons.

The flashes themselves occur through direct interaction with the optic nerve or nuclear interactions in the eye that in turn affect the retina. There is no known immediate danger of these light flashes, however cosmic radiation in general is hazardous. We don't see them much on earth, because the earths atmosphere decays them rather well, into usually muons.

Cosmic radiation is the kid at school that just didn't care. He'd only pay attention to you once or twice, but most of the time he just walked right past you! No spacecraft has any protective barrier against them, I'm not talking about just Apollo but anyone that's in space. Infact even people who work in aircrafts are at risk! The tiny tiny 'ray' usually passes right through us most of the time. However, every now and again it actually hits. Even if it hits the aluminium shell of a space craft, then secondary radiation within the cabin from "daughter" breakdown products of aluminum and associated gamma radiation would still occur. Cosmic ray hits damaging just one strand of our DNA are usually reparable by body cells. When double strand breaks occur the result is severely mutagenic and frequently beyond complete repair.

Now lets look at the radiation in the Van Allen belt specificaly. The number of particles encountered (also known as flux) is dependent on the energy of the particles. In general the flux of high energy particles is less and the flux of low energy particles is more. The very low energy particles cannot penetrate the hull of a spacecraft nor an astronaut.

Electrons below 1 MeV are unlikely to be dangerous
Electrons below 10 MeV don't sufficiently Penatrate to be of any real concern

Bearing in mind that the actual fluxes encountered in Van Allen are of great commercial importance, in regards to lifetimes and their electronics - so this wasn't just calculated for the astronauts, it's done for the satellite industry as well.

The standard database on the fluxes in the belt are the models for the trapped radiation environment. AP8 for protons AE8 for electrons.

Electrons with energy over 1 MeV have a flux of 1 million per square centimeter per second from 1-6 earth radii .
Protons with energy over 10 MeV have a flux above one hundred thousand per square centimeter per second from about 1.5-2.5 Earth radii

OK, so we have a rought idea of numbers in regards to fluxes and energies, no we have to calculate how long they were in the belt. To escape from earth requires a velocity of 11.2km/s which would leave them in the belts for just under an hour. However it's actually slightly harder to work out, because as the rocket stops burning, it would slow down due to the attraction of earths gravity, so at 38,000 km it would be moving at 4.6 km per sec, not 11.2, take the geometric average and I'm going to say 7.2 km/s - which would leave them in the belt for about an hour and half.

To calculate total radiation exposure (from all types of radiation) or all particles and energies, we need to take into account the shielding that they did have.

Range in Aluminum [cm] Energy
[MeV] electrons protons
1 0.15 ~ nil
3 0.56 ~ nil
10 1.85 0.06
30 no flux 0.37
100 no flux 3.7

Theres a nice table for you showing the approximate values for the ranges of protons and electrons in aluminum. For electrons, the AE8 electron data shows negligible flux (< 1 electron per square cm per sec) over E=7 MeV at any altitude. The AP8 proton compilations indicates peak fluxes outside the spacecraft up to about 20,000 protons per square cm per sec above 100 MeV in a region around 1.7 Earth radii, but because the region is narrow, passage takes only about 5 min. Nevertheless, these appear to be the principal hazard. These numbers seem pretty consistent with NASAs 2 REM?

Now if you want to continue this silly argument about radiation, I will be happy to once you tell me why the calculations are all wrong

""Solar flares are highly directional. Not all of them are pointed toward the Earth. Also, many of them are low intensity and not really cause for concern. Cosmic rays are not very common and also affect astronauts in LEO. They are not generally a problem because again they are not very common at high intensities. Notice your own sources say they are attenuated by the atmosphere. Any astronaut in LEO or not would be affected by cosmic rays. If they are as bad as you are trying to imply then how can we have space travel at all? It might help if you understood the material you are trying to argue. So far all you are doing is parroting the ignorant arguments of the likes of Percy, Renee, and Sibrel whose only concern for you is how much money they can make off of you.

Another thing to consider, the shuttle and the ISS both pass routinely through a low hanging part of the Van Allen belts. Yet those astronauts are fine. Why do you suppose that is?""

Well for a start off they are hundreds/thousands of miles away from the intense part of the belts SAA or not!

Sorry and what is your Phd in?

"Solar (or star) flares of protons, and occasional and severe hazard on the way out of and into planetary systems, can give doses of hundreds to thousands of rem over a few hours at the distance of the earth. Such doses are fatal and millions of times greater than the permitted dose. Death is likely after 500 rem in any short time."

"Cosmic particles are dangerous, come from all sides, and require at least two meters of solid shielding all around living organisms. Earth's atmosphere provides the equivalent of 10 meters of shielding."

"By comparison, solar flares can deliver GeV protons in the same energy range as most cosmic particles. Increase of energy accounts for most of the increased radiation danger, because GeV protons or their products will penetrate several meters of material." - John Mauldin, p226 Prospects For Interstellar Travel

Same silly question for you Gav. What's your Phd in?

"Solar (or star) flares of protons, and occasional and severe hazard on the way out of and into planetary systems, can give doses of hundreds to thousands of rem over a few hours at the distance of the earth. Such doses are fatal and millions of times greater than the permitted dose. Death is likely after 500 rem in any short time."

"Cosmic particles are dangerous, come from all sides, and require at least two meters of solid shielding all around living organisms. Earth's atmosphere provides the equivalent of 10 meters of shielding."

"By comparison, solar flares can deliver GeV protons in the same energy range as most cosmic particles. Increase of energy accounts for most of the increased radiation danger, because GeV protons or their products will penetrate several meters of material." - John Mauldin, p226 Prospects For Interstellar Travel

Throughout all the Apollo moon missions combined a total of 1485 flares occurred. Whereas Apollo 15 absorbed the grand total of 268 solar flares, Apollo 16 absorbed the single-largest flare as this one lasted three days and was higher in intensity than all previous Apollo flares and cosmic radiation


Observations have shown that cosmic rays with an energy above 10 GeV (10 x 109 eV) approach the Earth’s surface **isotropically (equally from all directions)**; it has been hypothesised that this is not due to an even distribution of cosmic ray sources, but instead is due to galactic magnetic fields causing cosmic rays to travel in spiral paths

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_radiation

"Solar flares are on those things you need to take a calculated risk on because they will zap you with radation once they get to you. But you've got a long time, hours, if not a day or more to either come back to Earth, find a shielded place, or prepare yourself".

They had plans for this. **The plan was to turn the bulky end of the ship toward the incoming front of radiation**. **That bulk of the ship had all the fuel in it and could provide plenty of protection for that burst of radiation**"

James Oberg- NASA De-bunker of everything.

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=EJuuraAMAUs

"Explorer I ran into a belt of intense radiation at 600 miles. The satellite carries a Geiger tube to count cosmic rays. At 684 miles the tubes registered 140 counts per second. The Geiger tubes had been knocked out by radiation too intense for them to handle. The satellites passed through radiation 35,000 counts per second. The belt may extend outward 8,000 miles. LEAD SHIELDING WOULD REDUCE THE DOSE TO A SUPPORTABLE LEVEL." Time Magazine May 12, 1958

"Unless some practical way can be found to shield space travellers against the effects of radiation, manned space rockets can best take off through the radiation-free zone over the poles" - James Van Allen 1959

Precisely correct.
But I think you missed the point.

Science already knows about Apollo and its accomplishments. They do not, and will not waste money attempting to image the landing sites. They know where they are, they're still using several of them for studies with the LRRRs that were placed there, and we've been doing studies on the lunar samples these missions returned for decades, and of course, it's the most documented occurrance in human history.

Science doesn't waste money on frivolous, scientifically valueless endeavor. Space craft and missions are expensive. Scientists are not generally stupid people.

At the same time, I would say that a clear picture of an Apollo landing site would most assuredly hold value. That value would be sentimental, and emotional...not scientifically significant.


You see, science is not interested in proving that Apollo happened, any more than they are interested in proving that the Sun is a star. They already know that stuff.

You may of course disagree with all that. But anyone with a scientifically oriented education won't join you.

Cheese...


You seem to have this penchant for quoting age-old preliminary understandings about the van Allen belts that were expanded upon geometrically between the latter 1950s and latter 1960s.

You also seem to have a penchant for selectively ignoring some of the information provided you in favor of citing utter morons who put together silly youtube pieces which do little but expose the producer's ignorance in the topic matter.

Youtube is perhaps a classroom of sorts, but it's generally not teaching you what you actually need to know about these things. You'll never get your PhD there.

Further, what is this with asking where everyone's PhD came from?
It doesn't take a PhD in astrophysics to understand the basics. About all we can discern from this insistence of yours is that you most certainly don't have one.


Take this for instance:



1959.
Do you know that several years later, we had a clear picture of the structure of the belts? Do you know that they extend much farther out into space than was thought in 1959, and that their shape was determined to a much higher degree?

Do you know that the majority of the radiation belts lie within 20 degrees north and south of the equator and that they thin out considerably the farther you go north or south?

You also must know that Apollo EOs were inclined 30 degrees, since I've told you that, and you could've verified this for yourself by now. Perhaps it doesn't make sense to you, but those orbits were done that way for a reason...which I also told you:


So we could leave EO and only transit the very thinnest parts of the belts, thus minimizing exposure and dosage, which, as I also told you, is a function of time.


We never transited the van Allen belts to any profound degree (i.e., equatorially). We spent a couple hours per mission exposed to them to any degree at all. Know why?
Because we designed the trajectories to minimize exposure and dosage of van Allen radiation.

They were pretty smart people who did this thing.





This too...

Do you know where Explorer 1 was in the radiation belts?
Do you know its orbit?

It was in a high ellipse, 220 x 1600 miles, at a 33 degree inclination, with apogee and perigee that allowed it to pass right into the van Allen belts for lengthy periods to measure radiation rate.

An Apollo was typically in a circular 105 mile orbit, not in the belts at all, and executed TLI at a point where it would swiftly transit the thinnest and northern most parts of the belts above the equator.


Explorer 1 dove headlong into intense radiation fields, by design. We can be thankful for that. Apollo did not...also by design, and fopr perfectly logical and sound reasons.


All this information is available to you right on the Internet nowadays. I am amazed that you do not avail yourself of the actual information available through your keyboard, but rather favor moronic productions by people who never had any scientific training and favor putting low-grade video productions on "youtube"...

It's one of the fallacies of the Internet, I suppose. It's kind of sad.

""All this information is available to you right on the Internet nowadays. I am amazed that you do not avail yourself of the actual information available through your keyboard, but rather favor moronic productions by people who never had any scientific training and favor putting low-grade video productions on "youtube"...

It's one of the fallacies of the Internet, I suppose. It's kind of sad.""

No I tell you whats kind of sad is your attempt to tapdance right round the work of a man with a Phd by trying to make yourself look clever by dismissing U-T videos.

Read it and weep MID.

"Solar (or star) flares of protons, and occasional and severe hazard on the way out of and into planetary systems, can give doses of hundreds to thousands of rem over a few hours at the distance of the earth. Such doses are fatal and millions of times greater than the permitted dose. Death is likely after 500 rem in any short time."

"Cosmic particles are dangerous, come from all sides, and require at least two meters of solid shielding all around living organisms. Earth's atmosphere provides the equivalent of 10 meters of shielding."

"By comparison, solar flares can deliver GeV protons in the same energy range as most cosmic particles. Increase of energy accounts for most of the increased radiation danger, because GeV protons or their products will penetrate several meters of material." - John Mauldin, p226 Prospects For Interstellar Travel

Read it and weep!

Baloney.
Apollo 15 endured no direct solar flares, and neither did Apollo 16. The record is clear on this.
There were many solar flares detected during Apollo's time frame. Detecting a solar flare is not an indicator of absorbing radiation from them. Solar flares are directional. We can detect them, even if they don't come in our direction, and even if their energy is insignificant as pertains to space travelers. There was not any solar flare activity documented between 1969 and 1972 that directly affected any Apollo mission's crew.

The fact is that Apollo 12's external radiation sensors apparently detected solar radiation on the hull of the craft that had the signature of a minor solar flare, but there was no appreciable penetration recorded by internal dosimeters.


The statement that Apollo 15 absorbed a grand total of 268 solar flares is not only dimensionless (in other words, it has no value of radiation attached to it), it is sensationalistic and utterly inaccurate. Apollo 15's dosimeters recorded average values of 0.3 rads total skin dose for all crew members, well below the level of any detectable effects. There was no indication of any high level of radiation at all on the AS-15 mission.


Apollo 16?

0.5 rad, total skin dose for the entire mission, also well below any detectable physiological effect range.

HB's tend to put together fallacies based upon some thing that actually happened, and I've seen this done with the 1972 major solar flare event several times.

There was a major solar flare event in 1972.
It happened in AUGUST.

Apollo 15 flew in July of 1971, and Apollo 16 was already back from the Moon by August of 1972, as they flew in APRIL.
Neither mission absorbed any detectable solar flare radiation.
No one was out there in August, 1972.

This is utter baloney, and a complete lie.

""Apollo 16?

0.5 rad, total skin dose for the entire mission, also well below any detectable physiological effect range.

HB's tend to put together fallacies based upon some thing that actually happened, and I've seen this done with the 1972 major solar flare event several times.

There was a major solar flare event in 1972.
It happened in AUGUST.

Apollo 15 flew in July of 1971, and Apollo 16 was already back from the Moon by August of 1972, as they flew in APRIL.
Neither mission absorbed any detectable solar flare radiation.
No one was out there in August, 1972.

This is utter baloney, and a complete lie.
""

I sincerely hope you are not accusing me of lying about the solar flares. As I've already stated a solar flare was recorded by Apollo 16 a day after they launched that lasted for three days.

http://history.nasa.gov/alsj/a17/a17OTM.html


http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1973ICRC....2.1486F

Now I wonder who decided it was safe for Apollo 16 to travel onwards to the Moon or if they had to turn the hull of the spacecraft towards the flare???? so the fuel would provide extra shielding???- James Oberg- NASA comedian.

Yea..."read it and weep." I could perhaps laugh so hard that I cry...but otherwise...

A typical (and I suspect selective) statement of someone who selectively quotes material he doesn't understand...


What does this have to do with Apollo?
Solar flares...that didn't happen?
Doses of radiation that never were recorded on any Apollo mission...nothing even remotely close.

One wonders, how is that flimsy Voyager still functioning, on it's now interstellar journey, with all that hell bombing it all the time, and no where near two meters of solid insulation....

This is now ascending to the moronic.

""Yea..."read it and weep." I could perhaps laugh so hard that I cry...but otherwise...

A typical (and I suspect selective) statement of someone who selectively quotes material he doesn't understand...


What does this have to do with Apollo?
Solar flares...that didn't happen?
Doses of radiation that never were recorded on any Apollo mission...nothing even remotely close.

One wonders, how is that flimsy Voyager still functioning, on it's now interstellar journey, with all that hell bombing it all the time, and no where near two meters of solid insulation....

This is now ascending to the moronic.""

Sorry. Is there a living organism on Voyager? Something else NASA neglected to inform us about!

"Explorer I ran into a belt of intense radiation at 600 miles. The satellite carries a Geiger tube to count cosmic rays. At 684 miles the tubes registered 140 counts per second. The Geiger tubes had been knocked out by radiation too intense for them to handle. The satellites passed through radiation 35,000 counts per second. The belt may extend outward 8,000 miles. LEAD SHIELDING WOULD REDUCE THE DOSE TO A SUPPORTABLE LEVEL." Time Magazine May 12, 1958

"Unless some practical way can be found to shield space travellers against the effects of radiation, manned space rockets can best take off through the radiation-free zone over the poles" - James Van Allen 1959

No cheese. I am accusing you of not paying attention. People who lack knowledge don't exactly lie. They may quote sources that do, but they don't know enough genrally speaking, to lie.
You have linked to an Apollo 17 page. Jesus.

And please, don't reference ALSJ. The data there will refute your claims, and teach you what you need to know.






This is your quote, Not Jim's.

Jim is an experienced flight controller, who actually knows what he's talking about, and a space consultant to MSNBC ( the only good one there is, very likely, since he's a bonified expert on the subject), as well as a bunch of other stuff. He's very knowledgable, and will make you look silly...why don't you challenge him? He's a member here.


There was no directional flare that posed any hazard to Apollo 16, or any other Apollo mission, thank God!


If there was a major STE detected, the SM and heat shield of the Apollo CM would've provided highly adequate shielding against solar radiation. I am supposing you have a problem with what amounts to about 25 feet of shielding...

You really have no idea what you're talking about, and are becoming boring with this nonsensical talk about radiation.

It was not ever an operational problem for Apollo missions.

Are you now deliberately being ignorant and obtuse, cheese?


I already addressed these very quotes...try again:




Now how about addresssing what's already been said...just a few posts ago, instead of posting this nonsense again as if you hadn't read it?
You already said this stuff...it was responded to, and you didn't read it.

Why are you wasting our time here?