Anyone ever look at the moon and think

[aboutfkntime]

Originally Posted by alexguiness

We never landed on the moon.

Apparently the 'technology' was the equivalent of a pocket calculator in 1969.

Now in 2020 with the huge quantum leaps in technology, we should be able to go back easily.

If it was so easy in 1969, why is it so hard in 2020?

it should be so much... easier / cheaper / safer... now...

China would have done it

Russia would have done it

[The Noose]

Originally Posted by alexguiness

We never landed on the moon.

Apparently the 'technology' was the equivalent of a pocket calculator in 1969.

Now in 2020 with the huge quantum leaps in technology, we should be able to go back easily.

If it was so easy in 1969, why is it so hard in 2020?

The Apollo Guidance Computer (AGC) had less RAM than a modern day calculator.
But the overall technology that they used was actually very advanced.

Im not sure if anyone thought it was easy in 1969, or that it is so hard now. But if they do go back to the moon they will have to develop the craft using modern technology, so they cant just use the blueprint from 69. They have to innovate new ideas and then test them.

[The Noose]

Originally Posted by aboutfkntime

the reason why the astronauts were not affected by radiation whilst travelling in a vehicle that did not contain any radiation shielding... is because they did not pass through the Van Allen belt

Almost true.
They only passed through a small section of tje outer belt.
Do you think the materials of the ship could of acted as cosmic radiation shielding?
If not, why.

according to NASA, the type of shielding they require on spaceships is, radiation shielding... and they insist that they require the radiation shielding to protect them from the harmful radiation they will encounter when passing through the Van Allen belt

What type of radiation shielding. And why.

the stuff above... is stuttering, and pointless...

No, you said "here is the science...here are what the results showed from the VAB probes".
But you provided no results or science.

Silbeck's statement was clear, and impossible to misunderstand... "radiation belts pose a hazard to spacecraft and astronauts"

Hazardous doesnt mean lethal/fatal.

You cant find any quote or show any science that backs up your beliefs.

[aboutfkntime]

Originally Posted by The Noose

The Apollo Guidance Computer (AGC) had less RAM than a modern day calculator.
But the overall technology that they used was actually very advanced.

Im not sure if anyone thought it was easy in 1969, or that it is so hard now. But if they do go back to the moon they will have to develop the craft using modern technology, so they cant just use the blueprint from 69. They have to innovate new ideas and then test them.

it was antique

the AGC had 1300x less processing power than a iPhone 5

a iPhone 5 only costs a few bucks

we are FAR more advanced now, than we were back in 1969

we are leaps ahead, in EVERY department... we have quantum computers

it would be a lot easier now... and cheaper... and safer...

if it was possible back then... it should be WAY easier now

if it was even slightly possible... China would have done it

and so would Russia

they would have done it decades ago

[aboutfkntime]

Originally Posted by The Noose

Almost true.
They only passed through a small section of tje outer belt.
Do you think the materials of the ship could of acted as cosmic radiation shielding?
If not, why.

What type of radiation shielding. And why.

No, you said "here is the science...here are what the results showed from the VAB probes".
But you provided no results or science.

Hazardous doesnt mean lethal/fatal.

You cant find any quote or show any science that backs up your beliefs.

no, because... "Cosmic radiation is extremely high energy, and is very penetrating... In some cases, improper shielding can actually make the situation worse... also, using material with a high neutron activation cross section to shield neutrons will result in the shielding material itself becoming radioactive and hence more dangerous than if it were not present."

which is why NASA "study radiation belts because they pose a hazard to spacecraft and astronauts"

NASA admit that they did not include any radiation shielding in the design

so...

... do you really believe that NASA " fluked " effective radiation shielding?... because yea wow, that would be truly amazing... even more amazing than flying to the moon using an iPhone 5




on earth:
" NEVER expose your skin to the sun... it can be deadly...
... ALWAYS cover-up... and/or, ALWAYS apply sunscreen "

thousands of miles closer to the sun, in the middle of a radiation belt:
" it's all good, nothing to worry about up here... no protection required "

Image View Removed. Please Click Here.

[The Noose]

Originally Posted by aboutfkntime

no, because... "Cosmic radiation is extremely high energy, and is very penetrating... In some cases, improper shielding can actually make the situation worse... also, using material with a high neutron activation cross section to shield neutrons will result in the shielding material itself becoming radioactive and hence more dangerous than if it were not present."

You copied that from the wiki page about radiation. But you dont understand what you are reading.

That passage is under Electromagnetic radiation.
Above that is Cosmic radiation. Which you have already copy and pasted from, but didnt understand.

The Van Allen radiation belts are made mostly of protons and electrons (BETA particles).

Here is a passage under cosmic radiation that you somehow missed...

Beta particles (electrons) are more penetrating, but still can be absorbed by a few millimeters of aluminum. However, in cases where high energy beta particles are emitted shielding must be accomplished with low atomic weight materials, e.g. plastic, wood, water, or acrylic glass

You see, so lighter materials, like the ones used to make Apollo, act as shielding.

NASA admit that they did not include any radiation shielding in the design

Where have they said this?
Maybe find me a quote with a link.

[aboutfkntime]

Originally Posted by The Noose

You copied that from the wiki page about radiation. But you dont understand what you are reading.

That passage is under Electromagnetic radiation.
Above that is Cosmic radiation. Which you have already copy and pasted from, but didnt understand.

The Van Allen radiation belts are made mostly of protons and electrons (BETA particles).

Here is a passage under cosmic radiation that you somehow missed...

Beta particles (electrons) are more penetrating, but still can be absorbed by a few millimeters of aluminum. However, in cases where high energy beta particles are emitted shielding must be accomplished with low atomic weight materials, e.g. plastic, wood, water, or acrylic glass

You see, so lighter materials, like the ones used to make Apollo, act as shielding.

Where have they said this?
Maybe find me a quote with a link.

read your own post

read your own post... and stop blurting out rubbish

Image View Removed. Please Click Here.

"in cases where high energy beta particles are emitted shielding must be accomplished with low atomic weight materials, e.g. plastic, wood, water, or acrylic glass"

"where high energy beta particles are emitted shielding must be accomplished"... you do know what that means, right?

read this...

"The solar wind has low-energy particles of about one hundred electron volts per particle, so each could possibly ionize a few dozen atoms. This is not of great concern. What makes this radiation problematic is that it has the highest flux of the three sources, about 10 billion of these particles per square centimeter each second. Each particle itself cannot do so much damage, but there are so many of them that the added damage is of definite concern.

Solar flares have between 1000 particles per square centimeter per second with energies in the ten millions of electron volts, up to particle fluxes of 1 per square centimeter per second with up to 100 million electron volts. Each of these higher energy particles has enough energy to ionize of the order of 10 million atoms. Even so, scientists have figured out pretty good ways to deal with this type of radiation, which consists of putting matter between the radiation and the instruments and people"
[Link View Has Been Removed. Click Here To Unlock This Content.]

we 100% require radiation shielding, when travelling through a radiation belt... you muppet

on earth:
" NEVER expose your skin to the sun... it can be deadly...
... ALWAYS cover-up... and/or, ALWAYS apply sunscreen "

thousands of miles closer to the sun, in the middle of a radiation belt:
" it's all good, nothing to worry about up here... no protection required "

Image View Removed. Please Click Here.

even in this revisionist document, which NASA released specifically to cover-up the "nope, never gave shielding a single thought" red-flag... NASA ADMIT that they did not design any radiation shielding for the moon landings... of course, the result of NASA's more recent investigation in 2012, proved the complete opposite of their earlier "guess"... "which is why NASA "study radiation belts because they pose a hazard to spacecraft and astronauts" LMAO

[Link View Has Been Removed. Click Here To Unlock This Content.]

btw, that junk was written very recently... in a revisionist attempt to cover-up the fact that NASA did not use any radiation shielding when they went to the moon... WHICH IS FKN HILARIOUS

Image View Removed. Please Click Here.

[aboutfkntime]

right, so..... NASA flew to the moon, using a computer with 1300x less processing power than a iPhone 5..... they used NO RADIATION SHIELDING WHATSOEVER..... and they did it in this.....

Image View Removed. Please Click Here.

oh, and of course... despite their overwhelming success, we never went back

Image View Removed. Please Click Here.

Image View Removed. Please Click Here.

[aboutfkntime]

right, so..... NASA flew to the moon, using a computer with 1300x less processing power than a iPhone 5..... they used NO RADIATION SHIELDING WHATSOEVER..... and they did it in this.....

Image View Removed. Please Click Here.

oh, and of course... despite their overwhelming success, we never went back

Image View Removed. Please Click Here.

moon-landing fan #1: " yea... I fcuked Kylie Jenner, honest...
... we had a great time, she loves me "

moon-landing fan #2: " really, how come you don't see her anymore "'

moon-landing fan #1" " aah, well... I have been really busy, ya know "

Image View Removed. Please Click Here.

[PRINCEKOOL]

[Link View Has Been Removed. Click Here To Unlock This Content.]