Have you looked at Hiroshima and Nagasaki? What kinds of radiation were present and at what levels? How do the types and levels of radiation present at those two sites compare to the Van Allen belts?

I believe I have some pertinent knowledge in this matter, having received military training in detection, protection, and decontamination procedures related to nuclear, biological, and chemical (NBC) weapons threats. I also served as an NBC response team chief. As Jay already mentioned, nuclear blasts produce high levels of gamma and x-rays. Additionally, radiation from alpha and beta particles is present in the form of fallout contamination.

Gamma radiation is the kind of radiation bogeyman most lay people think about when "R" word is mentioned. Alpha and beta particles are much easier to shield against. A layer of paper or clothing will shield you from the majority of alpha particles and most common building structures are effective against beta. However, after a nuclear blast, they can pose greater long-term problems than gamma radiation because the fallout dust is widespread, clings to clothing and equipment, gets tracked all over the place, and can be ingested or inspired.

Now, take a guess at how much nuclear fallout is in the Van Allen belts? Nada. Zip. Zero. As Jay can explain in exquisite detail, most of the radiation in the belts is not of the Hollywood-mondo-ultra-deadly variety, that Apollo's course through the belts was programmed to avoid much of the radiation hazard, and that the CSM's construction provided shielding, as well.

__________________
Cheers...Loreto

There are cosmic gamma rays. The ambient is negligible. And after Apollo, we discovered gamma ray bursts, which thankfully are comparatively weak and infrequent.

The x-ray ambient is at a low energy -- or stated another way, a long wavelength. The wavelengths typically encountered in the cislunar ambient won't even penetrate a meter of air.

There are x-rays associated with solar events, of course, and these would be of some concern. But these are infrequent.

__________________
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams
Clavius Moon Base

Tongue in cheek. I was being juvenile about your choice of the phrase "in space". A literal reading might lead one to believe natural X-Rays/Gamma rays do not occur anywhere in the Universe, which means some radio astronomers might have some 'splaining to do.

D.

There are several other important factors to consider with A-bombs. They produce a huge and destructive shock wave, they heat up the air which in turn burns a lot of things, and finally the fire balls produces huge amount of thermal radiative heat transfer.

Nor do we have to listen to you anymore. Goodbye.

_________________
Phil Plait
The Bad Astronomer
http://www.badastronomy.com
badastro@badastronomy.com

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: The Bad Astronomer on 2003-02-07 00:02 ]</font>

BA = Anne Robinson. [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_wink.gif[/img]

__________________
Everything I need to know I learned through Googling.

Bad Anne? [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif[/img]

Are you going to swear on the bible Bart Sibrel that:


You didn't fake the moon landing yourself and then blame someone else ?

And that this is not a cheap publicity stunt to sell your web site and video.

I think the real reason we have people like Bart Sibrel is this a cheap way to sell their products.

We have a similar person in Australia who try to sell but fail to sell his web site.

Saying The Port Arthur shooting was committed by the Government.

How can you rely on the discoveries made by the Apollo program? You were told that they are "comparatively weak and infrequent". How do you know that this is true?

And do not flame me as I'm trying to convince nobody except myself.

In your place I'd reply to some intelligent arguments instead of commenting that fragments of text that come at the top of this page.

Yeah, truth hurts...

We're not relying purely on the Apollo program. The Van Allen belts have been measured by numerous people and countries, not just the US. A number of Satallites, including the ISS pass through parts of them, so if the mesurements were wrong, these things would stop working. The Soviets even send a pair of turtles on an orbit about the moon to test the radition levels. To assume that this is all "misinformtion" requires the belief that there is a world wide conspircy involving the US, Europe, China, Russia, and Japan space agencies long with the technicians and workers who design and build all the satallites that end up in high enough orbit to pass through any part of the belts. That would be a bigger and more complex conspiracy that the one already claimed and shown as fallacy from the NASA faked it group.

__________________
Howling from the Shadows

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. --- JayUtah

You can't reason an irrational person out of an irrational belief. --- Noclevername

Apollo: The History and the Hoax
Enter the World of Athran

We'd love to. But we haven't found any yet.

Welcome to the board.

So tell me, how much of 960 rem could pass to the inside of a apollo spacecraft (through it's protection shields)? And then ask yourself, how much is a deadly dose for a homo sapiens?

About the blast crater, you were told, that less then 3000 pounds of thrust blew the american flag away from it's position as the module returned back to the orbit of moon. And do you think that during touchdown every piece of dust was lying untouched, having in mind that they must have levitated some feet over the ground while calibrating the LM (with the ROCKET ENGINE ON)? Read more about rocket engines and how stuff like that works.

Ask the retired astronauts, why there's no man on the moon since 1973? They will probably tell you a lie, but if you don't ask, they wouldn't.

Don't be too proud to do some basic calculations. Don't be too proud to misbelieve.

My favorite quote:
The problem with America is stupidity. I'm not saying there should be a capital punishment for stupidity, but why don't we just take the safety labels off of everything and let the problem solve itself?

The LD50/30 is around 3-5Sv. Where did your 960rem statistic come from?

I study rocket engines for my degree. What do you know about them? If you watch the DAC footage of the landing (Apollo 12 is a good example), you'll see the soft pack being moved by the incidence of the plume. What calibration of the LM do you mean? Once they were within feet of the surface, the contact light would come on and the engine would ideally be cutoff.

No-one is willing to fund such expeditions.

Let's see yours for your radiation and descent arguments.

How can you rely on the discoveries made by the Apollo program?

Because it has been copiously confirmed by many sources. Why do you think NASA could just lie about what anyone can see for himself? Do you think the Soviets didn't know what the cislunar environment was like? And since most international space commerce takes place within the Van Allen belts, how long do you think the truth could be kept hidden?

You were told that they are "comparatively weak and infrequent". How do you know that this is true?

Because billions of dollars worth of international commerce would be broken if it were false.

Except that we're talking about gamma bursts, which don't have anything to do with Apollo discoveries.

And do not flame me as I'm trying to convince nobody except myself

Of what?

__________________
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams
Clavius Moon Base

I'll leave this one to Jay, simply because I don't have the figures on my table and he will, however I will note here, that the amount of Radition is irrelevant, it is the type that matters. You could have 1 million rems of Alpha particle radiation aimed at you, and it wouldn't matter because your clothing would stop it, it wouldn't even make it to, let alone through your skin. Now while the VA Belts have higher engery radiation particles that lpha Prticles, they aren't anywhere near Gamma radiation levels, and so can be stopped pretty easily with the right materials. Again I'm sure Jay will have the exact figures (in fact I think I have seen them on his site somewhere) but from what I recall, around 99% of the radiation would have been stopped by the CM wall, the air in the CM or the space suits the astronaunts were wearing.

Okay this one is just rediculous. I mean come on, do you really believe that the Lift Off motor was LESS powerful than the landing one, or do you assume that the landing motor had to be the some strength as the lift off one? I don't need to do the figures here, just think about it. The landing motor had to slow the LM and let it settle in a downwards motion, that means its overall thrust is less than the moon's gravity pulling the LM down. The lift off engine had to rapidly fire the LM up and away from the Moon. If they had the same thrust, either the LM would never have lifted off, or it would never have landed. Use a little common sense here.

Actually the last mission was in 1972, but hey why worry about the facts here, you haven't been so far (not that I actually have seen a HB do so yet.) The reason is simple, and doesn't take a genius to understand. Congress shut down the project because of costs. Basically they didn't want to have to explain why they were spending huge mounts of money on something few people cared about, and could get people killed. They didn't want to lose the votes if that occured, so they killed it. No one has gone back since, because no one has been willing to fund them going back. It's not a big secret, it's well known and documented why, and so I don't see why any Astronaunt have any need to lie about it.

I think it is safe to say that I find this quote extremely ironic coming after the rest of your post.

__________________
Howling from the Shadows

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. --- JayUtah

You can't reason an irrational person out of an irrational belief. --- Noclevername

Apollo: The History and the Hoax
Enter the World of Athran

So tell me, how much of 960 rem could pass...

Is that a hypothetical figure, or are you getting that from some source?

you were told, that less then 3000 pounds of thrust blew the american flag away from it's position...

Slightly more, actually.

And do you think that during touchdown every piece of dust was lying untouched...

I hold to neither absolute. Some dust was displaced, some dust was left behind. That's why the dust continued to be visible while the engine was firing and stopped flowing immediately as the engine was shut off.

that they must have levitated some feet over the ground while calibrating the LM...

Why do you say that?

Read more about rocket engines and how stuff like that works.

I'm professionally qualified to talk about rocket engines. I'm an engineer. What particular aspect of rocket propulsion would you like to talk about?

Ask the retired astronauts, why there's no man on the moon since 1973?

Already have.

They will probably tell you a lie, but if you don't ask, they wouldn't.

What's that supposed to mean? Have you already decided that the astronauts must be lying?

Don't be too proud to do some basic calculations.

I have. What would you like to calculate? And what calculations have you done yourself?

Don't be too proud to misbelieve.

From Merriam-Webster:

misbelieve: to hold to a false or unorthodox idea.

I have no intention of holding to a false idea. I will gladly hold an unorthodox idea if there is nevertheless evidence for it. I have no plans to hold an unorthodox idea simply because it's unorthodox. Too many people are willing to believe an idea simply because it's different than what they've heard, even if it's absurd. Consider that common beliefs are common because they're the ones that seem right.

The problem with America is stupidity.

Are you suggesting that it's stupid to believe that the Apollo missions were authentic. Very well; I'll happily pit my ideas against yours and we'll decide whose are stupid.

__________________
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams
Clavius Moon Base

I just noticed this on a re-read.

Why on Earth would anyone want to misbelieve?

That is to "Believe in a false opinion or notion."

I guess if you want to believe in falsehoods go right ahead. I like sticking to the facts.

__________________
Howling from the Shadows

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. --- JayUtah

You can't reason an irrational person out of an irrational belief. --- Noclevername

Apollo: The History and the Hoax
Enter the World of Athran

First of all, I see this bb is stuffed with rocket engine experts. ok than tell me the density of moon dust, the EXACT power of rocket engine at all stages of touchdown, and I'll have a calculation. Oh, and the width of the dust layer under the LM. I'd also would like you to compare the rocket engines of a space shuttle and saturn IV and post here.

Some arguments:
960 rem was exact dose of radiation which is to be applied to the spacecraft during the mission, according to Space Biomedical Research Institute. And by the way, if you'd look at the photos, pressurized suits give a rigid balloon-like appearance which the moon astronauts did not appear to have.

Vietnam war wasn't canceled at the right time and 50.000 americans were killed. Apollo project could have been of greater importance (it's not for me to decide), it killed much less people (can't say exact number), but it was canceled anyway. Today anyone could fund a 40billion trip into space and it would be a great advertising campaign investment for cocacola, microsoft, west, or anything. Who cares about people's lives? Why NASA is wasting peoples lives on columbia when it could waste them on a real trip to the moon? Why china announced that they will send a manned spacecraft to moon in 2001, but silenced that project after they figured out it is still impossible? In my language there is a phrase 'invention of a bicycle', do you know what that means? ehh, don't have dictionary, could speak a lot.

Jay's going to have fun with this!!!

I've got news for you: it is. There are real live experts here who know about rocket engineering because it's their career. Some of us even have multiple degrees in scientific fields and have used space-based satellites for research. Perhaps you could tell us what your experience is in this field?

Incidentally, your coming in here so aggressively about the hoax is not the best tactic. We have seen many come (try using the search engine before posting the same tired arguments, please), and few who could maintain the polite level of discourse clearly outlined as necessary in the FAQ. This is a not-to-subtle reminder to read it before posting again.

Unsurprisingly this is a BB for people with an interest in science, quite often scientists and engineers. These sort of people quite often have interests and knowledge in these fields (and careers). Honestly being surprised about this is like going to a conferance on teeth and being surprised to see a dentist there.

I am sure with a little research you can find these things out yourself. If you are willing to make claims about a subject, go and research it first rather then expecting to be hand-fed all the answers.

What has this got to do with landing on the moon? Again though, go and look it up rather then expecting to be hand-fed the answers.

The suits had a "restraint layer" that prevented them blowing up like a balloon. Jay has more info on that here

There really is no comparisom between the two. The Vietnam War was fought in a misguided belief of trying to stop communism. And by the way, both lost the funding and support about the same time.

Anyone could fund a 40 billion dollar trip???? Yeah I happen to have a spare 40 billion in my back pocket. No company on the planet is going to fork out a 40 Billion dollar advertising program. Get real.

China only got their first man into space last year, I think that if their project was silenced it was because they realised that getting to the moon by 2001 was far too ambious, not because it was impossible. Even the Soviets know it is possible, they very nearly did it and beat the US, but they cut too many corners in on effort to catch up and their ambious plan fell to pieces. Also, Last I heard the Chinese are still planning to get to the Moon before 2010 so they can't have decided it was impossible.

__________________
Howling from the Shadows

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. --- JayUtah

You can't reason an irrational person out of an irrational belief. --- Noclevername

Apollo: The History and the Hoax
Enter the World of Athran

PhantomWolf, I find your comment highly offensive. I'm not going to start an argument here; I merely ask you to refrain from making such blatantly political statements in the Lunar Conspiracies forum.

__________________
--Doug

"When your statics problem becomes a dynamics problem, you're in trouble." --me

Moor's Law: "As you go from freshman engineering to Ph.D., the amount of work required per credit hour doubles approximately every 18 months." --me, inspired by Prof. Scott Moor

I'm sorry if you feel that way, however, I stand by my statement, that is how I see it from an outsider's prespective and having talked to people that were there. It was not a "blatantly political statement" because that would mean I have some reason to be political in sying it. I'm not American and nor do I have any angenda against America. If you disagree with the given reasons that the US got involved, fine, obviously you have talked to different people than I have, that doesn't change my belief that the US was misguided in entering what was a civil war and that the main reason behind the doing so was an attempt to stop the spread of Communism through South East Asia. As I said, there is nothing political in my belief of that, it is just what comes across when looking at the history from a netrual position outside of it all.

Other than that, I wasn't the one that brought it up and I was merely responding to a statment that compared the Veitnam War to the Apollo missions, if BA thinks that what I said is wildly inapproprite, then I'll happily stand down, but otherwise or until then, again, I stand by my response to molotov.

__________________
Howling from the Shadows

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. --- JayUtah

You can't reason an irrational person out of an irrational belief. --- Noclevername

Apollo: The History and the Hoax
Enter the World of Athran

This is an unfortunate argument since you're neglecting to consider that half the lunar module gets left on the Moon. Still, the ascent engine is documented as having 3500 pounds of thrust versus the 3000-10000 pounds of the descent engine.

__________________
Everything I need to know I learned through Googling.

Hi molotov,

thank you for reviving an old thread of mine after being dormant for more than one year. :P

Now, what I wonder: You come in here with statements full of self-confidence and giving the impression you know what you're saying and then, suddenly, you reveal that you even don't know some of the most basic figures involved.

Maybe you confuse photos of ballooning space-suits with advertisemnts for Michelin tires? Please show me one, only one, photograph of a real spacesuit ballooned. Only one.

Harald

__________________
"Flying in space is risky business, but just staying on this planet is risky business too." - John Young, astronaut

Go to images.google.com, enter "man in space" and browse for your amusement.

During what mission? An Apollo mission? Interplanetary deep-space mission? And if these people at NSBRI (are we talking about the same institute?) know the truth about space radiation and the impossibility of moon flights, why haven't they come forward and stated clearly that Apollo missions were hoax?