Yeah I know there's already a thread. I believe this is sufficiently different than the one just below it to make a new thread. If I'm wrong, merge of course =).

As per the rules (that I read before posting, yay) I hereby state that:

I am not a conspiracy theorist, nor do I advocate that the Lunar landings were faked.


Okay on to the purpose of my post.
I recently got into a debate with someone over the internet about the Van Allen belts. He wants me to show him several items, none of which I have, or have been able to find yet.
-> proton/electron flux in the inner belt.
-> proton/electron flux in the outer belt.
-> peer reviewed publications ("not wiki" DARN!!! )
-> The ability of the Apollo CSM to shield against VAB radiation.
And of course he wants links.

He wants calculations.
He's sent me some calculations from me, and he's sent me his calculations in which he got a dosage of 250 rem for the Apollo astronauts, yet IIRC, they only got exposed to less than 1 rem.

Any help will be greatly appreciated.

I'd love to see those calculations.

The conspiracy theorists trip up on the notion that there should be one particular number for energy and flux of the various particles in the Van Allen belts. In fact the mathematical models that determine those things rely on a number of variables such as latitude, longitude, geodetic altitude, time of year, direction you're facing, and so forth. It's not just one set of numbers, which means his "calculations" are probably pretty naive.

The standard models are AP8 and AE8 for protons and electrons, respectively, and can be obtained from NASA/Goddard.

Use 7 grams per square centimeter as the average shield factor for the Apollo CM, although in most places the shielding would be considered quite a bit thicker, such as in the direction through the service module.

As for peer-reviewed papers, try just about anything that was written in the 1960s in any of several standard astrophysics journals.

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

He doesn't provide references, but here he goes.

Outer belt region (2.5 -6)rE (5 MeV average) electrons (h1=5 rE) (h2=1.5 rE)
Use D1= Sqrt[(2 X 6rE - h1)h1]= 5.916 rE ~ 37862 Km
D2= Sqrt[(2 X 2.5rE - h2)h2]= 2.598 rE ~ 6627 Km
D2-D1=21235 Km
Minimum Transit time (outer belt) = 21235 Km/7.2 Km/sec ~ 2950 Sec


The side CM walls are 6 mm Aluminium+1.27 honey comb steel
hence negligible energy loss. The base walls are thicker (considerable energy loss)and
cover approx 2 Pi/3 Steradians.
Side walls cover approx 4Pi/3 Steradians.
Hence 1/3 rd of protons should have 40 %(approx)
energy lost while 2/3 (through side walls) freely pass (10 % loss).



NOW proton flux (average 50 MeV) a minimum value is 10^5 protons/sec/cm^2.
for 1.6-1.9 rE particle flux approx 10^6 protons/sec/cm^2.
6 mm Aluminium conical side walls (CM)
will cause a small energy loss the protons.
Also remember the region in 1.6-1.9 rE has
proton flux above 10^6 p/cm^s/sec.
take minimum human body surface area = 2 X 10^4 cm^2.



approx 650 sec through region1
approx 350 sec through region2
region 1= 1.3 -1.6 rE & 1.9 -2.2 rE
(10^5 protons /sec / cm^2 )
region 2= 1.6 -1.9 rE (10^6 protons /sec / cm^2 )
Total protons = 8.3 X 10^12

Total energy absorbed by astronaut
= 8.3 (2/3 X50 % ) X 10^12 X 5 MeV X 1.6 X 10^-19 ~115 J.
5.3 J/70 Kg =0.076 J/Kg=76 rad X 2(RBE)= 150 rem (for protons).
When they return they will have 1/3 X 150 = 50 rem
(radial cut through inner VA belt)
total radiation due to inner VA belt is
200 rem (minimum).


The inner VAB has
---------------------
(1.3-1.9 rE ..flux 10^6 e/sec/cm^2.)
for 3 -10 Mev electrons.average 5 MeV
Stopping range fro electrons.
3 MeV (Al)=1.5 cm
20 MeV (Al)=3 cm
50 MeV range (Al)= 6 cm
100 MeV range (Al)= 12 cm;
So most of the 3 MeV and above electrons cross through with energy loss(assume 50 %)
through the 6mm Al+1.27 cm stainless steel side walls.



Inner belt radiations = 200 (protons) rem
------------------------
Outer VAB (electrons) using the same arguments

2X10^4 cm^2 X 2950 sec X 10^6 e/sec/cm^2 ~6 X 10^13 e
Energy absorbed
=6 X 10^13 (2/3 (loss factor)) X 5 MeV X 1.6X10^-19 = 27 J ;
27 J/70 kg = 0.38 J/Kg= 38 rad =38 rem.

When they return they will have 1/3 X 38 = 12.6 rem
(radial cut through outer VA belt)
Total=38+12.6=50 rem.

Thus INNER+OUTER =250 ~ 250 rem.

I did my own research and math on it before I understood flux and all that. Even with my primative method a few years ago here Van Allen Belt? you don't get anywhere near the required radiation to actualy kill someone, or even make them sick.

Basicaly when you compare power levels of Van Allen belts to known artificialy Sources, it's just plain weak.

__________________
There is no problem that cannot be solved by a suitable application of high explosives - US Army Demolitions School

I just saw Hayley's comet, she waved, Said "why you always running in place? Even the man in the moon disappeared, Somewhere in the stratosphere" - Shinedown

http://worldsofothersuns.home.comcast.net/

Also, are the timings in those calculations for passage through the belt actually correct? I understand the trajectory was planned such that they would spend the minimum amount of time possible actually within the high energy particle area of the belt. However, i do not know the actual figures, but I know it was minutes rather than hours.

__________________
The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds new discoveries, is not Eureka! (I found it!) but rather, 'hmm.... that's funny...'
- Isaac Asimov

Are we alone in the Universe? Are we the only intelligent life? Who knows? But the universe is so BIG, it somehow seems such a waste of space if we are ....

I just pulled 1 hour out of a hat. I wasn't tryign to relate the time to that the space ships spent in the belt. In fact i was avoiding anythign related to the apollo missions to avoid conspiratorial backlashes.

__________________
There is no problem that cannot be solved by a suitable application of high explosives - US Army Demolitions School

I just saw Hayley's comet, she waved, Said "why you always running in place? Even the man in the moon disappeared, Somewhere in the stratosphere" - Shinedown

http://worldsofothersuns.home.comcast.net/

Why are you letting him push the burden on to you? Have him provide the actual levels and times in the belts along with trajectory information on how the Apollo modules transited the belt.

probably because by doing that, the other guy will claim victory because you can't come up with the numbers to show that he is wrong.
they frame the argument so that they can't lose- or at least so they can claim victory and get you to stop with all the fancy book lernin stuff.

__________________
"blacker than the blackest black... times infinity."- Nathan Explosion
The.. Best.. Thread..Ever...

If I'm not mistaken, the only way he can prove the Van Allen belts were indeed lethal is to show that the values/flux support this alleged lethality. He made the claim, he should have the supporting data.

I completely agree that he should be providing references for his numbers.

Unfortunately, he's already of the mindset that the missions never left Earth orbit (if they flew at all). Providing him measurements from missions he believes are faked are not going to be convincing to him.

I've been looking around for early Pioneer data on the belts, so far I've scrounged up

Van Allen Radiation Belts
http://engineering.dartmouth.edu/~Si...imonsen_91.pdf

Low-energy integral fluxes:
Electrons > 1.6 MeV
Protons > 30 MeV

High-energy fluxes:
Electrons > 40 KeV
Protons = 0.1 to 5 MeV

I'm just not sure where to go from here.

Here is a big list of peer reviewed papers on the radiation belts.

__________________

Any comments in glorious red are to be considered in ModeratorMode.


善數, 不用籌策 (shàn shù, bù yòng chóu cè)
He who is good at counting, uses no counting tools
“A good scientist has freed himself of concepts and keeps his mind open to what is”
道德經, 二十七 (dào dé jīng, 27)

it don't work that way in the CT world. you need to prove them wrong, or they are right.

__________________
"blacker than the blackest black... times infinity."- Nathan Explosion
The.. Best.. Thread..Ever...

My point is that you should make him show his numbers mean anything.

The Van Allen belts are not some area where the flux jumps up to a high value and just stays there. Different areas that are in the belts can have wildly different fluxes.

Make him prove that the numbers he is using for flux are accurate. He should show that the numbers he is using are actually something that the apollo capsule would pass through on the way to the moon.

We know the course it supposedly took, and the flux that it should have passes through. He shouldnt have to pull out random numbers for his calculations

Ask him if he knows that the Van Allen belts are tilted 23 degrees from the ecliptic, and wether that means that the apollo mission actually passed through the belts.

I'm not going to lie, I wasn't aware the belts were inclined as such. Though if they're perpendicular to Earth's magnetic field, then this would make sense.

And... I'm pretty sure the Apollo missions did pass through the VA belts. Even if they are tilted 23 degrees, they're fairly "wide" (in an north-south sense).

While this is true, the point about the inclination is that, with the belts varying in density across their width and the most intense regions being quite concentrated around the equator, you could swing out of LEO 'over' or 'under' the most intense regions.

__________________
"The very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common: They don't alter their views to fit the facts, they alter the facts to fit their views." The Doctor, Doctor Who: The Face of Evil.

Not only that, but the belts are thinner the farther you are from the equator. Both effects would combine to reduce the radiation dose.

Cross ref: http://apollohoax.proboards.com/inde...ay&thread=2553

__________________
Reality moves at the speed of light.
If the text of this post is blue, it's a "Moderator comment".
[ The RULES of the Forum ] [ Forum FAQs ] [ Conspiracy Theory advice ] [ Alternate Theory Advice ]
To report a post (even this one) to the moderation team - use the /!\ icon at the top-right of the post.

The side CM walls...

Wrong already. Use 7 g/cm² as the nominal CM-only shield factor. Since that appears in his dosage estimate at the end, that's where the correction ought first to be applied.

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

You may want to try these two publications (in pdf)

NASA SP-71
NASA SP-169

Also Richard Hoagland's site has some good info on radiation for Apollo flights