BrendanS
Well-Known Member
You expect me to correct garbage? It's not possible. Go back to basics, correct the fundamental errors, and I'll comment
The Moon.
- Thread starter VO5
- Start date
Ben Dockrell 22
Well-Known Member
I have no inclination or need to correct what id posted. its not meant to be comprehensive nor beyond outlining a few recollections and thoughts on the subjects mentioned.
If you get that offended by what you read on ybw in regards to what is factually unoffensive material im suprised your still here or anywhere ?
lets see the outrage and tantrums then ?
If you get that offended by what you read on ybw in regards to what is factually unoffensive material im suprised your still here or anywhere ?
lets see the outrage and tantrums then ?
DownWest
Well-Known Member
IIRR, the pressure in the capsule and suits is 5 psi.
VO5
Well-Known Member
Considering the surface pressure on earth is around 15 PSI, would not prolonged exposure to such low PSI cause health problems I wonder ?
webcraft
Well-Known Member
.
woooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
- W
woooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
- W
Conachair
Guest
VO5
Well-Known Member
Does not prolonged restriction of oxygen lead to risk of brain damage ?
Heart problems ?
I am not a doctor so I don't know, but surely prolonged exposure to low air pressure must have detrimental health effects.
Heart problems ?
I am not a doctor so I don't know, but surely prolonged exposure to low air pressure must have detrimental health effects.
Moonshining
Well-Known Member
Yes, prolonged restriction of oxygen would lead to a risk of brain damage. No, prolonged exposure to low air pressure doesn't have significant health effects.
Do they not have Google on your planet?
VO5
Well-Known Member
The world does not revolve round Google, it revolves around the sun.
There are lots of things about the moon landing that intrigue me.
For example, this is one of them. Clear explanations are not forthcoming on the question of pressurisation of the moonsuits to maintain air pressure at earth levels in an environment that has no atmosphere. It has never been explained why the suits did not baloon in a zero pressure environment whilst remaining perfectly frexible and not losing their shape as the idea of flexibility and rigidity of structure seem incongruous. Furthermor, now we learn of low pressurisation with its acoompanying risks of brain damage. How can this be ?
Additionally the surface of the moon which faces the sun has no shade, no relief from the direct rays of the sun, no wind to cool the surface or even rain or snow. I should imagine the surface must be boiling hot, unbearable if one is to judge by what it is like to walk barefoot on a sandy beach on a really hot day. It seems amazing to me the soles of the boots did not melt or deform
Moonshining
Well-Known Member
The world does not revolve round Google, it revolves around the sun.
There are lots of things about the moon landing that intrigue me.
For example, this is one of them. Clear explanations are not forthcoming on the question of pressurisation of the moonsuits to maintain air pressure at earth levels in an environment that has no atmosphere. It has never been explained why the suits did not baloon in a zero pressure environment whilst remaining perfectly frexible and not losing their shape as the idea of flexibility and rigidity of structure seem incongruous. Furthermor, now we learn of low pressurisation with its acoompanying risks of brain damage. How can this be ?
Additionally the surface of the moon which faces the sun has no shade, no relief from the direct rays of the sun, no wind to cool the surface or even rain or snow. I should imagine the surface must be boiling hot, unbearable if one is to judge by what it is like to walk barefoot on a sandy beach on a really hot day. It seems amazing to me the soles of the boots did not melt or deform
I really don't believe that you're as ignorant as you're making out, so this must be a wind up. However:
The suits were designed not to balloon. The pressure was reduced to make this less of a problem. To overcome the low pressure, the astronauts breathed 100% pure oxygen, so the partial pressure of oxygen was the same as on earth. (The earth's atmosphere is mostly nitrogen.)
No, there's no shade, so the suits had a massive pack on the back which contained coolant which was circulated around the astronauts' bodies.
The maximum surface temperature of the lunar surface is 123 degrees celcius. Hot, but not exactly something that's going to melt or deform most materials.
It takes about 2 minutes looking around to find this stuff out. How long have you been sitting there pondering this without ever bothering to actually look for facts?
rbcoomer
Well-Known Member
Amusing thread & just a couple of 'observations'... 
The fact that light may reflect more directly from the moon's surface perhaps also has more to do with lack of atmosphere/pollution than the surface? (Presumably the composition of which will be similar to Earth, albeit minus the organic matter?)
That fact is incidentally also quite useful for those that measure the distance to the moon continually by laser. This brings me to point 2 - Lustyd post #7 - I doubt the moon will ever 'fall' as it's actually moving away from us - about 10cm a year IIRC? This presumably will contribute to lesser tides, longer days and ultimately less 'core energy' in the Earth and thus ultimately we'll freeze over... Might take a while however so don't put away the shades just yet!
The fact that light may reflect more directly from the moon's surface perhaps also has more to do with lack of atmosphere/pollution than the surface? (Presumably the composition of which will be similar to Earth, albeit minus the organic matter?)
That fact is incidentally also quite useful for those that measure the distance to the moon continually by laser. This brings me to point 2 - Lustyd post #7 - I doubt the moon will ever 'fall' as it's actually moving away from us - about 10cm a year IIRC? This presumably will contribute to lesser tides, longer days and ultimately less 'core energy' in the Earth and thus ultimately we'll freeze over... Might take a while however so don't put away the shades just yet!
Last edited:
VO5
Well-Known Member
Well, the thing is I sit here pondering trying to work it out for myself. My Aunt Lottie, to her dying day, refused to believe men had landed on the moon. She argued it was plucked out of the Eagle Comic and created into a film...that conveniently was so convincing that it was fiction turned into reality....and all inspired by Dan Dare and the Rocket Ship and The Mykon, etc.,
Now I don't exactly share her views because they are a bit extreme, but, there are things about the moon landing that puzzle me.
I have an open mind about it.
I do not go around digging as you suggest I ought to, because otherwise the risk exists I could be contaminated positively or negatively, as a defender or a subscriber to a conspiracy theory. In order to remain impartial I have to be in the middle of conflicting postures and not in one or the other.
That is why I am in favour of you discussing this among yourselves, as mine is a delicate posture I wish to maintain, so that I can sample (as a priviledged observer) without being accused of being a conspiracist or otherwise.
Now I don't exactly share her views because they are a bit extreme, but, there are things about the moon landing that puzzle me.
I have an open mind about it.
I do not go around digging as you suggest I ought to, because otherwise the risk exists I could be contaminated positively or negatively, as a defender or a subscriber to a conspiracy theory. In order to remain impartial I have to be in the middle of conflicting postures and not in one or the other.
That is why I am in favour of you discussing this among yourselves, as mine is a delicate posture I wish to maintain, so that I can sample (as a priviledged observer) without being accused of being a conspiracist or otherwise.
Tommyrot
Well-Known Member
The Moon landings are historic fact.
By questioning them, you have already taken sides.
Or you are another incarnation of Ben Dockrell 22 on a wind-up.
By questioning them, you have already taken sides.
Or you are another incarnation of Ben Dockrell 22 on a wind-up.
Moonshining
Well-Known Member
Given your admitted ignorance of facts and unwillingness to learn them, it seems your mind is not so much open as empty on the subject.
VO5
Well-Known Member
No, you do not understand my posture despite my attempts to explain it to you.
I am impartial. I am not committed one way or the other.
But I am very curious.
My curiosity is what drives my quest for proper explanations, thank you.
VO5
Well-Known Member
The Moon landings are historic fact.
By questioning them, you have already taken sides.
Or you are another incarnation of Ben Dockrell 22 on a wind-up.
It is because I am not taking sides that I reserve the right to question.
Now, for example, here is another riddle:~
The Earth is supposedly surrounded by a swathe of radioactive dust, called the Allen Bands that stretch out between the Earth and the Moon itself....
How can a Lunar Module cross them twice without being contaminated with radioactivity, or its occupants, for that matter ?
Moonshining
Well-Known Member
It is because I am not taking sides that I reserve the right to question.
Now, for example, here is another riddle:~
The Earth is supposedly surrounded by a swathe of radioactive dust, called the Allen Bands that stretch out between the Earth and the Moon itself....
How can a Lunar Module cross them twice without being contaminated with radioactivity, or its occupants, for that matter ?
Magic pixies sheltered the spaceship using faerie dust.
Tommyrot
Well-Known Member
I'm sure someone could explain the Van Allen belt to you, but why should they?
Most people would simply read up on the subject, if they had a real interest.
If anyone listed the things they didn't fully understand, there would be some extremely long lists around.
Have you any questions about sailing?
Apart from the fictitious "Gravilation".
Most people would simply read up on the subject, if they had a real interest.
If anyone listed the things they didn't fully understand, there would be some extremely long lists around.
Have you any questions about sailing?
Apart from the fictitious "Gravilation".
Flying Penguin
Well-Known Member
Having read through this thread, start to finish, one thing comes to mind............
VO5
Well-Known Member
I'm sure someone could explain the Van Allen belt to you, but why should they?
Most people would simply read up on the subject, if they had a real interest.
If anyone listed the things they didn't fully understand, there would be some extremely long lists around.
Have you any questions about sailing?
Apart from the fictitious "Gravilation".
I am not seeking solutions on this thread, I am impartial and somewhat puzzled. Therefore my posture is one of bemused curiosity. That is why it is preferable for you to discuss this among yourselves.
Gravilation is not ficticious. It is an anomaly that occurs exclusively on the very edge of an anticyclone carrying Polar Air.
And no, I don't have any questions about sailing, but I am sure you have lots.
