Re: [Vo]:Fw: Biggest con jobs in the history of mankind.
At 04:55 PM 12/14/2012, Harvey Norris wrote: When I was a kid in the Cleveland area, we rushed home from school (in the early 60's) to see Captain Penny and his bullwinkle show and assorted cartoons. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Captain_Penny Captain Penny would say at the end of every show, You can fool some of the people all of the time, all of the people some of the time, but you canât fool Mom. (Actually a quote from Little Rascals expunged from a President Lincoln saying??? Remembering this and checking the site out, I have to agree us sheeple gets hoodwinked everytime, and this is why no planes hit the World Trade Center. It is positively amazing as to what big brother can do in the terms of manipulation of beliefs, and the underlying scientific scandal that comes with the package. After extra review of this problem and the following info; Actually what this post shows is, indeed, you can fool some of the people some of the time. Some people are just waiting to be fooled. All it takes is a predeliction to believe something that seems to confirm their suspicions. A closely related concept are the Lagrangian or L points. Joseph-Louis Lagrange was a mathematician who lived between Jan. 1736 and April 1813. During this time a considerable amount of work was done on the orbits of the Moon and planets. One of the key concepts was the mathematical description of the motion of a three body problem, i.e., the Earth, the Moon and the Sun. His work showed that there are places 60° in front of and behind a planet in its orbit where the gravitational forces between the Sun and the planet cancel each other out. That is an inaccurate description of a Lagrange point. The points are not where the gravitational forces cancel each other out. While a single such point exists (obviously along a line between the centers of mass of the two objects), it is not one of the Langrangian points. L1 is the point that is along the central axis. It is a point such that the orbital velocity of the obect around the earth has been lengthened by the reduction in net force toward the earth, such that the orbital period is that of the moon. So the object stays in the same relationship to the earth and moon, if it were at this exact point. However, that point has negative stability. L4 and L5 have positive stability, that's why they are proposed as sites for space colonies. Minimal station-keeping would be necessary. These became known as the Lagrangian or L points. While Lagrange did not believe these points had any special significance in the Solar System, astronomers have since discovered several asteroids in the Lagrangian points for the Earth and Jupiter. The ones for Jupiter are called the Trojan asteroids. Achilles was the first one discovered in 1908. The Lagrangian points also exist in the Earth-Moon system as well. They move about a central point as the Earth and Moon orbit one another and rotate on their axes. The Lagrangian points may become important in the future as they are excellent places to build communication satellites and potentially even space colonies. Several of the L5 Societies and related organizations can be accessed through the National Space Society. I was the Administrator of the L-5 Society in something like 1979 or so, I forget exactly when. Knowing that the ratio of the masses of the Earth and Moon is approximately 81:1 and the gravitational forces vary inversely with the square of the distance, the approximate neutral point can be calculated. The spacecraft, in general, followed an orbit that was not through a neutral point. What is needed to understand the issue is a stody of orbital motion. If one looks at the net gravitational vector operating on a space vehicle, that vector will cause acceleration in its direction. As the object separates from the earth and begins to approach the moon, there will be a point where the decline in velocity, produced when the vehicle is near the earth, turns around and the velocity begins to increase, as the vector begins to point more toward the moon. That is a kind of turnaround point, and the comments refer to it. If the Apollo spacecraft had any kind of velocity read-out (I'd doubt it, this is a very complex problem), they would see the decline in velocity slow to zero and then start to increase (in absolute value) from there, until they actually enter moon orbit and their velocity becomes relatively constant. Descriptions of the spacecraft velocity would come from measurements of, probably, earth-reference effect, such as doppler shift of radio signals. So the gravity on the moon is approximately .64 that of earths gravity or almost two thirds. Now we understand why the Apollo astronauts were making those pitiful 6 inch hops on the moon. Very unlikely. See, by the way, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_hoax -- but this does not deal with the
Re: [Vo]:Fw: Biggest con jobs in the history of mankind.
At 05:36 PM 12/14/2012, John Berry wrote: I have read this before. Surely the answer could be established (if not by any other means) by studying the rate of acceleration and deceleration of rising and falling objects in video on the moon. Besides the bunny hoping astronautics there are various other things, the trajectory of the sand kicked up by the lunar buggy if it can be seen clearly enough. So it should be easy albeit it does require someone with some mathematical skill which I don't have. The problem is that the Great Fake Moon Landing Conspiracy would surely have slowed those videos down appropriately. To truly resolve this, aside from making a knee-jerk assumption as to who is wearing a tin-foil hat, I suggest looking at pre-NASA estimations of the Moon's mass. There is a plot of these at page 66 of the review that I cited. http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu//full/2002Obs...122...61H/061.000.html Essentially, the Earth/Moon mass ratio had settled, through the use of increasingly accurate techniques, at about 81 by 1880. (And before that, there were mixed results, between about 80 and almost 90. Not much less. Because we also know the size of the Moon, we can then calculate the gravity ratio. Notice: the neutral point is a *calculation* that falls out from the distance between the Earth and Moon and the mass ratio. That neutral point is not an observation. If anyone spoke about a neutral point, they were using calculations, either made themselves or by someone else. Trying to estimate the Moon's mass, and thus the gravity, from where the neutral point is located is backwards. Yes, the videos should enable an extimate of gravity at the Moon's surface. All we need to know is the apogee height, and how long it took. If light objects accelerate as rapidy as heavy ones (like dust vs spacesuited men), that indicates a vacuum. But a skillful fake video is certainly not beyond the capacity of a well-funded organization. Hence the reliance I'm suggesting on prior sources. Of course, the paper cited above is hosted on the SAO/NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS). So one who believes in the conspiracy could then assert that this is all nonsense. Except it can be checked. The paper is thoroughly referenced to old sources. Someone who believes in the conspiracy now has a splendid opportunity to prove it. Just look up those sources. If they are all missing, OMG! One of the problems with a paranoid theory is that one can take each piece of evidence and demonstrate that it is entirely bogus, that the real evidence, relating to the issue raised, points in the other direction. But the theorist has developed ten reasons for believing the theory, and if you shoot one down, why, they remain confident. After all, there are nine other reasons. And if you go through this with another reason, they same thing happens, only there is a peculiar phenomenon. They don't remember what they don't understand, that's actually normal. So at this pint they once again have the comfort of nine other reasons. Not eight. The number does not decline. I once went through this process with the fellow who discovered the so-called miracle of the nineteen in the Qur'an. He had an idiosyncratic belief that the direction of Mecca was southerly from Tucson. (He made a big deal out of it, for him, that nearly everyone else was praying in a northerly direction was a proof of how astray they were.) He had ten arguments. I went through them all, and each time -- the guy actually was not stupid -- he granted that his argument was defective. When we came to the end, he trotted out one more argument: God had told him. This, actually, led to his assassination. Long story. Totally unnecessary, except he really did believe what he'd invented, and ... God had told him he was right. Tough to answer that argument, eh? Years later, his followers were still using those defective arguments, and, of course they believed that God had told him. Personally, I wonder why God would use defective arguments, why God would need to argue at all. Of course, God did not give him the arguments, he made them up, and we don't actually know what God actually said to him (if anything). Maybe he misunderstood!
[Vo]:Fw: Biggest con jobs in the history of mankind.
When I was a kid in the Cleveland area, we rushed home from school (in the
early 60's) to see Captain Penny and his bullwinkle show and assorted cartoons.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Captain_Penny
Captain Penny would say at the end of every show, You can fool some of
the people all of the time, all of the people some of the time, but you
can’t fool Mom. (Actually a quote from Little Rascals expunged from a President
Lincoln saying???
Remembering this and checking the site out, I have to agree us sheeple gets
hoodwinked everytime, and this is why no planes hit the World Trade Center. It
is positively amazing as to what big brother can do in the terms of
manipulation of beliefs, and the underlying scientific scandal that comes with
the package. After extra review of this problem and the following info;
A closely related concept are the Lagrangian or L points.
Joseph-Louis Lagrange was a mathematician who lived between Jan. 1736 and
April 1813. During this time a considerable amount of work was done on
the orbits of the Moon and planets. One of the key concepts was the mathematical
description of the motion of a three body problem, i.e., the Earth, the
Moon and the Sun. His work showed that there are places 60° in front
of and behind a planet in its orbit where the gravitational forces between
the Sun and the planet cancel each other out. These became known as the
Lagrangian or L points. While Lagrange did not believe these points had
any special significance in the Solar System, astronomers have since discovered
several asteroids in the Lagrangian points for the Earth and Jupiter. The
ones for Jupiter are called the Trojan asteroids. Achilles was the first
one discovered in 1908.
The Lagrangian points also exist in the Earth-Moon
system as well. They move about a central point as the Earth and Moon orbit
one another and rotate on their axes. The Lagrangian points may become
important in the future as they are excellent places to build communication
satellites and potentially even space colonies. Several of the L5 Societies
and related organizations can be accessed through the National Space Society.
Knowing that the ratio of the masses of the Earth and Moon is approximately
81:1 and the gravitational forces vary inversely with the square of the
distance, the approximate neutral point can be calculated.
So the gravity on the moon is approximately .64 that of earths gravity or
almost two thirds. Now we understand why the Apollo astronauts were making
those pitiful 6 inch hops on the moon.
That the gravity on the Moon is one sixth that of earths is one of the biggest
con jobs in the history of mankind.
http://www.thelivingmoon.com/47john_lear/02files/Neutral_Point.html
Now looking at the graph near the start of article we have a red line that
represents the summation of both the gravitational forces, when in fact if the
object was in between the earth and the moon, we would instead be subtracting
those quantities to obtain a zero result. Why do we need to know the quantity
when those forces are acting together, when actually we are looking for the
quantity acting when they are in opposition? Aha. they must be referring to
the point in the orbit 60 degrees BEFORE that midway point! In that case then
the neutral point would be 43,000 miles from the moon. And actually only ONE
component of each vector would be acting together, and the remaining ones in
cancellation. The issue becomes even more confusing to say the least because
the moons vector angle will be smaller then the earths vector angle because
these are not equidistant pathways. Even though we specify 60 degrees in the
orbit, this does not imply that
the force vectors themselves will be at 60 degrees! {or was this the original
intention of the skeptics viewpoint?}And right now the sun is setting, but it
actually is already behind the earth, (because of light speed), and I am too
tired to think anymore about the issue except to repeat my assertion that I
believe we have been hoodwinked! Why did not the skeptic say that one case
involves vectors and the other does not! Think about
it! http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AoDP1RaUX3PSxqYNJfJlMLDty6IX;_ylv=3?qid=20120214151338AAL3xme
A) What will an object weigh on the Moon's surface if it weighs 170 N on
Earth's surface?
b) How many Earth radii must this same object be from the
center of Earth if it is to weigh the same as it does on the Moon?
please EXPLAIN how you found the answer. Thanks!
10 months agomy answer;It was Sir Isaac Newton who had first
calculated
the Earth-Moon neutral point using his theory of gravitation. That
theory gave him an average Earth- Moon distance of 238,900 miles, and
the neutral point thus occurred at ~ 23,900 miles from the moon(1). This
of course gave the familiar figure that the Moon's gravitational
attraction was about 1/6th that of Earth.
But then came a 1969
Re: [Vo]:Fw: Biggest con jobs in the history of mankind.
I have read this before.
Surely the answer could be established (if not by any other means) by
studying the rate of acceleration and deceleration of rising and falling
objects in video on the moon.
Besides the bunny hoping astronautics there are various other things,
the trajectory of the sand kicked up by the lunar buggy if it can be seen
clearly enough.
So it should be easy albeit it does require someone with some mathematical
skill which I don't have.
On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 10:55 AM, Harvey Norris harv...@yahoo.com wrote:
When I was a kid in the Cleveland area, we rushed home from school (in the
early 60's) to see Captain Penny and his bullwinkle show and assorted
cartoons.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Captain_Penny
Captain Penny would say at the end of every show, You can fool some of
the people all of the time, all of the people some of the time, but you
can’t fool Mom. (Actually a quote from Little Rascals expunged from a
President Lincoln saying???
Remembering this and checking the site out, I have to agree us sheeple
gets hoodwinked everytime, and this is why no planes hit the World Trade
Center. It is positively amazing as to what big brother can do in the terms
of manipulation of beliefs, and the underlying scientific scandal that
comes with the package. After extra review of this problem and the
following info;
*A closely related concept are the Lagrangian or L points. Joseph-Louis
Lagrange was a mathematician who lived between Jan. 1736 and April 1813.
During this time a considerable amount of work was done on the orbits of
the Moon and planets. One of the key concepts was the mathematical
description of the motion of a three body problem, i.e., the Earth, the
Moon and the Sun. His work showed that there are places 60° in front of and
behind a planet in its orbit where the gravitational forces between the Sun
and the planet cancel each other out. These became known as the Lagrangian
or L points. While Lagrange did not believe these points had any special
significance in the Solar System, astronomers have since discovered several
asteroids in the Lagrangian points for the Earth and Jupiter. The ones for
Jupiter are called the Trojan asteroids. Achilles was the first one
discovered in 1908.*
*The Lagrangian points also exist in the Earth-Moon system as well. They
move about a central point as the Earth and Moon orbit one another and
rotate on their axes. The Lagrangian points may become important in the
future as they are excellent places to build communication satellites and
potentially even space colonies. Several of the L5 Societies and related
organizations can be accessed through the National Space Society.*
*Knowing that the ratio of the masses of the Earth and Moon is
approximately 81:1 and the gravitational forces vary inversely with the
square of the distance, the approximate neutral point can be calculated.*
**
*So the gravity on the moon is approximately .64 that of earths gravity
or almost two thirds. Now we understand why the Apollo astronauts were
making those pitiful 6 inch hops on the moon.*
**
*That the gravity on the Moon is one sixth that of earths is one of the
biggest con jobs in the history of mankind.*
http://www.thelivingmoon.com/47john_lear/02files/Neutral_Point.html
Now looking at the graph near the start of article we have a red line that
represents the summation of both the gravitational forces, when in fact if
the object was in between the earth and the moon, we would instead be
subtracting those quantities to obtain a zero result. Why do we need to
know the quantity when those forces are acting together, when actually we
are looking for the quantity acting when they are in opposition? Aha. they
must be referring to the point in the orbit 60 degrees BEFORE that midway
point! In that case then the neutral point would be 43,000 miles from the
moon. And actually only ONE component of each vector would be acting
together, and the remaining ones in cancellation. The issue becomes even
more confusing to say the least because the moons vector angle will be
smaller then the earths vector angle because these are not equidistant
pathways. Even though we specify 60 degrees in the orbit, this does not
imply that the force vectors themselves will be at 60 degrees! {or was this
the original intention of the skeptics viewpoint?}And right now the sun is
setting, but it actually is already behind the earth, (because of light
speed), and I am too tired to think anymore about the issue except to
repeat my assertion that I believe we have been hoodwinked! Why did not
the skeptic say that one case involves vectors and the other does not!
Think about it!
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AoDP1RaUX3PSxqYNJfJlMLDty6IX;_ylv=3?qid=20120214151338AAL3xme
A) What will an object weigh on the Moon's surface if it weighs 170 N on
Earth's surface?
b) How many Earth radii must this same object
