furi
Mars
The Secret is to keep banging those rocks together.
Posts: 260
|
Post by furi on Jun 9, 2007 20:08:39 GMT -4
However, I predict a response along the lines of 'how am I supposed to verify that' or 'NASA made a special camera to avoid this signature effect giving the game away' or some other such nonsense. true, that would be the obvious rebuttal, however the could always just speed up the cycling and the frame rate by 2 and a squidge times, of course this would negate the reduction of bandwidth and there for require a higher speed transmission system, so the would need to fake new electronics systems. also the sensor would be receiving significantly less light per frame if filmed at this speed so they would need to fake better sensors. where these camera still susceptible to bloom if so they would need to change the physics relating to charge dispersal in the frames as well. and if it wasn't the electrics they altered to sensitize the cameras optics to work at this speed then they must have proportionately altered the lighting and Albedo of all materials to keep the apparent scenes equal... I scare myself at the blindingly obviousness of the hoax (takes medication and goes back to playing watching Blake's 7)
|
|
|
Post by hplasm on Jun 10, 2007 16:36:28 GMT -4
Simpler to just get The Amazing Kreskin to hypnotize everyone into believing it happened...
|
|
|
Post by dwight on Jun 10, 2007 21:47:47 GMT -4
Color isn't the issue here. Body movement is the issue. Your explanation is very vague. Please go into some detail. Colour is very much the issue. It is NOT vague at all. Especially if you knew what it meant to your argument. I REFUSE to go into detail if you cannot justify your argument without my help. YOU SHOULD KNOW ABOUT THIS BEFORE MAKING UNFOUNDED CLAIMS. You were proved wrong. Be an adult of for higher powers sake and admit it. Childish routines are the realm of psychiatrists and not an Apollo hoax debate. FACT Your argument proved you wrong. Get over it.
|
|
|
Post by gillianren on Jun 11, 2007 21:45:48 GMT -4
Where have I heard this hubris before? Ah, yes: Vincini: Let me put it this way, have you ever heard of Plato? Aristotle? Socrates? Westley: Yes... Vincini: Morons. Inconceivable! You spelled "Vizzini" wrong!
|
|
|
Post by donnieb on Jun 11, 2007 22:10:35 GMT -4
Where have I heard this hubris before? Ah, yes: Vincini: Let me put it this way, have you ever heard of Plato? Aristotle? Socrates? Westley: Yes... Vincini: Morons. Inconceivable! You spelled "Vizzini" wrong! You keep using that word...
|
|
MarkS
Earth
Why is it so?
Posts: 101
|
Post by MarkS on Jun 12, 2007 0:33:31 GMT -4
Inconceivable! You spelled "Vizzini" wrong! Yipes! My fault for blindly copying the first Google hit of the quote I encountered.
|
|
|
Post by BertL on Jun 12, 2007 12:49:37 GMT -4
Color isn't the issue here. Body movement is the issue. Your explanation is very vague. Please go into some detail. Colour is very much the issue. It is NOT vague at all. Especially if you knew what it meant to your argument. I REFUSE to go into detail if you cannot justify your argument without my help. YOU SHOULD KNOW ABOUT THIS BEFORE MAKING UNFOUNDED CLAIMS. You were proved wrong. Be an adult of for higher powers sake and admit it. Childish routines are the realm of psychiatrists and not an Apollo hoax debate. FACT Your argument proved you wrong. Get over it. If you do not understand what dwight is talking about, please say so. I'll explain. If you do understand what dwight is talking about, then show us your knowledge and understanding.
|
|
furi
Mars
The Secret is to keep banging those rocks together.
Posts: 260
|
Post by furi on Jun 12, 2007 13:17:03 GMT -4
Slightly off topic not intended as a thradjack, but is sort of related.
I am looking to start a new thread, as a few exploratory calculations of mine have found a serious problem with energy conservation principals on a theoretic simulation of the moon ie taking Charlie dukes jump as a good example. the motion of the jump could be emulated by increasing the frame rate by 2.64 however if we take the Energy calculations are not reproduced there seems to be a 15% error (forget the actual value as my spreadsheet is at work)
What I am wondering is if anyone can point me to video footage that can be utilised and have reasonable accurate photo-telemetry (Is that a word?I mean accurate recording of 3d movement between the frame) espescially concerning vertical motion, as it is this particular component that requires the slow down.
So far I have the jump salute, and the Feather / hammer drop, the rover footasge, also good dust distubance shots as well. I am not sure if accurate measurement of Aldrins Bouncing around learning to walk could be accurately measured. any photo graphs or video that has been accuratly measured for heights motion etc will also greatfully be welcomed, I can never refuse good evidence, however when looking for such facys with apollo there is TOO much evidence.
any figures or or segments to look at will be greatfully received, the thread not meant to be a photo shadow flood light analysis thread, it is more to determine the actual physical problems with design structure and the energy/momentum conservation problems this would create just a nice simple Question of physics forces and implications.
to assist in keeping this thread on track might be better to pm me with suggestions,
|
|
|
Post by JayUtah on Jun 12, 2007 13:30:28 GMT -4
The word you're looking for is photogrammetry -- the measurement of objects in photographs. In your case it should be sufficient to measure motion directly in the image plane, scaled appropriately. You should not gain much precision with a photogrammetric rectification. I would use the PLSS as a scale reference. Somewhere I have a dimensioned drawing of the PLSS from which I can get you the measured height dimension.
It should be noted that purely vertical motion can be emulated simply by changing the time base. What cannot be emulated is ballistic motion that includes both a horizontal and a vertical component.
|
|
|
Post by scooter on Jun 12, 2007 14:07:28 GMT -4
A bit OT but they just finished deploying the big solar arrays on the ISS...darn things looked to be waving in the breeze up there. Of course they were ocillations created by panels coming unstuck, but it sure looked like they were waving...musta been filmed in the desert somewhere...
|
|
furi
Mars
The Secret is to keep banging those rocks together.
Posts: 260
|
Post by furi on Jun 12, 2007 14:50:31 GMT -4
I have realised that the vertical motion can be time scaled, and that horizontal axes are cause of some interest, what I am also going to investigate is basic conservation of momentum/energy and structural physical limitation of structures under impuls shock due to a compressive timeframe, whilst as well as basic ballistic trajectory of independ items can provide a time referance (eg dust) it doesn't solely disprove any time referance manipulation, although citation on the camera optics available, light response and the like could be used, I am not even an amateur when it comes to that aspect, I intend primarily to explore basic Newtonian "layman" physics, and tackle later accepted Energy Power material types later on solely within the referance of a scaled time argument, the done with wires aspect can be handled elsewhere
If you could PM the link to the PLSS details, it would be greatly appreciated.
|
|
|
Post by JayUtah on Jun 12, 2007 15:04:39 GMT -4
My PLSS drawings aren't a link.
|
|
furi
Mars
The Secret is to keep banging those rocks together.
Posts: 260
|
Post by furi on Jun 12, 2007 15:21:23 GMT -4
oops sorry, I just meant if it had been previously posted some where, were the PLSS dimensions Identivcal/similar in all Missions I know they changed the capabilities of them and increased functionality, but I imagine the volume constraints must have been strict ((why do I get CT sites first when I try and search online ... Grrrr, now maybe there is a fox/timewarner//google conspiracy ) Do you think HB photo analysts would accept arguments based on scaled PLSS size? just trying to forestall the, well they used a pygmy with a smaller scaled suit and that is why the momentum didn't break the ankle argument.
|
|
reynoldbot
Jupiter
A paper-white mask of evil.
Posts: 790
|
Post by reynoldbot on Jun 12, 2007 15:39:29 GMT -4
On the forefront, what Rocky is doing isn't really that bad. There's nothing wrong with making claims. But you've gotta follow it up by investigating those claims. Find evidence that supports your claims or conduct an experiment that verifies them. Rocky's problem is that he refuses to do either and just sticks to making unsupported claims.
Rocky, I'm still waiting for you to explain how the astronauts could have possibly spent many hours hopping around at top speed. It would have been necessary to make the slowed down footage look realistic. I want you to attach a bunch of weights to your body and do a bunch of manual labor as fast as you can for six hours straight. Videotape it as proof that it's possible.
|
|
|
Post by JayUtah on Jun 12, 2007 15:41:59 GMT -4
No offense taken. I have copies of the layout drawings made by Hamilton-Standard engineers. They may be also available in digital form online, but I wouldn't know where.
There are no HB photo analysts. There are only HBs who fancy themselves photo analysts, but have no demonstrable training, experience, or skill at it. So whether they accept it or not is largely irrelevant; PLSS height is a reasonably defensible choice of scale reference for this problem. If HBs object, it is unlikely they can do so on valid grounds. We know the PLSS is a certain number of inches tall. If you have a good digital transfer of the film, the PLSS will be so many pixels tall. That gives you a way to convert pixels in the image to actual measurements in the scene.
Since the PLSS height and jump height are reasonably equidistant from the camera, and lie in a plane roughly perpendicular to the optical axis, you have a reasonably defensible basis from which to compute distances in the scene.
|
|