|
Post by BertL on Oct 21, 2007 9:59:10 GMT -4
Jay, maybe you could provide a book number/page number as a reference to where you found the height of the PLSS. "My shelf" isn't too much of a source (although it makes for a good chuckle ;D).
|
|
|
Post by JayUtah on Oct 21, 2007 10:11:04 GMT -4
You are uneducated person. You not know history of ?Apollo? program!
I know far more about it than you do. I am an internationally-recognized expert in it.
While the Apollo project was brought to the fore by political proclamation, it nevertheless was built upon existing technology and also subsequently developed a great deal of additional technology to accomplish its goal, which had political, scientific, and engineering components. While political vacillation comes and goes, technology either works or it doesn't. It's therefore a better determiner of the authenticity of the program. Since the program served three presidents and two competing political parties, it's difficult to dismiss it as pure political fluff. Nor would political will be served by a fake program.
Further, the Soviet space program was heavily motivated also by political interests. Does that by itself suggest that all the Soviet claims are false?
This signifies you not have a proof. I no distrusted in it. You are liar!
As I said, I have hands-on experience with this technology. I am a recognized expert in it. I don't mindlessly Google, as do some. I gave you my source and I suggested where you might find a copy of it. Hamilton Standard's reference for the drawing is SVHS7061007-1. Hamilton Standard is now known as Hamilton Sundstrand.
When you provide the requested source for your estimate of PLSS dimensions, then you may accuse others of lying.
|
|
|
Post by JayUtah on Oct 21, 2007 10:17:15 GMT -4
My shelf" isn't too much of a source (although it makes for a good chuckle ;D).
It's literally a large-format second-generation photocopy of a somewhat amateur drawing. It's literally on my shelf, in my collection of engineering-as-art. I've seen poor digital versions of it floating around the web, but I don't have any current links to it. I'm hoping someone does.
|
|
|
Post by JayUtah on Oct 21, 2007 10:35:30 GMT -4
After finally remembering how to spell Karl's name (Dodenhoff), and following my own dead links endlessly, here: www.myspacemuseum.com/plssblueprints.htmHis site has moved since I was last there. And there is indeed a reasonably useful scan of the drawing. It seems it has been shrunk repeatedly until it would fit on someone's scanner, making some of the lettering difficult to read. But the dimension is clearly visible. The title block says it's a J-size drawing, which would make the page a meter tall in the original. Mine is about 24 inches tall. I've had it for years. It was in the blueprint section of the engineering library where I got my undergraduate degree.
|
|
|
Post by JayUtah on Oct 21, 2007 10:40:49 GMT -4
You are not teacher for me, and I am not pupil for you.
Then display actual knowledge.
Do not point to my mistakes, prove that I mistaken.
Your mistakes prove that you are mistaken, by definition.
You seem to believe that in order to refute you, someone is obliged to make a correct computation of your problem. First, tofu did that on page 1 of this thread, and you have largely ignored it.
Second, you don't consider the possibility that your approach is entirely wrong in both method and execution. A wrong method wrongly executed is wrong, but it cannot be corrected by simply executing the wrong method correctly.
You have the burden to prove your claims. If that proof contains error, your claim fails. It does not require a counterclaim.
Now are you actually interested in this discussion, or are you simply going to continue to use Apollo as an excuse for your nationalistic bigotry?
|
|
|
Post by scooter on Oct 21, 2007 11:18:19 GMT -4
So, our Russian visitor watches ONE video clip, and a bad one at that. Refusing to employ a better quality version, he determines that the entire program was faked. ...and that we are all under NASA employment. Does he realize that literally thousands of companies were used to design and fabricate the hardware of Apollo? That the workers did not work for NASA? If that one piece of video was faked, then ALL the video is faked. Maniac, show us the flaws in all the other video. This guy is a fools' fool...believing every bad argument ever presented by the hoaxters hook line and sinker. Maniac, you are not an inquisitive or curious person, you don't study or investigate. You just spout your party line to the point of embarrassment. You really should learn to think for yourself.
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Oct 21, 2007 11:20:24 GMT -4
He may be a fool, incurious, etc. but I think it's pretty obvious that he's also a troll.
|
|
|
Post by tofu on Oct 21, 2007 14:23:09 GMT -4
tofu did that on page 1 of this thread, and you have largely ignored it. I counted the number of pixels that the astronaut's right foot moved per frame. Conspiromaniac's response was: I say about left leg of the astronaut! I didn't say anything at the time, but I got a real chuckle out of that. Yes, clearly, the right leg of the four meter astronaut is falling at a different rate than the left leg. How silly of me.
|
|
|
Post by Grand Lunar on Oct 21, 2007 15:38:15 GMT -4
One thing I'll say about our "friend" is that he doesn't limit himself to insulting Americans. Not that any insult of any nationality is a good thing.
A question for Jay:
I want to know more about that, mostly because for how amazing it is. I assume your website is the main thing that catches attention?
|
|
|
Post by JayUtah on Oct 21, 2007 15:59:23 GMT -4
I want to know more about that, mostly because for how amazing it is. I assume your website is the main thing that catches attention?
The web site primarily, yes. Also the television program for Channel 4 in the United Kingdom, which is the same program (with American narration) as was shown on National Geographic and other channels, and on some European network. Eric Jones consults me every so often for ALSJ matters. I did some work for Arthur C. Clarke a number of years ago -- research for a paper he was about to give. Ed Mitchell gives my name out to people who want to know engineering details that he's forgotten. And Clavius was written up in a blurb in Science. I've been quoted in the New York Times Magazine, and in Metropole.
Now that said, there are a lot of people who are more eminent experts than I: names you'd recognize such as Andrew Chaikin and of course Roger Launius, and even people perhaps like Karl or Eric. These people have done many more times the research I have. But at the same time, I'm not ignorant of the Apollo program's history. So when I say it's hogwash that Apollo was "90% political," that's an informed opinion.
|
|
|
Post by macapple on Oct 21, 2007 19:32:30 GMT -4
This is always an interesting debate on the science of physics based upon film images.
The sad part is that it is very hard to ascertain a true position that refutes the space footage without using almost similar equipment and accurate measurements and timing to measure the outcome. Using any software based analysis based on streamed media or "tainted" downloads is always going to be flawed. If you can use the original prints or certified copy's.
A simple example of how bad this method is just look at footage using the 16mm camera and TV camera where both are recording the same image. Both are fundamentally different in behavior and frames per second. Try the Apollo 17 Trans Earth EVA.
I have both the 16mm and TV footage on film but not digital .
I will try and copy to prove the point.
i have also been told to get the DVDs from spacecraft films which have lots of footage.
Using maths is a great method to calculate physics but you must apply the rules of physics first.
The simple way to look at this, is go to a beach stick your feet in the sand and film the reaction when you jump 2 feet in the air..I would be very impressed if the sand reacts any way near that of these films..
The issues of mechanics, physics would really put this one to bed.
|
|
|
Post by Data Cable on Oct 21, 2007 22:04:43 GMT -4
You are uneducated person. You not know history of ?Apollo? program! Wow, just.... wow. "Mr. Kettle, Mr. Pot on line 3."
|
|
|
Post by JayUtah on Oct 22, 2007 14:22:42 GMT -4
i have also been told to get the DVDs from spacecraft films which have lots of footage.
They have lots of great footage. They can be considered reasonably complete. But Mark Gray produces them specifically to facilitate historical research of this type. We are his target consumers and he has our needs in mind.
Using maths is a great method to calculate physics but you must apply the rules of physics first.
I touched on this before, and I want to say it again. Many conspiracy theorists don't consider that they approach they're taking is wrong or simplistic. So when someone says, "That's not right," they think all that needs to be done is to fix a number here or there. And then they'll often say, "Okay, then you tell me what numbers I should be using!" In short, they don't know just how wrong they are.
You can draw an analogy to cooking. A successful dish consists of both the right recipe and the right technique. If your recipe for chili calls for boiled codfish instead of a nice chuck roast or beef brisket, you're in trouble no matter how carefully you follow it. You picked up the wrong recipe. And if you get a good recipe, you still have to cube the beef carefully: cutting it wrongly into strips or uneven chunks will ruin even the best-appointed recipe. So when someone says, "Okay you're so smart, you tell me the right way to boil the codfish for my chili," you just have to sort of sit back for a minute and think about your answer.
|
|
|
Post by macapple on Oct 22, 2007 16:47:18 GMT -4
i have also been told to get the DVDs from spacecraft films which have lots of footage.They have lots of great footage. They can be considered reasonably complete. But Mark Gray produces them specifically to facilitate historical research of this type. We are his target consumers and he has our needs in mind. I need to get them from the US as the selection not as good on the UK Amazon. Real shame i cant get them direct from the spacecraft films site but it does not mail to the UK.
|
|
|
Post by stutefish on Oct 22, 2007 16:53:52 GMT -4
You are uneducated person. You not know history of ?Apollo? program! Wow, just.... wow. "Mr. Kettle, Mr. Pot on line 3." I'd say it's more a case of Mr Kettle and Mr. Stainless Steel Mixing Bowl.
|
|