|
Post by captain swoop on Feb 19, 2010 11:45:21 GMT -4
Cosmic Rays are the same partical radiation that we can produce on Earth, they just originate 'in space'. They dson't have any mystery poweres.
|
|
|
Post by trebor on Feb 19, 2010 12:08:25 GMT -4
Cosmic Rays are the same partical radiation that we can produce on Earth, they just originate 'in space'. They dson't have any mystery poweres. Even the LHC can't produce particles with the energy many cosmic rays have. Although as noted cosmic rays at those kinds of energies are rare. And as you say they are just protons and other charged particles.
|
|
|
Post by Jason Thompson on Feb 20, 2010 10:16:05 GMT -4
Phantomwolf, you say there's no danger from a single 50J particle, but how do you know? How do you know there is? As I said before, this all boils down to scientists not conducting experiments you think are valid, but you have yet to demonstrate that your expectations are more valid than the work being carried out by physicists all over the world into the effects of long-term space exposure to humans. I work for a company developing blood testing devices. At the moment we hardly ever use blood in our tests. Why? Because we don't have to in order to get valid data. A layperson migt wonder why we are wasting our time with plasma and buffer systems instead of doing everything with blood, since that's what the device is supposed to be for, but science just doesn't work as laymen expect it to. That's why we have specialists, and that's why the argument from incredulity demonstrated so vociferously by McGowan is so absurd. If anyone could do it, everyone would and there would be no need for specialists in any field.
|
|
|
Post by ka9q on Feb 20, 2010 11:40:26 GMT -4
Even the LHC can't produce particles with the energy many cosmic rays have. Although as noted cosmic rays at those kinds of energies are rare. And as you say they are just protons and other charged particles. There are indeed cosmic ray particles with incredibly high energies. But they are very rare, and so the actual damage is done by less energetic but far more numerous particles that are more easily stopped with practical shielding. I have yet to find a single hoax proponent with an accurate understanding of the space radiation environment. They simply don't know or don't care that the vast majority of charged particles trapped in the VA belts have extremely low energies and are readily stopped with even minimal shielding. They obsess with the high end of the scale and ignore the fact that this is a tiny fraction of the total population. This is not to say that minimal shielding is always enough to provide a good margin of safety. But a little shielding can go a very long way. Except during intense mass ejections that actually hit the earth-moon system, or for long-duration (months) exposure to the densest portions of the belts, it is entirely practical to provide enough shielding to keep human exposures well under safety limits. The Apollo project itself is just one proof of this; every mission carried dosimeters and the results are public information.
|
|
|
Post by echnaton on Feb 20, 2010 23:22:20 GMT -4
The article does not mention any American experiments along these lines, (animal experiments) either before the Apollo missions or at any time since. Nor any Russian experiments after this first one. . Here is one reason animal experiments are controversial. From the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine. Doctors File Federal Petition to Stop NASA’s Monkey Radiation Experiments
|
|
|
Post by JayUtah on Feb 22, 2010 2:54:44 GMT -4
...there has been no deep space experimentation with biological specimens.Why should there be? Phantomwolf, you say there's no danger from a single 50J particle, but how do you know?Because it's the same as saying there's no danger of being struck by lightning. Yes, if one happens to be struck by lightning then the damage could be severe. But the chances of that happening are remote, so we don't worry about the danger while we're going about our daily lives. People who handwave about the danger of 50 J particles assume it's a forgone conclusion you're going to be hit by one. An astronaut stands a better chance of crashing his jet than of getting hit by such a high-energy particle. It's pretty much gotten to the point where I can't reply without repeating myself.No matter how many times you repeat abstract, baseless doubts they do not suddenly become real, credible objections.
|
|
vq
Earth
What time is it again?
Posts: 129
|
Post by vq on Feb 22, 2010 22:17:30 GMT -4
People who handwave about the danger of 50 J particles assume it's a forgone conclusion you're going to be hit by one. An astronaut stands a better chance of crashing his jet than of getting hit by such a high-energy particle. That might overstate the probability of being hit by a 50J particle by a bit, since they appear to be far less common than lighting. ;D
|
|
|
Post by Grand Lunar on Feb 25, 2010 16:26:43 GMT -4
In addition, they also ignore the time scales invovled. Hoaxers seem convinced that the issues with long term missions that will require better shielding mean that Apollo couldn't have made it to the moon. Somehow they also get the idea that en route to the moon, better radiation protection is needed, and believe that radiation is a show stopper in getting to the moon.
The more eccentric hoaxers feel that it's proof of a faked mission. Then again, they also think Jan Lundberg not only claims that you can't take good photos without a viewfinder, but also think Lundberg ridiculed the Apollo photos.
|
|
|
Post by BertL on Feb 25, 2010 18:17:58 GMT -4
Then again, they also think Jan Lundberg not only claims that you can't take good photos without a viewfinder, but also think Lundberg ridiculed the Apollo photos. Correction: 'Jan Lundberg said it's IMPOSSIBLE to take pictures without a viewfinder'. Quoted from someone who regularly comments on one of the videos on my bertlapollo's YouTube account.
|
|
|
Post by JayUtah on Feb 25, 2010 18:20:57 GMT -4
All that's required to take a picture is to load the shutter and press the release. Now whether it's the picture you wanted...
I had no problem taking pictures with that camera sans its viewfinder, and I didn't even get the practice that the astronauts got. It's a wide angle lens. It's really hard to miss.
|
|