|
Post by PhantomWolf on Feb 22, 2012 22:21:33 GMT -4
Depends on what you are cooking, but in general for something you want to slow cook probably 180, for a cooking but not making crunchy go for 200, and to get that crunchy crispy outer, 230.
|
|
|
Post by PhantomWolf on Feb 22, 2012 17:27:52 GMT -4
I had a nice long post explaining all about why to and not to include gravity, but Explorer crashed, and since Prof is likely to ignore it anyway...... So the abridged version... F = ma twhere a t = a + g pand g p is the acceleration vector component of gravity in the plane of the Force vector we're looking at Now we have two basic situations, one is where our plane is vertical to the local gravity field and so g p = our local g and where the other is when the plane is horizontal to the local gravity field and so our g p = 0m/s 2 regardless of where it is in the universe because gravity is a vector that has no horizontal component to it. (Note that a combination of these two planes can be used to represent any force vector possible which is why they are the simplest planes to work with to demonstrate the point.) So given that... F = m (a + g p) First let's take a hovering spacecraft of mass 2,500kg. Since it is hovering, a = 0m/s 2Since we are dealing with the Vertical Plane we know that; On Earth g pv = 9.81m/s 2On Moon g pv = 1.63m/s 2so on Earth... F = m (a + g pv) F = 2500kg (0ms 2 + 9.81m/s 2) F = 2500kg x 9.81m/s 2F = 24,525N On the Moon F = m (a + g pv) F = 2500kg (0ms 2 + 1.63m/s 2) F = 2500kg x 1.63m/s 2F = 4,075N Hopefully this expains why you need less thrust on the moon, it's not the mass that has changed, but the acceleration you need to overcome. Now let's look at a ball moving horizontally in both places. Remember that in the horizontal plane, g ph = 0m/s 2 because gravity has no horizontal component. Our ball will have a mass of 0.5kg and we'll throw it with an acceleration of 48m/s 2 taking 1s to do it. so on Earth... F = m (a + g ph) F = 0.5kg (48ms 2 + 0m/s 2) F = 0.5kg x 48m/s 2F = 24N On the Moon F = m (a + g ph) F = 0.5kg (48ms 2 + 0m/s 2) F = 0.5kg x 48m/s 2F = 24N Note that the answer is identical in both equations. Force that is horizontal to the local gravity vector doesn't change regardless of where it is in the universe. So how does that effect the energy? Well E k = ½F.a.t 2so regardless of where the horizontal force occurs, the E k it transmits will be the same. In the case of the balls in the above example, 576J This should also explain why your don't change the density (which is mass/volume) as mass doesn't change, and why you don't consider gravity when dealing with horizontal motion, such as dust being blown across a surface. ETA: Something I should have noted, and did in the longer version (yes it was longer ) is that while the ball leaves our hand with the same velocity in both examples (since v = at and a and t are the same in both examples) it will go futher on the Moon because after leaving our hand the lower gravity means it will take longer to reach the ground allowing it to travel a much greater distance.)
|
|
|
Post by PhantomWolf on Feb 17, 2012 19:41:12 GMT -4
Just as I thought. You were debunked and you never came back.. Pretty sad. You can't even back up what you claim is facts.HA! Forthetrhillofital was banned the next day, not that coherent support for the post would have been forthcoming anyway. Like a little thing like that would stop Prof, um Patrick, from coming back
|
|
|
Post by PhantomWolf on Feb 16, 2012 20:27:40 GMT -4
Well don't hang your head in sadness, I'd suggest he's aready back.
|
|
|
Post by PhantomWolf on Feb 15, 2012 17:31:37 GMT -4
Thank you! I might have sent the message you saw. If you look at that list, you'll notice that the impact locations of two Apollo LM ascent stages are unknown: those for A11 and A16. Both were abandoned in lunar orbits that later decayed long after they went dead, so there was no tracking and no direct knowledge of their impact locations. But I am wondering if new data (LRO mapping and the improved gravity models from the Japanese Kaguya and the US GRAIL missions), plus a good collective eyeball effort, just might make it possible to discover one or both of those LM impact locations. Best idea is to follow along a ground path based on their last known orbit and the rotation of the moon from then until estimated impact. It's unlikely that they would have strayed from that before impact. Then look for something that resembles the other known impact sites. Still a huge amount of ground to cover, but less than having to search the entire moon for them.
|
|
|
Post by PhantomWolf on Feb 15, 2012 17:24:52 GMT -4
I could give him some things to do. What with working a full time job (till the end of next month ), writing a novel, learning PHP and Python, learning to use Blender and Maya, redesigning my Apollo site, job hunting, and house work, I hardly have time to fit in my gaming.
|
|
|
Post by PhantomWolf on Feb 9, 2012 20:06:45 GMT -4
But I can't host addin domains within the same account and have them behave as though they are separate with 000webhost. Quite important when the sites aren't all mine. Not saying that you're wrong, but they do note that you can have 5 add on domains with the free account, and unlimited with the pay, if that's what you're after.
|
|
|
Post by PhantomWolf on Feb 9, 2012 2:18:24 GMT -4
I would be worried that a free service could disappear overnight because they went bankrupt. How do they pay their employees? Or pay for server maintenance and upgrades? Do they force advertising onto your site? I could host my sites for free on my desktop computer, but the connection speed wouldn't be very good because I don't have a T1 line running into my home. 000webhost.com has been around since 2007, so they are 5 years in and going strong. They are a free/pay hybrid, if you want the unlimited space and bandwidth or the really nice toys, you pay for it. They don't push out advertising either, which is very nice. You get PHP and a mySQL DB for free.
|
|
|
Post by PhantomWolf on Feb 9, 2012 0:53:20 GMT -4
LO, Is there no mileage in looking at hosting this yourself? The hosting package I use in the UK costs me less than £100 per year and allows me as many different websites, domains and databases as required, 100GB of space and 1TB of bandwidth per month. £100 per year???!!!?? I use 000webhost.com. 100 GB/month data transfer and 1500MB space for free, or you can pay US$58 a year and get unlimited in both!
|
|
|
Post by PhantomWolf on Feb 7, 2012 15:39:02 GMT -4
I'd note that during Apollo 12 both the TV camera and one of the Hasselblads broke, and the other Hasselblad nearly suffered the same issue (the trigger coming loose) and kept failing to take images. The only camera caused safety issue however was when Alan Bean forgot to stow the DAC on landing back on Earth and the jolt caused it to fall and hit him in the head knocking him out.
|
|
|
Post by PhantomWolf on Feb 5, 2012 21:52:06 GMT -4
One, he is the World's Greatest Detective, in uncovering something that no one else could. He's Batman? Probably
|
|
|
Post by PhantomWolf on Feb 4, 2012 12:46:48 GMT -4
The truth of what happened.
- Oswald shoots Kennedy in the back. - Kennedy thinking that it's a set up by the Texan Governer responds by shooting Connolly in the back. - Connolly now under fire, returns the shoot hitting Kennedy in the throat. - Geer attempts to protect the president and tries to shoot Connolly, but distracted by driving he misses and hits Kennedy in the head. - Jackie shoots Connolly hitting him in the wrist. - It all gets covered up
|
|
|
Post by PhantomWolf on Feb 3, 2012 20:08:28 GMT -4
OK, now I'm confused. How exactly would "films and photos" be "taken care of" to hoax a Moon *landing* on a mission that did not involve, you know, actually landing on the Moon? My general point is that they would not hoax a moon landing without having the photos and films already in the can. The studio images must have been made before the stated dates of the various Apollo missions. Soooo... given you claim that the images of Earth were taken by probes, and the weather images show that these were taken during the missions, (including those taken on the surface of the moon showing the Earth) this would indicate that these images can't have been "in the can" prior to the mission, and thus your whole claim just collapsed on itself. Perhaps you'd prefer me to add this one to contradictions. 1) All Apollo photos of the Earth were taken during the time of the missions by probes so as to get the weather patterns right. 2) Photos on the lunar surface, including those showing the Earth, were all taken in a studio previous to the missions. See the problem here?
|
|
|
Post by PhantomWolf on Jan 30, 2012 21:23:12 GMT -4
Well the most common mistake made by HBs is that he was using the LM's hull as a measure of shielding for passage through the VA Belts. During which flight was the crew in the LM for either passage of the VA belts?
The rest of it is pretty much bunk. I loved the '"secondary" radiation you'd get from particles bouncing off each other and fragmenting' part, that was a real hoot. VA Belt particles are protons and electrons, if they fragment you get quarks. I suppect that he was meaning Bremsstrahlung or 'Braking radiation', however this is more intense the denser and thicker the metal (to a point, after a certain thickness the secondary radiation is shielded against as well.) Thus Aluminium is perfect for avoiding high levels of Bremsstrahlung.
|
|
|
Post by PhantomWolf on Jan 29, 2012 16:02:43 GMT -4
I do not understand your point. I would think the astronaut deaths here are real deaths. These were real accidents. Because this is a hoax does not mean people cannot die in the effort. Perhaps even more people died legitimate deaths in carrying out this hoax. They died in the line of hoax duty. Of course they would not be murdered. That does not make sense. No it doesn't make sense, and yet it is a prime arguement of many Hoax Believers, just type the following into Google: "Murdered Astronauts"
|
|