|
Post by gillianren on Jul 8, 2011 13:20:44 GMT -4
I believe that is known as being damned with faint praise, isn't it? That would be the exact phrase, yes.
|
|
|
Post by drewid on Jul 8, 2011 13:53:38 GMT -4
I do hear it may well be the best movie Michael Bay has ever made . . . the review which mentioned that gave the movie a C. I believe that is known as being damned with faint praise, isn't it? Much like Night of the Lepus being described as the greatest film ever made about giant killer bunny rabbits. A perfect example of it
|
|
|
Post by fiveonit on Jul 8, 2011 14:33:03 GMT -4
So, it was never about seeking the truth? It always was and still is about feeding Jarrah's overly inflated ego? Is that what you're telling me? You could knock me over with a feather right now. I may not be able to sleep tonight. << Yawn >>
|
|
|
Post by gwiz on Jul 8, 2011 14:47:53 GMT -4
A halo orbit about the Earth-Moon L2 point would do the trick, though it wouldn't be stationary over a point on the moon, so would have to be tracked by the antenna on the moon and would occasionally be below the horizon for some places on the far side. There's a slight problem in that a halo orbit isn't stable, so needs the occasional tweak manoeuvre to maintain it. Such an orbit has recently been used for the first time by NASA's ARTEMIS P1 satellite, now in lunar orbit. I think that you are suggesting a similar set up to the SOHO. That sits at L1 in a halo orbit, and needs the occasional tweak manoeuvre to maintain it. I will sit corrected on this point by others more knowledgeable in practical orbital mechanics. That's exactly comparable, apart from SOHO's L1 point being in the Sun-Earth system, rather than the Earth-Moon system. There have been other satellites than SOHO that have used or are using halo orbits about the Sun-Earth L1 and L2 points. The sister satellite of ARTEMIS P1 (that's P2) is currently in a halo orbit about the Earth-Moon L1 point and will shortly be manoeuvred to join P1 in lunar orbit. Here's a link to what the ARTEMIS satellites have been doing: www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/themis/news/artemis-orbit.html
|
|
|
Post by lukepemberton on Jul 8, 2011 15:09:54 GMT -4
That's exactly comparable, apart from SOHO's L1 point being in the Sun-Earth system, rather than the Earth-Moon system. There have been other satellites than SOHO that have used or are using halo orbits about the Sun-Earth L1 and L2 points. The sister satellite of ARTEMIS P1 (that's P2) is currently in a halo orbit about the Earth-Moon L1 point and will shortly be maneuvered to join P1 in lunar orbit. Here's a link to what the ARTEMIS satellites have been doing: www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/themis/news/artemis-orbit.htmlThanks for the link gwiz. I'm wondering how long it will be before Jarrah White claims that such an orbit could have been used to fake Apollo communications by placing a pre-recorded transmission on the dark side of the moon and then relaying the recordings through a satellite at L2. It would not surprise me. He needs another theory after Phil Webb and ka9q sent his last piece of rubbish to the flames. Just to clarify, I understand that the L1 point is in the Sun-Earth system.
|
|
|
Post by echnaton on Jul 8, 2011 17:39:25 GMT -4
If you take the yellow for the earth and the blue for the moon, this diagram will help. The L2 point is on the far side of the moon. And thus satellite at L2 could not transmit directly to the earth. A satellite at L1 could transmit to the earth, but the absence of orbital motion would have been noticed.
|
|
|
Post by LunarOrbit on Jul 8, 2011 20:47:49 GMT -4
I went to see Transformers 3... it wasn't the worst of the 3, but it was pretty bad. Surprisingly it wasn't even the Apollo stuff or the the cameo by Buzz Aldrin that bothered me. I could accept that as just being an alternate reality in which Apollo didn't happen the way we know it did. I spent the entire movie picking apart bad science... I can only imagine that those of you who know more about physics than I do would not have survived. Your heads would have exploded. The movie opened with a battle on the robot home world (I honestly don't care enough to remember the name of it). One of the good robots (voiced by Leonard Nimoy) tries to escape but the enemy launches missiles after him. The missiles flew in a spiral path around each other that looked really cool... but all I could think was "wouldn't they reach their target faster if they flew in a straight line? He's not even trying to evade them!" And then later on in the movie the bad robots chase the good robots down a freeway in car form, but suddenly transform into robots and run after the cars... which made me wonder "Aren't wheels more efficient than legs? Are they letting them escape on purpose?" And don't get me started on the skyscraper that could magically lean 45 degrees, with no support structure on one side of the building, while being torn apart by a giant robot, without collapsing.
|
|
|
Post by Data Cable on Jul 9, 2011 1:22:42 GMT -4
And don't get me started on the skyscraper that could magically lean 45 degrees, with no support structure on one side of the building, while being torn apart by a giant robot, without collapsing. I remember thinking that whole sequence both hackily-evoked images of 9/11 whilst simultaneously treating us as if we hadn't seen, from numerous angles, what happens when skyscrapers' structures fail catastrophically. They don't topple like redwoods, Michael!
|
|
|
Post by lukepemberton on Jul 9, 2011 5:08:19 GMT -4
I really need to go and see this film now. I have the cinematic equivalent of rubber necking.
|
|
|
Post by capricorn1 on Jul 9, 2011 5:25:18 GMT -4
I'm wondering how long it will be before Jarrah White claims that such an orbit could have been used to fake Apollo communications by placing a pre-recorded transmission on the dark side of the moon and then relaying the recordings through a satellite at L2. I may be mistaken, but I don't think that would work either......the Moon perturbation would misalign the signal with the landing site. If they positioned the satellite geostationary to a fixed point above the landing site, the line of sight wouldn't pass through the satellite continuously. Not being a radio buff.....I can't say that for sure. So, is that correct?
|
|
|
Post by lukepemberton on Jul 9, 2011 5:47:53 GMT -4
I may be mistaken, but I don't think that would work either......the Moon perturbation would misalign the signal with the landing site. No, you're not mistaken. If you watch Jarrah's Exhibit D on Apollo communications, then he makes up any old story at the expense of the physics and engineering. He's made up similar scenarios where it would be obvious that the signal is not coming from the landing site, but is actually moving in an orbit. I was just 'writing out aloud' I guess. It helps me work through their logic, or lack of it, and how easy it is to take a rapidly Googled concept, fit it into an 'whacko theory' and then sell it to the layman; while sounding like a technical expert in the process. That was the appeal of Ralph Rene, and his ability to sound like he knew what he was talking about to lay audiences.
|
|
|
Post by frenat on Jul 9, 2011 9:46:56 GMT -4
The missiles flew in a spiral path around each other that looked really cool... but all I could think was "wouldn't they reach their target faster if they flew in a straight line? He's not even trying to evade them!" SOME missiles, depending on their method of tracking will fly in a spiral pattern but I suspect the movie was just because it was pretty.
|
|
|
Post by redneckr0nin on Jul 18, 2011 4:42:28 GMT -4
That was the funniest thing I read watched all week!
|
|
|
Post by Glom on Jul 18, 2011 14:03:08 GMT -4
And don't get me started on the skyscraper that could magically lean 45 degrees, with no support structure on one side of the building, while being torn apart by a giant robot, without collapsing. I remember thinking that whole sequence both hackily-evoked images of 9/11 whilst simultaneously treating us as if we hadn't seen, from numerous angles, what happens when skyscrapers' structures fail catastrophically. They don't topple like redwoods, Michael! I actually kind of liked that sequence. Not for the mind boggling stupidity of course, but just because it gave them some interesting stunts. Chicago sure can build 'em though. I actually laughed out loud though when the Autobots went to the Moon and the LM was there with its ascent stage still attached.
|
|
|
Post by dwight on Jul 18, 2011 14:39:48 GMT -4
Did anyone else happen to notice how much Jerry Wang is a dead-ringer look alike for JW??
|
|