|
Post by Moon Man on Nov 13, 2005 15:39:31 GMT -4
Okay, thanks, I'll start the debate shortly. Give me 10 minutes or so to begin drafting my submission.
|
|
|
Post by hplasm on Nov 13, 2005 16:02:38 GMT -4
Quick question for you. It was said the vacuum begins above our atmosphere and runs until the end of the universe. Is the atmosphere on the moon different then the atmosphere, say, only 50,000 miles in space..? And is the same lunar atmosphere different then 220 miles up where the space station is located..?
And I like your humour, and comment; Don't think you'll like the source though...Ha! Well, consider that the natural state of space is to be empty, ie a Vacuum. The atmospheres of various celestial bodies are an attribute of whatever they are made of, so the atmosphere round earth would be different in it's makeup than that around the moon, or a Gorgonzola asteroid, for example. As the atmosphere is bound to each body by gravity, then the composition will vary with distance, so the Earth's atmos for example will have more lighter elements such as hydrogen in the upper layers than at sea level. So the lunar atmos would be different than that 220 miles above the Earth, as it arises from the moon, whereas the Earth's would be similar at sea level to that 220 miles up, but somewhat thicker.
|
|
|
Post by nomuse on Nov 13, 2005 16:22:02 GMT -4
It gets tricker when you start to talk of rarified "atmospheres." For the purpose of "yes, there is a population of gas molecules around here somewhere" you can go from the thermosphere (aka 220 miles from the Earth's surface), out to the edge of the heliosphere -- and after that you are in interstellar medium, which still contains gas molecules. For the purpose of "there's enough atmosphere for convection to occur" the limit is a lot lower.
Anyhoo, Earth's atmosphere is rather different at the different layers...composition changes, new ions and molecules are formed by interaction with cosmic rays...etc.
|
|
|
Post by hplasm on Nov 13, 2005 16:29:37 GMT -4
Tricky and trickier yet; having to up the complexity from a total lunar vacuum will no doubt cause trouble, but wait until zero-point vacuum fluctuations pop up to prove ther is no such thing as a vacuum.. I shouln' 'ave said that- I really shouldn' 'ave said that... /Hagrid
|
|
|
Post by Moon Man on Nov 13, 2005 16:46:13 GMT -4
I thought the debate thread was between the two people in the debate..?
I'm not really interested in getting into another free for all, at least not at this moment. I was also not finished my opening and people are already posting. I mentioned that I need to post edit and post again and that I would say, I'm finished wen I am done. Anyway, I'm going to eat and I will be back a little later.
|
|
|
Post by mushiwulf on Nov 13, 2005 16:49:35 GMT -4
Ok, so, we shoul duse this thread I guess, for discussion and the other thread to pose one or two questions at a time for you? Would that be better?
|
|
|
Post by hplasm on Nov 13, 2005 16:53:29 GMT -4
Well, the other thread is now underway, with point #1:- Batteries.
|
|
|
Post by Moon Man on Nov 13, 2005 16:57:05 GMT -4
I'm open to debating everyone at once provided it's civil. I don't even mind a bit of bantering, I enjoy that, really, I just don't want everyone saying, you're a troll, you never answered my question, you said this on BA, you ignored this on BA, etc., etc. I'm here to learn. Right now I don't believe the landings were real and I think it's easy to prove, but I hope I'm proven wrong, therefore, as long as it remains civil I'm okay with everyone offering their opinion in that thread. That's what message boards are al about anyway.
Also, did you notice this site set a new people online record today..?
I think I have stalkers..Ha!
|
|
|
Post by LunarOrbit on Nov 13, 2005 17:12:08 GMT -4
I'm open to debating everyone at once provided it's civil. I don't even mind a bit of bantering, I enjoy that, really, I just don't want everyone saying, you're a troll, you never answered my question, you said this on BA, you ignored this on BA, etc., etc. That is why we are going to focus on only one of your arguments at a time. And you will follow that rule too so that you won't be accused of changing the subject when you can't defend one of your claims. The rule is there to both protect you and to ensure you defend your claims.
|
|
|
Post by Moon Man on Nov 13, 2005 18:48:35 GMT -4
Sts60, the debate thread is for the debate, it is not to prove that you're a troll or how silly you are.
In the hello Jay thread you said:
Finally, and once again, I have direct personal experience with the use of such batteries, in a worse thermal environment, for longer than you claimed such batteries could last. I've pointed this out to you multiple times here and at BAUT. I've used the batteries you claim wouldn't work.
Where in this message do you say a satellite as you indicated in the debate thread..?
You didn't.
Prior to this message you posted where on this board did you point out to me that you used these batteries..?
I just joined here today, you silly being.
Also, you claim you used these batteries in a worse environment than the moon, i.e., space, and then you claimed in the debate thread that you used them on a satellite.
Um, correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the satelllite in space..?
Here's what you said in the debate thread.
I didn't say they were used in a worse environment than space. I said they were used on a satellite. Where do you think that was, the center of the Earth?
You also said this.
See, here's one of the problems with MoonMan. Not only is he totally ignorant of his subject; not only does he consider his opinion superior to the technical judgment of the entire scientific and engineering community; not only does he ignore explanations; no, he can't or won't even grasp what we're trying to say, no matter whether he believes it or not.
Personally, sts60, I think one of your problems is that you're not a very good liar.
|
|
|
Post by mushiwulf on Nov 13, 2005 18:58:33 GMT -4
We are waiting for some kind of input from you in the other thread Moon Man.
|
|
|
Post by sts60 on Nov 13, 2005 22:31:27 GMT -4
Prior to this message you posted where on this board did you point out to me that you used these batteries..?
I just joined here today, you silly being. I told you about the batteries several times in the BAUT thread, for example here. You are the same MoonMan (or Moon Man, whatever) as was in the BAUT forum, so you've already been presented with that information prior to signing up on this forum. Also, you claim you used these batteries in a worse environment than the moon, i.e., space, and then you claimed in the debate thread that you used them on a satellite.
Um, correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the satelllite in space..?Yes, you are wrong. I told you in the BAUT thread that these batteries were used on a satellite, and in another post that I had direct space flight experience with batteries. I also said these batteries were in a worse thermal environment. That is a significant qualifier to anyone who has spent any time learning about spaceflight, so it's not surprising its significance escaped you.
|
|
|
Post by Moon Man on Nov 13, 2005 23:20:12 GMT -4
You still misrepresented the truth. You can't deny it as the archive doesn't lie. I also never once said the batteries wouldn't work, I said they wouldn't work for as long as they allegedly did.
|
|
Bob B.
Bob the Excel Guru?
Posts: 3,072
|
Post by Bob B. on Nov 14, 2005 0:03:03 GMT -4
You still misrepresented the truth. You can't deny it as the archive doesn't lie. From my recollection, sts60 has repeated here very accurately what he told you at BAUT. I see no misrepresentation on his part. And sts60 has told you on numerous occasions that has has direct personal experience with batteries of the type used on the LRV that have operated for longer and under more adverse conditions than the LRV batteries.
|
|
|
Post by nomuse on Nov 14, 2005 0:53:28 GMT -4
I really shouldn't contaminate the offical debate by indulging in any posting in this side thread. But I find myself wondering about some of Moon Man's language where he doubts a battery that is rated for "five days" could still be in working order two weeks after leaving the Vehicle Assembly Building.
The 9v batteries we use in our wireless mics last us about fifteen hours (we replace them after ten, however). We also buy them several weeks in advance (generally we'll buy in bulk, getting all the batteries we'll need for a five-week run). I hope the problem is obvious. (Or, rather, the NON-problem).
|
|