|
|
Post by showtime on Apr 19, 2007 6:01:15 GMT -4
In honor of Venus lighting up the western sky,,, I submit this....     Heres another chance to debunk " The No Venus " arguement...  [EDITED by LunarOrbit] Showtime, please do not include such a large image in your signature. I have moved it into the main body of the message. |
|
|
|
Post by BertL on Apr 19, 2007 8:09:38 GMT -4
No.
|
|
Bob B.
Bob the Excel Guru?
Posts: 3,072
|
Post by Bob B. on Apr 19, 2007 8:23:09 GMT -4
Heres another chance to debunk " The No Venus " arguement... Why don't you try it for a change; you might learn something? What reasons can you think of, other than some nonsense about a hoax, for why Venus might not be visible? Furthermore, please be courteous enough to identify the photos you are posting. It is impossible for us to comment on anything when we don't know when and where the photograph was taken. |
|
|
|
Post by showtime on Apr 19, 2007 10:45:20 GMT -4
|
|
|
|
Post by captain swoop on Apr 19, 2007 10:58:37 GMT -4
whats the 'no venus' argument?
|
|
|
|
Post by Data Cable on Apr 19, 2007 11:34:50 GMT -4
whats the 'no venus' argument? He's apparently showing us a (rather low-res) screenshot from software which simulates the relative positions of the sun, planets and stars, and then a photo of Earth taken from the lunar surface which doesn't show Venus as depicted by the software (which was presumably set for the same date and time the photo was taken), therefore he immediately leaps to the conclusion "HOAX!!!!11!ONE!!SEVEN(in binary)!!!" |
|
|
|
Post by JayUtah on Apr 19, 2007 11:45:43 GMT -4
Showtime, what exposure settings would be required to expose Venus visibly on ISO 160 film using a 70mm negative format and a 60 mm lens?
What is the angular distance between Earth and Venus in your software screen shot?
|
|
|
|
Post by SpitfireIX on Apr 19, 2007 12:36:30 GMT -4
Showtime, what exposure settings would be required to expose Venus visibly on ISO 160 film using a 70mm negative format and a 60 mm lens?
What is the angular distance between Earth and Venus in your software screen shot?< cricket chirping>
|
|
|
|
Post by echnaton on Apr 19, 2007 13:51:08 GMT -4
That certainly makes for a pleasant sound to listen to while waiting on a substantive reply to Jay's question. Though as we know, an answer will never come. So I guess I have to turn the sound off now before my office mates think I have bugs in my computer.
|
|
|
|
Post by JayUtah on Apr 19, 2007 13:55:17 GMT -4
I have no delusion that Showtime will provide an answer. I expect him to let this pass in silence for a few days, as he has all his other claims, and then pop up later with a new crop of doctored silly photos and new conspiracy claims. But I have to ask anyway.
|
|
Bob B.
Bob the Excel Guru?
Posts: 3,072
|
Post by Bob B. on Apr 19, 2007 14:13:19 GMT -4
What is the angular distance between Earth and Venus in your software screen shot? That was the first question to come to my mind as well. Rather than expect an answer from showtime, I went ahead and made my own estimates... * I estimate the Earth phase is approximately 17%. * Based on the phase, I estimate the Earth-Sun angle to be ~49 o. * From the apparent positions in the computer plot, the Earth-Venus angle is ~13.2 o. * Again from the computer plot, Venus' position angle relative to Earth is ~320 o. * Based on Earth's size in the photograph, 9 pixels ~ 1 degree. If the above is accurate, Venus is located just above the top of the LM's dish antenna. If I'm off a little, Venus could very well be behind the antenna. |
|
|
|
Post by AstroSmurf on Apr 19, 2007 17:08:49 GMT -4
A quick peek in Celestia (didn't have the exact time, so I set it for Feb 5, 1971, 15:20:00 UTC as an approximate guess) leaves me to indicate that Venus would be... behind the LM! Down and off to the left, somewhere around the docking light to the left in the picture.
Yup, looks like that's another bust for the HBs. Not that that ever stopped them...
|
|
|
|
Post by Data Cable on Apr 19, 2007 17:17:15 GMT -4
If the above is accurate, Venus is located just above the top of the LM's dish antenna. If I'm off a little, Venus could very well be behind the antenna. Actually, I might have located the "missing" planet (not planet oid). The photo showtime selected was the 3rd in a series of 9 similar shots Al took at the end of EVA 2 (AS14-64-9189 - 9197). This allows us to compare them against each other and essentially filter out extraneous noise. Here is an animated GIF (2.85MB, so I took pitty on dial-up users and didn't post it inline) cropped from the High-Res scans of 9189 - 9197 at ALSJ, with the gamma increased to 3 in order to make this faint detail easily visible. The last 8 frames have been rotated to match orientation with 9189. Ordinarily I'd dismiss this as dust on the print or scanner, but the fact that it maintains it's relative position to the earth in all 9 shots (with minor differences which can be accounted for by lens distortion and any slight skweing/stretching inherent in the digitization process), while all other noise in the frame moves around, seems to indicate it was a feature in the scene as shot. Note in particular that this dot shares the degree and direction of motion blur with the earth visible in 9193. Anyone care to disagree? [Edit: Ah, crud. I just noticed I screwed up the format of the photo ID #'s in the animation. Was in too much of a rush to get it posted. Frack it, y'all know what I meant. ;D] [Edit part 2, the sequel: OK, un-frack it. I went ahead and corrected the animation. Dropped the size by ~.01MB, too. ;D ;D] |
|
|
|
Post by donnieb on Apr 19, 2007 17:23:44 GMT -4
Looks like you got it! Pretty consistent with Bob B's estimated position, too.
So, the supposed anomaly turns out to be strong evidence for the reality of the missions! Sweet.
You know, I'll bet nobody ever looked at those photos to try to identify Venus. Thanks to showtime for bringing forward this wonderful confirmation of Apollo, which might never have been spotted without his (unwitting) help.
|
|
|
|
Post by AstroSmurf on Apr 19, 2007 17:27:01 GMT -4
Woo, god job. Guess that shows that Celestia isn't really a planetarium software... it was considerably off.
|
|
