Moon Landing

[Keith Hamburger]

Quote by: Zeebadee Yet getting usable amounts of any "loads" of lunar material back to earth will be difficult and expensive. Re-entry problems will only multiply when the mass of a vehicle is increased.

The answers to that issue were developed over 30 years ago by a man named Gerard K. O'Neill. There is no reason to return teh mass to Earth when the best place to put a civilization is in space. As a formerly very active member of the L5 Society I strongly support the ideas of colonization of space. However, following the merger with the National Space Institute, to form the National Space Society, the grassroots activism in the L5 Society was effectively destroyed, which ended my involvement in space activism.

Quote by: Zeebadee Sure, a breeze. Fusion power alone isn't going to make "the planets will be very much easier to reach" a viable statement. Also, "cheap & basically unlimited amounts of energy" on the moon isn't going to be much good for those of us on the earth.

However, by taking the resources of the moon and building solar power satellites we could solve most all of the world's issues with resource depletion and Global Warming (tm). But, we may have missed the window for resolving such issues in such a manner. In the late '70s and early '80s, almost anything was possible. However, with the governmental interference, and the "not invented here" attitude of NASA, we may have missed the opportunity.

In the Pikes Peak L5 Society, in the mid '80s, when NASA and the DOD was working on developing the National Aero-Space Plane, we used to joke (but not really so funny) about the direction NASA was headed.

In the 1960's, we went to the moon. In the 1970's, the Shuttle would carry a payload to 400 miles above the Earth's surface. (ok, the shuttle didn't fly in the '70s, but that was the providence of the technology) In the 1980's, the NASP was intended to fly to an altitude of 200 miles. The direction NASA was headed, by the end of the century, we would have been driving ox carts.

Well, the NASP never came to be. The ISS is in an orbit of around 200 miles. We're running out of fuel. It won't be long before our government has us in ox carts.

Keith

[Century 25]

Princeton is doing well, but JET is where it's at.. The world's largest nuclear fusion research facility: EFDA-JET, the world's largest nuclear fusion research experiment

Q:What would be the soonest fusion power could be operable in Europe if funding were increased, and energy funding diverted from fossil fuel energy research, and finally, if the fusion research projects of the USA, EU, and Japan were combined, what is the soonest fusion power could be efficiently operated? A: The next step from JET (and the other tokamak research being undertaken around the world) is a device called ITER, an international tokamak project, 2-3 times bigger than JET, costing several billion pounds and capable of producing significantly more fusion power for longer periods. This will demonstrate the feasibility of the plasma physics and fusion engineering of a potential power plant and, given the present funding, is planned to be built in the next 10-15 years - an eventual commercial power plant probably being 30-40 years away. However, if the present international funding for fusion were increased, ITER could definitely be built more quickly and fusion power could be a reality much more quickly - in possibly half the time if the present funding levels were increased significantly.

Yes.. usable fusion power is within our grasp.. and possibly.. probably.. could be in 15 or 20 years, IF we could get funding.

At their site (above) you will see how.. again.. we are continuing to slip away from the leading edge of anything.. except maybe opening the most Walmart stores.

"JET is presently the only machine in the world able to operate with plasma currents above 5,000,000 amperes. Recent operations of JET have investigated plasma scenarios with toroidal plasma currents up to 3,500,000 amperes in preparation for performing experiments at even higher currents." (excerpt from site)

Yeah.. NASA was the can-do org.. but then along came the repub's (tricky-Dick) -- et al..

[5010]

Quote by: Zeebadee I'm not sure I know what you mean here. If both m-g-r's spin in sync, why would they also be swinging around each other?

From the perspective of each spinning m-g-r, the other is swinging around it.

Quote by: Zeebadee This makes no sense whatsoever. Why would it start and then stop spinning?

For example, when I spin around 1 time relative to the ground, what happens to a tree relative to me? The tree swings around me with 1 side always facing me. By your explanation, the tree must have spun around 1 time in order to do that. The same can be said for any object out in the universe, stars, planets, etc.

[Century 25]

SPACE.com -- NASA Plans Bigger Moon Base, Sporty Rovers for Future Missions

[Zeebadee]

Quote by: 5010 From the perspective of each spinning m-g-r, the other is swinging around it. For example, when I spin around 1 time relative to the ground, what happens to a tree relative to me? The tree swings around me with 1 side always facing me. By your explanation, the tree must have spun around 1 time in order to do that. The same can be said for any object out in the universe, stars, planets, etc.

Total nonsense. In your "example", both the m-g-r and the tree would rise and set in exactly the same position, with the exact same face showing, and at the same time every revolution, something the moon clearly doesn't do.

[Keith Hamburger]

Quote by: Century 25 Yes.. usable fusion power is within our grasp.. and possibly.. probably.. could be in 15 or 20 years, IF we could get funding.

We've been 15-20 years away from workable fusion for the past 30 years. In fact, I can remember working on my undergraduate physics degree when many were talking about us being 10 years away with then current funding.

I'm not opposed to fusion research but we really have to watch the hype before we get carried away with spending too much money here.

Keith

[Century 25]

Quote by: Keith Hamburger We've been 15-20 years away from workable fusion for the past 30 years. In fact, I can remember working on my undergraduate physics degree when many were talking about us being 10 years away with then current funding. I'm not opposed to fusion research but we really have to watch the hype before we get carried away with spending too much money here. Keith

Spending too much money..?? Let's look at this:

The Bush administration said earlier this year that it probably would need 147.5 billion dollars for fiscal 2008, but Pentagon officials now say that and 47 billion dollars more will be required, The Times said. That would spending on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan at about 195 billion in fiscal 2008, which begins in October 1, an increase of around 12 percent from the 173 billion dollars spent this year. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and other officials are to formally present the full request at a Senate Appropriations Committee hearing Wednesday, the report said. When costs of CIA operations and embassy expenses are added, the war in Iraq currently costs taxpayers about 12 billion dollars a month, said Winslow Wheeler, a former Republican congressional budget aide who is a senior fellow at the Center for Defense Information in Washington. "Everybody predicts declines, but they haven't occurred, and 2008 will be higher than 2007," the paper quotes Wheeler as saying. "It all depends on what happens in Iraq, but thus far it has continued to get bloodier and more expensive." In 2004, the two conflicts together cost 94 billion dollars; in 2005, they cost 108 billion; in 2006, 122 billion, the paper said. The new spending request is likely to push the cumulative cost of the war in Iraq alone through 2008 past the 600-billion-dollar mark -- more than the Korean War and nearly as much as the Vietnam War, based on estimates by government budget officials, The Times said.

excerpted from: AFP: Bush to ask 195 billion to fund Iraq, Afgan wars: report

And.. here is a counter, is this reasonable..?? National Priorities Project - Cost of War

[Keith Hamburger]

Quote by: Century 25 Spending too much money..?? Let's look at this:

You won't find me arguing that we aren't wasting money elsewhere. But, that doesn't mean that we might not be putting money down a rathole on fusion research as well.

Keith

[Century 25]

Quote by: Keith Hamburger You won't find me arguing that we aren't wasting money elsewhere. But, that doesn't mean that we might not be putting money down a rathole on fusion research as well. Keith

I fail to see a waste in pursuing fusion power, and to pursue it with meaning, not the pittance funded by our oil-controlled government. Fusion power is a fact, and now we must do the hard work of bringing it on line. It was JFK that said when he announced to the world back in 1961, he said we would do it because it was hard to do, not easy.

I think it appropriate to post this here, and especially at this time.. next week will mark 50 years.. a half-century since the first satellite was launched. And even more.. it shows how our leadership in science has been pissed away by a "government" bought & paid for by corporate interests.. interests not at all interested in spending anything not concerned with increasing their already bloated profits. Here is JFK's speech:

The Goal of Sending a Man to the Moon (May 25, 1961) IX. SPACE Finally, if we are to win the battle that is now going on around the world between freedom and tyranny, the dramatic achievements in space which occurred in recent weeks should have made clear to us all, as did the Sputnik in 1957, the impact of this adventure on the minds of men everywhere, who are attempting to make a determination of which road they should take. Since early in my term, our efforts in space have been under review. With the advice of the Vice President, who is Chairman of the National Space Council, we have examined where we are strong and where we are not, where we may succeed and where we may not. Now it is time to take longer strides--time for a great new American enterprise--time for this nation to take a clearly leading role in space achievement, which in many ways may hold the key to our future on earth. I believe we possess all the resources and talents necessary. But the facts of the matter are that we have never made the national decisions or marshaled the national resources required for such leadership. We have never specified long-range goals on an urgent time schedule, or managed our resources and our time so as to insure theft fulfillment. Recognizing the head start obtained by the Soviets with their large rocket engines, which gives them many months of lead-time, and recognizing the likelihood that they will exploit this lead for some time to come in still more impressive successes, we nevertheless are required to make new efforts on our own. For while we cannot guarantee that we shall one day be first, we can guarantee that any failure to make this effort will make us last. We take an additional risk by making it in full view of the world, but as shown by the feat of astronaut Shepard, this very risk enhances our stature when we are successful. But this is not merely a race. Space is open to us now; and our eagerness to share its meaning is not governed by the efforts of others. We go into space because whatever mankind must undertake, free men must fully share. I therefore ask the Congress, above and beyond the increases I have earlier requested for space activities, to provide the funds which are needed to meet the following national goals: First, I believe that this nation should commit itself to achieving the goal, before this decade is out, of landing a man on the moon and returning him safely to the earth. No single space project in this period will be more impressive to mankind, or more important for the long-range exploration of space; and none will be so difficult or expensive to accomplish. We propose to accelerate the development of the appropriate lunar space craft. We propose to develop alternate liquid and solid fuel boosters, much larger than any now being developed, until certain which is superior. We propose additional funds for other engine development and for unmanned explorations--explorations which are particularly important for one purpose which this nation will never overlook: the survival of the man who first makes this daring flight. But in a very real sense, it will not be one man going to the moon--if we make this judgment affirmatively, it will be an entire nation. For all of us must work to put him there. Secondly, an additional 23 million dollars, together with 7 million dollars already available, will accelerate development of the Rover nuclear rocket. This gives promise of some day providing a means for even more exciting and ambitious exploration of space, perhaps beyond the moon, perhaps to the very end of the solar system itself. Third, an additional 50 million dollars will make the most of our present leadership, by accelerating the use of space satellites for world-wide communications. Fourth, an additional 75 million dollars-of which 53 million dollars is for the Weather Bureau--will help give us at the earliest possible time a satellite system for world-wide weather observation. Let it be clear--and this is a judgment which the Members of the Congress must finally make--let it be clear that I am asking the Congress and the country to accept a firm commitment to a new course of action-a course which will last for many years and carry very heavy costs: 531 million dollars in fiscal '62--an estimated seven to nine billion dollars additional over the next five years. If we are to go only half way, or reduce our sights in the face of difficulty, in my judgment it would be better not to go at all. Now this is a choice which this country must make, and I am confident that under the leadership of the Space Committees of the Congress, and the Appropriating Committees, that you will consider the matter carefully. It is a most important decision that we make as a nation. But all of you have lived through the last four years and have seen the significance of space and the adventures in space, and no one can predict with certainty what the ultimate meaning will be of mastery of space. I believe we should go to the moon. But I think every citizen of this country as well as the Members of the Congress should consider the matter carefully in making their judgment, to which we have given attention over many weeks and months, because it is a heavy burden, and there is no sense in agreeing or desiring that the United States take an affirmative position in outer space, unless we are prepared to do the work and bear the burdens to make it successful. If we are not, we should decide today and this year. This decision demands a major national commitment of scientific and technical manpower, materiel and facilities, and the possibility of their diversion from other important activities where they are already thinly spread. It means a degree of dedication, organization and discipline which have not always characterized our research and development efforts. It means we cannot afford undue work stoppages, inflated costs of material or talent, wasteful interagency rivalries, or a high turnover of key personnel. New objectives and new money cannot solve these problems. They could in fact, aggravate them further--unless every scientist, every engineer, every serviceman, every technician, contractor, and civil servant gives his personal pledge that this nation will move forward, with the full speed of freedom, in the exciting adventure of space.

Continued next post...

[Century 25]

..conclusion:

X. CONCLUSION

In conclusion, let me emphasize one point. It is not a pleasure for any President of the United States, as I am sure it was not a pleasure for my predecessors, to come before the Congress and ask for new appropriations which place burdens on our people. I came to this conclusion with some reluctance. But in my judgment, this is a most serious time in the life of our country and in the life of freedom around the globe, and it is the obligation, I believe, of the President of the United States to at least make his recommendations to the Members of the Congress, so that they can reach their own conclusions with that judgment before them. You must decide yourselves, as I have decided, and I am confident that whether you finally decide in the way that I have decided or not, that your judgment--as my judgment--is reached on what is in the best interests of our country.

In conclusion, let me emphasize one point: that we are determined, as a nation in 1961 that freedom shall survive and succeed--and whatever the peril and set-backs, we have some very large advantages.

The first is the simple fact that we are on the side of liberty--and since the beginning of history, and particularly since the end of the Second World War, liberty has been winning out all over the globe.

A second great asset is that we are not alone. We have friends and allies all over the world who share our devotion to freedom. May I cite as a symbol of traditional and effective friendship the great ally I am about to visit--France. I look forward to my visit to France, and to my discussion with a great Captain of the Western World, President De Gaulle, as a meeting of particular significance, permitting the kind of close and ranging consultation that will strengthen both our countries and serve the common purposes of world-wide peace and liberty. Such serious conversations do not require a pale unanimity--they are rather the instruments of trust and understanding over a long road.

A third asset is our desire for peace. It is sincere, and I believe the world knows it. We are proving it in our patience at the test-ban table, and we are proving it in the UN where our efforts have been directed to maintaining that organization's usefulness as a protector of the independence of small nations. In these and other instances, the response of our opponents has not been encouraging.

Yet it is important to know that our patience at the bargaining table is nearly inexhaustible, though our credulity is limited-that our hopes for peace are unfailing, while our determination to protect our security is resolute. For these reasons I have long thought it wise to meet with the Soviet Premier for a personal exchange of views. A meeting in Vienna turned out to be convenient for us both; and the Austrian government has kindly made us welcome. No formal agenda is planned and no negotiations will be undertaken; but we will make dear America's enduring concern is for both peace and freedom--that we are anxious to live in harmony with the Russian people-that we seek no conquests, no satellites, no riches--that we seek only the day when "nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more."

Finally, our greatest asset in this struggle is the American people--their willingness to pay the price for these programs--to understand and accept a long struggle--to share their resources with other less fortunate people-to meet the tax levels and close the tax loopholes I have requested--to exercise self-restraint instead of pushing up wages or prices, or over-producing certain crops, or spreading military secrets, or urging unessential expenditures or improper monopolies or harmful work stoppages--to serve in the Peace Corps or the Armed Services or the Federal Civil Service or the Congress--to strive for excellence in their schools, in their cities and in their physical fitness and that of their children--to take part in Civil Defense-to pay higher postal rates, and higher payroll taxes and higher teachers' salaries, in order to strengthen our society--to show friendship to students and visitors from other lands who visit us and go back in many cases to be the future leaders, with an image of America--and I want that image, and I know you do, to be affirmative and positive-and, finally, to practice democracy at home, in all States, with all races, to respect each other and to protect the Constitutional rights of all citizens.

I have not asked for a single program which did not cause one or all Americans some inconvenience, or some hardship, or some sacrifice. But they have responded-and you in the Congress have responded to your duty--and I feel confident in asking today for a similar response to these new and larger demands. It is heartening to know, as I journey abroad, that our country is united in its commitment to freedom-and is ready to do its duty. [/quote]

Miller Center of Public Affairs - John F. Kennedy Speeches

It is shocking to compare with Bush's.. "inspirational" speeches. And this is our.. "future".. ?? I think I'm going to be sick..

[Rocky]

This is new.

Look at the object that falls from the astronauts backpack at the 50 second mark in this video.
YouTube - Moon Hoax - Bag Drop A17 EVA 3 STN 8

It falls faster than the hammer and the feather in this clip.
http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a15/a15v_1672206.mpg

Even the people from Clavius are having a hard time with this.
ApolloHoax.net - Fast falling object from astronaut's back

[triad]

:eek:

So much information..

My conclusion:

They were there. Plain and simple... if they were not, we'd know. Not just maybe we'd know, we'd know fo sho (slang for: for sure).

But much like 9/11, we'll never know the truth simply because there are so many stories that exist and so many different theories.. and not enough evidence to prove them all.

But like I said, for such a claim as this consiracy, there is not enough evidence for me to say - yeah, it was all a hoax.

[Scribbler1]

I'll go with the reasoning that the object was slightly accelerated as it fell off as the astronaut was coming down on the step.

[Rocky]

Look at it several times.
YouTube - Moon Hoax - Bag Drop A17 EVA 3 STN 8

It can be seen as it starts to fall. There's nothing that pushes it down.

[Scribbler1]

As I find the whole conspiracy theory phony, I only looked once. I'm waiting for REAL, substantive and verifiable proof, and a You Tube video ain't it.

All I see is people who don't believe we went to the Moon grasping at straws.

[Rocky]

. I'm waiting for REAL, substantive and verifiable proof, and a You Tube video ain't it.

The YouTube video is identical to the NASA one.
http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a17/a17v.1672622.mpg

If the acceleration rate of two falling objects is different, obviously one of them was slow-motion or a different rate of slow motion than the other or some other explanation. On the moon everything would fall at the same rate.

[Scribbler1]

I'm not disputing the video's authenticity. Without a control with which to duplicate the event, all we have it is pure speculation.
And again, given that there were thousands of people working on the project, no one to date has come forward with any proof that it was faked.
In light of that, the conspiracy theorists will need a LOT more than the video to convince me.

The bottom line is, I wasn't there and neither were you, so we have to go with the best source available. So you have the CT people and you have NASA, which has been pretty transparent over the course of it's existence. IMO, NASA wins this one.

[Chris]

I was marveling at the waning gibbous out there tonight. I just now took a photo and posted it to flickr.

[thx1138]

Well we may soon know the truth...

Japan now has three orbiters scanning the moon, one of them has a HDTV camera, so we will be able to travel the moons surface much like you can now with Google Earth.

So unless some CG is impose on the images we will know soon.

[Century 25]

Nice lookin' gibby moon.. couple nights ago it was so bright I could read by the full. Did you know that a full moon is 13 times brighter than at half moon..? Check this out: Albedo: How Bright is the Moon?

There is not the shadow of doubt that old luna was trod upon by earthlings.. and driven on.. even had a tee shot whacked out upon.. and there is plenty of evidence, footprints will be there for eons..