It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Stars Can't Be Seen from Outer Space

page: 32
40
<< 29  30  31    33  34  35 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 1 2016 @ 10:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
oh dear - just when i thought things could not sink lower :

i now suspect the OP is having conversations with his own sock puppet

warning kids - this is what happens when you are utterly scientifically illiterate


I did notice that and had a good chuckle.




posted on Mar, 2 2016 @ 03:08 AM
link   
@GaryN
Yes indeed, habit is the second nature of man. But do not forget that Armstrong, Mitchell and all others were prepared in this regard, and however there is a huge difference between to see several stars scattered here and there, far fewer than the daily habit, and to not see stars at all as he clearly said.

It seems that too few understand the difference between the thermosphere and cislunar or deep spacer, and on the other hand the role of magnetosphere of a celestial body in the solar system dynamics.

And of course you can PM the link to your website, but I can't promise to post something there.



posted on Mar, 2 2016 @ 05:29 AM
link   

originally posted by: Box of Rain
Do you have any science that backs this up? All point-source EM radiation follows the inverse-square law, whether it be microwaves, infrared, visible light, ultraviolet, or X-rays.


His statement actually shows he does not even understand the inverse-square law, or what it means!



posted on Mar, 2 2016 @ 11:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: sadang
@GaryN
Yes indeed, habit is the second nature of man. But do not forget that Armstrong, Mitchell and all others were prepared in this regard, and however there is a huge difference between to see several stars scattered here and there, far fewer than the daily habit, and to not see stars at all as he clearly said.


he says he could see the sun.. the sun is a STAR..

having said that, why do you think that we can see stars at night but we cant during the day??

why do you think we can see more stars in the country side at night time than we can in a large city at night time?



posted on Mar, 4 2016 @ 02:50 PM
link   
March 22/23 would be a good time for Chang'e to look at the Earth, even better if they had sent a camera with a zoom. I suppose the Sun is too bright for Chang'e to look at though so they won't try. The next camera on the Earth facing side should have zoom and an ND filter that could be flipped in or out, but maybe that is beyond the engineers capability?
Eyeball FOV
www3.telus.net...
Zoomed at maximum partial eclipse
www3.telus.net...

edit on 4-3-2016 by GaryN because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 4 2016 @ 10:49 PM
link   
a reply to: GaryN

taking pictures of the earth and sun in that configuration will prove nothing..

since you already claimed they can see the earth from some weird UV shield bouncing UV light towards the moons extremely thin atmosphere anyway..

and in reality its going to be visible anyway.. so the only thing that doing this will prove is that the camera works..

the moon has an atmosphere (of some sort) which you claim makes visible light.. why dont we see stars from chang'e photos? you also claimed the inverse square law was bogus which means the distant stars should be extremely bright even with the thin atmosphere.
edit on 4-3-2016 by choos because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 14 2016 @ 04:13 PM
link   
If you watch the "When We Left Earth" series you will see an interview with Scott Carpenter where he states he could see the stars and they don't twinkle because there was not atmosphere.

Also, on ArsTechnica they have an article where they are using VR for some NASA events and when you are on the moon they have you look up and when your eyes adjust it goes from black to star filled.

"After I'd cruised along the moon's surface for a minute, he encouraged me to look up, straight up, at the rest of the black universe above my head. "The stars will appear once your eyes adjust," he said, and sure enough, the bloom effect played out. Utter blackness turned into a wealth of stars, which Shehata said happens to be the same thing astronauts experience on the moon when they look up from its bright, sun- and Earth-lit surface."

arstechnica.com... /ars-tests-nasas-first-vive-vr-experiments-iss-lunar-rover-simulators/



posted on Mar, 14 2016 @ 06:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: Flipper35
If you watch the "When We Left Earth" series you will see an interview with Scott Carpenter where he states he could see the stars and they don't twinkle because there was not atmosphere.

Also, on ArsTechnica they have an article where they are using VR for some NASA events and when you are on the moon they have you look up and when your eyes adjust it goes from black to star filled.

"After I'd cruised along the moon's surface for a minute, he encouraged me to look up, straight up, at the rest of the black universe above my head. "The stars will appear once your eyes adjust," he said, and sure enough, the bloom effect played out. Utter blackness turned into a wealth of stars, which Shehata said happens to be the same thing astronauts experience on the moon when they look up from its bright, sun- and Earth-lit surface."

arstechnica.com... /ars-tests-nasas-first-vive-vr-experiments-iss-lunar-rover-simulators/



Must be so weird to see totally static stars....very eery i imagine.



posted on Mar, 14 2016 @ 09:16 PM
link   
a reply to: Flipper35


Utter blackness turned into a wealth of stars, which Shehata said happens to be the same thing astronauts experience on the moon when they look up from its bright, sun- and Earth-lit surface.

My memory must be getting really bad, can you remind me which astronaut/s said that?



posted on May, 28 2016 @ 01:48 AM
link   
All the Apollo missions were done during the moons day. Although the moon has basically no atmosphere, the Sun's light would still saturate any exposure. As we know, we can't see the stars here during the day.



posted on May, 28 2016 @ 12:10 PM
link   
a reply to: MattMan83



As we know, we can't see the stars here during the day.

Yes, that is why we do astrophotography at night, the stars are bright and colourful. So Chang'e 3 on the Lunar surface should be able to do the same from the Moon. So why no pictures? China could be first to image stars from the surface of an object other than Earth. A missed opportunity, or it's just not possible?



posted on May, 28 2016 @ 01:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: GaryN
a reply to: MattMan83
China could be first to image stars from the surface of an object other than Earth. A missed opportunity, or it's just not possible?

Sorry, but Curiosity rover has done so numerous times.



posted on May, 28 2016 @ 02:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: GaryN
a reply to: MattMan83



As we know, we can't see the stars here during the day.

Yes, that is why we do astrophotography at night, the stars are bright and colourful.


No, the stars are the same brightness that they are during the daytime. However, the sky is darker, allowing dark-adapted eyes to see them, and cameras designed for very long exposures to image them.


So Chang'e 3 on the Lunar surface should be able to do the same from the Moon. So why no pictures?


The panoramic cameras are designed to image the landscape during daytime, therefore they don't need to look up, nor do they need to take long exposures. Chang'e 3 goes into sleep-mode during the lunar night because the solar panels can't provide power (it has an RTG that keeps the systems warm during 14 days of darkness, but it does not provide enough power to run the probe).


China could be first to image stars from the surface of an object other than Earth.


No, Apollo 16 was the first to image stars from the surface of an object other than Earth 44 years ago using a 3-inch UV telescope. Link


A missed opportunity, or it's just not possible?


It is possible and they didn't miss the opportunity: Chang'e 3 is equipped with a 150mm UV telescope that makes it the first long term lunar-based astronomical observatory.



posted on May, 28 2016 @ 02:51 PM
link   
Does this mean the Hubble Space Telescope is actually in some NASA employee's garage?



posted on May, 28 2016 @ 04:05 PM
link   
- GaryN it seems you have to start again from beginning with explanations for Saint Exupery. you still have resources and patience for this?



posted on May, 28 2016 @ 07:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: sadang
- GaryN it seems you have to start again from beginning with explanations for Saint Exupery. you still have resources and patience for this?

Do you think ATS is ready for this thread to reach page 60?



posted on May, 28 2016 @ 08:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: sadang
- GaryN it seems you have to start again from beginning with explanations for Saint Exupery. you still have resources and patience for this?



Do any of us have the patience?


LETS FIND OUT! GaryN, you're up!
edit on 28-5-2016 by 3danimator2014 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 28 2016 @ 08:15 PM
link   
This article is either crap, or this picture of stars from the space shuttle is completely fake- either way something is being faked somewhere.

www.google.com... Fwww.abovetopsecret.com%25252Fforum%25252Fthread463004%25252Fpg1&source=iu&pf=m&fir=gBAgKMkAeFEQaM%253A%252CGGeu-BrMfsnTmM%252C_&usg=__ueMgqcEG4EnEi0J 9_20CNEZIiE4%3D&biw=1525&bih=706&dpr=0.9&ved=0ahUKEwjIvpG2jf7MAhVB8GMKHYaLDqcQyjcINg&ei=E0JKV4jpN8HgjwOGl7q4Cg#imgrc=gBAgKMkAeFEQaM%3A



posted on May, 28 2016 @ 08:17 PM
link   
Actually....I'm a better thinker for having read page one......which I remember from ages ago......then reading this last page 32.....good gravy.....I'm somehow more rounded.....
almost closure.....he he

now I wonder what was in the middle.....



edit on 28-5-2016 by GBP/JPY because: our new King.....He comes right after a nicely done fake one

edit on 28-5-2016 by GBP/JPY because: last minute thought there....yezz



posted on May, 28 2016 @ 08:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: GBP/JPY

now I wonder what was in the middle.....




It's soft and chewy and quite fruity, dig in.



new topics

top topics



 
40
<< 29  30  31    33  34  35 >>

log in

join