Learning to walk (to the Moon) all over again., page 6
Pages: <<  3    4    5    6  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 0 times


reply posted on 21-2-2005 @ 11:15 PM by Aether
Originally posted by SiberianTiger
Its accepted that a minimum of 10 cm width of aluminium would be needed at the very least to keep out radiation. However the walls of the Apollo craft and capsule were made as thin and as light as possible and as a result the craft initially could not carry enough air inside to withstand the equivalent to sea level air pressure. NASA had to reduce air pressure inside the cabin to cope. Here are the official stats from a NASA website:
www.hq.nasa.gov...

[edit on 21-2-2005 by SiberianTiger]


Imagine for a second your inside an apollo atmosphere re-entry 'vehicle'. Your traveling around mach 36 (the mach 36 info is referenced from John D. Anderson Jr.'s Fundamentals of Aerodynamics) Do you really believe radiation is going to be a factor when you have the enough protective shielding to withstand re-entry through the atmosphere?


reply posted on 22-2-2005 @ 02:32 PM by HowardRoark
Dude. . .

Take a breath, and calm down a bit, okay?

I never said that radiation outside of the Van Allen belt wasn’t a concern. It is. What is important to realize is that that radiation varies considerably in its intensity and consequentially it effects. Most of the time the solar radiation levels are low and are well within the acceptable risk limits. Occasionally, there are solar storms that produce high levels of radiation that can indeed be hazardous to humans.

There is no data to support your claim that the astronauts would have died within three minutes after leaving the Van Allen belt. No scientist* any where, has ever made that assertion.

Here is an analogy. Suppose you have a small sailboat. Now suppose you live in Cuba but you want to live in the USA, because you want to play baseball and become the next Sammy Sosa (I know, he’s Dominican, but stick with me here ) Now you know form your sailing experience that It will take you about three days to cross over from Havana to Miami. You also know that your boat is handles great in average winds, but will capsize and sink if the winds get over 50 knots. So what do you do? Do you set off and hope that the weather holds until you get to Miami, or do you check the weather predictions to see if there are any storm warnings forecast? After all, you don’t want to set out a day before a hurricane is expected to hit, now do you? Obviously you figure out what the weather will be like before you set out.

Now back to space. Since the intensity of solar radiation in trans-lunar space is directly related to solar flares and CMEs, and these events are directly related to solar sunspots, it stands to reason that if you know what the sunspot activity is, you can reasonably predict the likelihood of a solar flare.

Well, guess what, sunspots are highly cyclic and their occurrences can be reasonably forecast within the time frame of the mission planning.

Please try to understand the science behind these things.









*That is, no scientist with an ounce of self respect or with any respect from his peers.





[edit on 22-2-2005 by HowardRoark]


reply posted on 22-2-2005 @ 09:48 PM by HowardRoark
Abstract

The dose rates in the blood-forming organ of a typical astronaut for four space
shielding conditions are used to study the astronaut health effects of the solar particle
event which began on August 4, 1972. This event was chosen as it was the most hazardous
event for which detailed measurements have been made and for which dire
predictions of the potential health effects have at times been suggested. The code used
for health effects is the biological model developed for tactical nuclear weapons warfare
survival of young adults in a 1g environment. We find the risks of early lethality
to be very small especially if appropriate medical action (antibiotics and blood transfusions)
is taken soon after the exposure. The primary concern would then be for the
development of cancer later in life. Although leukemia could occur relatively soon
after the exposure, the risk of solid tumors might be best controlled by using mature
individuals for the mission, and thereby offset cancer risk by balancing life span
remaining against the long latency periods associated with solid tumors. Use of
genetic selection criteria could further reduce health risks during the mission. A
possible space experiment to evaluate synergistic effects of the microgravity environmental
stress and other space-related stress factors is discussed.


Yes, it can get dangerous out there, no one is denying that. 100% lethal, 1--% of the time? Not hardly.

Astronaut Protection From Solar Event of August 4, 1972

Any other questions?


reply posted on 11-4-2005 @ 02:46 AM by OpenSecret2012
Originally posted by SiberianTiger
This IS what prooves I have won the argument ONCE AGAIN!!! YO HOWARD, Ichallenge you NOW in front of the ATS community who's watching this thread GO I said GO and get NASA's OFFICIAL staementS on the SUN'S RAYS outside the VAB and post it up on here, you'll see that what I said is 100% true, the suns rays are 100/200 times more leathal outside of the VAB than in the earths atmosphere AND in the VAB, no nylon cloth or plastic bage can withstand the heat in outer Van Allen Belt from sun's rays, first get nasa's words that Sun's rays are not more powerfull than in earths atmosphere, than you can say u dis proved me.


*waddles into thread*

The Van Allen Belt is very, very, thin in certain areas. Mission Control on purpose had the rocket launch into the thinest part. Next, the rocket is going superfast, so any exposure is sooo minimal, soo fast, it's within normal limits.

When you get X-Rays taken, the attendant still stands behind 200 feet of lead shielding (OK I'm exaggerating a tiny bit LOL!). Does this mean your gonna die?! I mean, why is the hospital attendant running over and hiding behind his shielding? While your butt naked in front of that X-Ray machine?

Radiation isn't harmful to humans. too much radiation is what's harmful to humans. There are acceptable levels of radiation that the human body can tolerate without dying.

Next, after the body is exposed to radiation, even if it starst to be harmful, the body reheals itself. The cells that died from radiation are pushed out, discarded, and new cells replace them. As long as the body isn't killed off faster than it can replace its cells.

Oh yeah, did you know space is freeeezing COLD? Even when one leaves the Earth's atmosphere it's still freezing cold. The reason why the earth is warm, and not a ball of ice, is because the sun's heat is trapped on earth by the atmosphere.

Of course, if the spaceshuttle, or apollo rocket, tried travelling to the sun, after a while, they'd evaporate from being tooo close to the sun where they'd get too hot, hotter than the coldness of space.

And if you think simple "cloth" can't protect them, then why are modern spacemen able to spacewalk in "cloth" spacesuites no problem? From the USA, Russia, Japan, and S. America? (Whoops... I almost forgot S. America's rocket got sabatoged by the CIA. )

*Waddles back out of thread*

[edit on 11-4-2005 by OpenSecret2012]
Pages: <<  3    4    5    6  >>    ^^TOP^^



F-22 Pilots Told Not to Talk
  Posted 17 days ago with 23 member flags
Mind Control - Reference Articles (Pdf\'s)
  Posted 19 days ago with 7 member flags
Several military convoys traveling through Kittery, Maine
  Posted 18 days ago with 6 member flags
Eglin Air Force Base hangar Foam Party!
  Posted 8 days ago with 4 member flags