NASA's Sun Simulator caught on video

I think you need to stop taking comments so personally, and state your case.

No offense, but acting like a whiney school girl, isn't the best tactic to be taken seriously. Around here anyway.

originally posted by: watchitburn

originally posted by: Hecate666
a reply to: brokenghost

I managed to watch this utter s4ite until 3:58. This people is what happens when people just lack knowledge.
It's like me making up how a piston engine works using fairies and god rays rather than looking it up and learning why things do what they do.

The 'planet' is so clearly a lens flare and a reflection of some inner camera part [reflection of] that it baffles my mind how any adult in 2018 can ignore a perfectly logical explanation to the stupidest reason ever.

It leaves me as baffled as flat earth, chetrails and religion. Seriously?

Then what are the fairies in my engine really up to?
I'm going to need to have a talk with them.

Who are you then, their fairy God Mother?

a reply to: brokenghost

Dude you so badly got fooled it's painful.

The patent doesn't exist-I looked for it myself. The dude who made this has his tin foil hat on too tight or he was just pranking people-Just because it's on youtube doesn't make it real.

originally posted by: brokenghost
a reply to: opethPA

It's not. But apparently it is for you.

btw you can have your knife back, you know, so you can come back for seconds.

I don't give a raging bloodsucking bat about what you're implying dude. I had a question, simple to the point. Why so anguished about me asking a damn question for my own study?

That's great and has literally nothing to do with the questions I asked. I'm also not implying anything and if you arent an Always Sunny fan then the Dennis Reynolds reference makes no sense I am sure.

What is the implication of this video to you?

Why does the agency responisble for the study of space having a way to simulate something in space seem illogical or nefarious to you?

Ignoring the videos in the op, here is the patent.

ntrs.nasa.gov...

ntrs.nasa.gov...

a reply to: Jefferton

Yeah you're right. I should just ignore you, but go ahead please continue taking on the more popular view of acting like an a** to enhance one's ... 'fill it in'.

a reply to: Thecakeisalie

You think I don't do this for purposes unknown to you? How egotistical.

a reply to: badw0lf

Thanks for finding that.

originally posted by: opethPA

originally posted by: brokenghost
a reply to: opethPA

It's not. But apparently it is for you.

btw you can have your knife back, you know, so you can come back for seconds.

I don't give a raging bloodsucking bat about what you're implying dude. I had a question, simple to the point. Why so anguished about me asking a damn question for my own study?

That's great and has literally nothing to do with the questions I asked. I'm also not implying anything and if you arent an Always Sunny fan then the Dennis Reynolds reference makes no sense I am sure.

What is the implication of this video to you?

Why does the agency responisble for the study of space having a way to simulate something in space seem illogical or nefarious to you?

I don't have a # clue who that guy is, never seen him before. I just caught wind of the patent part of it and wanted to know if anyone heard of it, that's it.

originally posted by: Thecakeisalie
a reply to: brokenghost

Dude you so badly got fooled it's painful.

The patent doesn't exist-I looked for it myself. The dude who made this has his tin foil hat on too tight or he was just pranking people-Just because it's on youtube doesn't make it real.

Glad you feel positive about that, considering it was just posted by someone.

a reply to: brokenghost

This patent?

Patent

It says nothing about being a "sun simulator" and I find no mention of NASA.

It needs a solar source, which would be a star. It also doesn't generate light, it just reorganises it to be distributed as desired. Apparently it'll reflect/refract the whole or a good portion of the electromagnetic spectrum.

It would be super useful on an space-based biome, but then we've got some pretty good energy-efficient lights specifically designed for growing these days.

Oh yeah, the patent is expired... Seemingly outdated and yeah... Nibiru

originally posted by: brokenghost
a reply to: odzeandennz

Did you read it, the patent part.

The patent describes a system for using sunlight in a controlled environment INDOORS.

patents.google.com...

originally posted by: odzeandennz
and nasa made the swap while everyone was sleeping...

i can't even fathom what level of idiocy is behind this "conspiracy"...

the earth orbits the sun. think about that...

Same people who believe in Orgon Generators also believe that weather radar stations generate rainclouds - ever noticed how in the weather maps, all the rainstorms are always centred around the radar stations?

originally posted by: RAY1990
a reply to: brokenghost

This patent?

Patent

It says nothing about being a "sun simulator" and I find no mention of NASA.

It needs a solar source, which would be a star. It also doesn't generate light, it just reorganises it to be distributed as desired. Apparently it'll reflect/refract the whole or a good portion of the electromagnetic spectrum.

It would be super useful on an space-based biome, but then we've got some pretty good energy-efficient lights specifically designed for growing these days.

Oh yeah, the patent is expired... Seemingly outdated and yeah... Nibiru

Well I did just provide both a source to the referred item and the pdf pertaining to a sun simulator.

So...

Outdated or not, calling the OP wrong, is erroneous.

a reply to: badw0lf

Oh well lol, I had a different patent.

Still isn't an artificial sun.

originally posted by: OneBigMonkeyToo

originally posted by: brokenghost
a reply to: odzeandennz

Did you read it, the patent part.

The patent describes a system for using sunlight in a controlled environment INDOORS.

patents.google.com...

In order to provide sufficient illumination to simulate sunlight over a practicably large area

?

a reply to: brokenghost

Oh wow, I found a sight that leads to the patents, but I don't think it is allowed to be linked here. So, I will just link the patents instead. These are the ones pointed out that NASA has that relates to the OP subject matter:

1. Space Simulator ...

Claims (1)
1. A SPACE SIMULATOR, COMPRISING: A SHELL STRUCTURE DEFINING A TEST CHAMBER; A SOURCE OF SOLAR SIMULATING RADIATIONS DISPOSED EXTERNALLY OF SAID SHELL; A LENS IN A WALL OF SAID SHELL FOR TRANSMITTING SAID RADIATIONS AS AN EXPANDING BEAM INTO SAID TEST CHAMBER; A MULTIPLE CELL REFLECTOR WITHIN SAID SHELL DIMENSIONED TO INTERSECT THE ENTIRE BEAM OF SAID RADIATIONS; A MAIN REFLECTOR AT ONE END OF SAID TEST CHAMBER AND ARRANGED TO RECEIVE RADIATIONS TRANSMITTED BY SAID MULTIPLE CELL REFLECTOR; EACH OF THE CELLS OF AID MULTIPLE CELL REFLECTOR BEING PARABOLIC SO AS TO REFLECT THAT PORTION OF THE TOTAL RADIATION WHICH IT RECEIVES OVER ESSENTIALLY THE ENTIRE SURFACE OF SAID MAIN REFLECTOR, WHEREBY EACH POINT OF THE MAIN REFLECTOR RECEIVES THE SUM OF THE RADIATIONS FROM ALL THE CELLS OF SAID MULTIPLE CELL REFLECTOR.

2. Sun Simulator ...

Abstract: Illumination system design for use as sunlight simulator in space environment simulators with multiple light sources reflected to single virtual source

3. Means for simulating Certain environmental conditions in outer Space ...

MEANS FOR SIMULATING CERTAIN ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS OF OUTER SPACE Filed Feb. 2, Iseo 2 sheets-sheet 2 o Nv gr I Vu U1 2' 3 T1 m f llf) N Sn INVENTOR. l0 OTTO SCHUE LER ATTORNEY mie/w43" AGENT United States Patent Otiice v 3,010,220 Patented Nov. 28, 1961 MEANS FOR SIMULATING CERTAIN ENVIRON- The invention described herein may be manufactured and used by or Afor the United States Government for governmental purposes without payment to me of any royalty thereon.

This invention relates generally to the simulation of anticipated space iiight conditions to be encountered outside the earths atmosphere and, more particularly, to a novel apparatus for simulating the hazards and environmental conditions to be encountered in orbital or space iiight.

4. Space Chambers ...

This invention relates generally to the simulation of space flight conditions in outer space and, more particularly, to novel means for approximating the hazards and environmental conditions to be encountered in orbital or space flight, and this application for Letters Patent is an improvement over my copending application, Serial No. 6,330, filed on February 2, 1960, now Patent No. 3,010,220.

There are about 6-7 more patents but they all seem to be things that would be needed in space flight once you read through them a bit. I could be missing something though. Pretty cool to read about! The tech that they invented to go into space. Thanks for bringing this up! I would've never found it if you hadn't have started this thread!

Oh, and if you want the link to the other patents, I think it is ok to PM that sight to you..but I don't think ATS allows it to be used in a thread.

Thanks again!
blend

there's a patent for light simulation on earth to mimic the properties of sunlight in space. its available for the general public...

its not a massive light ball put in orbit and can light up an entire planet and moon presumably. how would the earth be able to rotate around an object with less mass than itself?

artificial light would not be able to sustain life on earth, its not emitting any of the particles and radiation the sun does.

the sun and this artificial sun would have to be right on top of each other or encased in each other in order for a gap to not be a seen as the earth rotates about the (actual) sun

a patent is a place holder for intellectual property. the device can be theoretical in nature. as long as their is a viable physical explanation of function...

a reply to: badw0lf

Where did I say the Op was wrong?

Admittedly I'm not the sharpest knife in the draw but I fail to find where I said "Op you are wrong" in fact I asked if it was this patent and then provided a link.

Took me all of two minutes to do a Google search, I'm usually not one to have a go at people but the Op could've put a little more effort into his original post.

It is what it is.

Again I failed to find anything about me saying the Op is wrong, maybe you can enlighten me?

originally posted by: RAY1990
a reply to: badw0lf

Oh well lol, I had a different patent.

Still isn't an artificial sun.

I agree.