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.

 

The Big NASA-Military Cover-up On Gravity And Atmosphere On The Moon!

page: 6
114
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 11 2008 @ 10:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by newagent89
As for high jumps:
Neil Armstrong reported that he was able to jump to the third step of the lunar module ladder, which he estimated to be five or six feet from the lunar surface [Reports11b, 89]. "I did some fairly high jumps," said Armstrong, "and found that there was a tendency to tip over backward on a high jump.


I consider it a fairy tale until NASA shows us just one clip during the entire Apollo Program showing an astronaut jumping six feet as mentioned by Armstrong. Don't you find it odd that there is not even one vid showing this? At least I haven't come across any!

Cheers!




posted on Sep, 11 2008 @ 11:06 PM
link   
reply to post by mikesingh
 


you should of watched the anniversary show of nasa this evening.. armstrong was on there with about 30 other astro... they were talking about how much fun it was to jump around up there.. and laughing about the people that think it was just a hollywood production all 9 times that they went up there.. I guess they were laughing at you .. ??



posted on Sep, 11 2008 @ 11:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by TeslaandLyne
Well just from the numbers presented for the neutral point:
Moon ship to Earth: 215,100
Moon ship to Moon: 23,900
The Earth mass is 81 Moons.
Force of Earth on Ship = Mass Earth x Mass Ship over 215,100 squared
Force of Moon on Ship = Mass Moon x Mass Ship over 23,900 squared
Mass Earth = Mass Moon x ( 215,100/23,900) squared
= Mass Moon x (9) squared
= 81 times the Moon mass

So that checks out.
So we are using our mass/force equation for gravity.

Not the same thing perhaps.
We do not know what gravity is.


How about some real numbers:
At 40,000 miles from the moon the gravitational attraction calculations yield:

between the moon and the LM = 17.1796021489 newton
between the earth and the LM = 51.2905825893 newton

But as I said earlier there are not just three bodies to consider:
between the Sun and the LM = 87.065857531 newton

Hmmm. It seems the Sun is pulling harder on the LM than the Earth and Moon combined. But that's OK, let's just ignore it. While we're at it, let's ignore centripetal force and inertia too. All that stuff just makes it too hard.


[edit on 11-9-2008 by Phage]


jra

posted on Sep, 11 2008 @ 11:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by mikesingh
I consider it a fairy tale until NASA shows us just one clip during the entire Apollo Program showing an astronaut jumping six feet as mentioned by Armstrong. Don't you find it odd that there is not even one vid showing this? At least I haven't come across any!

Cheers!


Here's the fairy tale in question. www.hq.nasa.gov...

There are pleanty of videos released by NASA showing the astronauts jumping higher then normal. Just don't use youtube as a means of finding them. Try the Apollo Lunar Surface Journal insted.



posted on Sep, 11 2008 @ 11:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Grayarea
 


Extremely good points, Grayarea.

Someone else (please scroll up) mentioned a very simple fact: The Moon is a moving target. The Earth-Moon system is dynamic, but at the same time is also orbiting our Sun.

ALL orbits are ellipses. There are no perfectly circular orbits (at least, none observed yet).

Irrespective of my last paragraph, a trajectory to the Moon, or any other planetary body, is not a 'straight-line' shot. You are aiming for where your target WILL BE at your estimated time of arrival.

Celestial Mechanics 101.

Unless you have some sort of enhanced technology, that will get you where you want to be in mere seconds.....but with Apollo, this doesn't seem to be the case, now does it?

If we didn't understand the basics of Newtonian calculus, and basic Copernican and Brahe observations and calculations....not to mention Galileo....we would never havve been able to direct probes to...Mars, Mercury, Venus, the Sun, Saturn, Jupiter, Uranus and Neptune....nor would we be able to actually probe a comet.....

But, you want to believe we can't find the Moon, in our virtual backyard?

Sure, early missions suffered failures. Baby steps.....

Not to mention, back in the early days....they mostly relied on slide rules (for the younger generation...."Yes, Beaver!" There actually was a time before digital computers!).

Remember, please. NASA had cutting-edge (Lockheed wags called it 'bleeding edge') technology, in the 1960s. Back when TVs had vacuum tubes to blow out, and transistors were a brand new 'idea' for the general public.

We tend (by "we" I refer to 'you' to a generation after myself, who grew up taking all of this current computer tech for granted) ...I, and my generation, I can remember there was a time when your automobile did NOT have computer chips under the hood!

So, instead of saying 'It couldn't have been done with the technoogy of that era' consider two possibilities:

Mike Singh is correct, and it needed back-engineered ET tech....or....it actually happened, as witness and documented.

You're smart enough to draw your own conclusions, and no one can change them, except you They're yours....but, keep investigating anyhow (I am) and deny ignorance!

Cheers!



posted on Sep, 11 2008 @ 11:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
Hmmm. It seems the Sun is pulling harder on the LM than the Earth and Moon combined.


Hmmmm yes but the Sun is pulling equally on the Earth, the Moon and the spaceship between... like two kids playing ball on a moving train... the trajectory of the ball is not effected by the moving train




posted on Sep, 11 2008 @ 11:47 PM
link   
Just curious, are there any real astronauts on this forum, ones who have actually been to space or better yet the moon or is just all fans? Thanks

Peace



posted on Sep, 11 2008 @ 11:52 PM
link   
Yup, Im half way thru Dark Mission and have to say its pretty convincing!!!



posted on Sep, 11 2008 @ 11:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon

Hmmmm yes but the Sun is pulling equally on the Earth, the Moon and the spaceship between... like two kids playing ball on a moving train... the trajectory of the ball is not effected by the moving train



No, it's not like that.

The trajectory of the ball involves the relative motion between the train, the kids, and the ball, not the forces.

Are you saying that the Sun's gravity has no influence on objects in orbit around it?

[edit on 11-9-2008 by Phage]



posted on Sep, 11 2008 @ 11:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by monkeybus
Front side of the moon
Dark side of the moon


There IS no DARKSIDE of the Moon

Might want to get that cleared up first...

You know that Deny Ignorance thingy?





posted on Sep, 11 2008 @ 11:58 PM
link   
reply to post by zorgon
 


Z, I like that! You said in, like three sentences....and it took me, like, eighteen paragraphs.

Guess I tend to embellish....bombastic, I tend to be!

Backward speaking, I will in future be. Sentences, ending in verbs will.

Fun, this is!



posted on Sep, 11 2008 @ 11:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
Are you saying that the Sun's gravity has no influence on objects in orbit around it?


No I am saying it excerpts the same force on all objects...


But Pari Spolter is working on a new theory... I will get to that later



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 12:03 AM
link   
reply to post by jra
 


Really unimpressive quality in that film clip. The second time I watched it, I found the shadow which was supposed to be an astronaut.

He might have jumped, or they might have skipped some frames. Or it might have been fingerpuppets. Whatever reasons they may have gone to the moon if they did go to the moon, it was not for humanity. They have forsaken humanity and credability with the poor quality "preservation" of the historical record.



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 12:15 AM
link   
Just a generic response, to no one in particular.

I am having difficulty understanding what exactly is being posited, by several in this thread, regarding 'gravity'.

We either accept Newton, Copernicus, Brahe and Galileo, not to mention Einstein.....OR, we reject all of that data, and centuries of observational knowledge, and create our own 'theories' based on personal 'observations'??

That's where I have difficulty. I have yet to see a solid scientific refutation of Newton, or Brahe, or Copernicus, or Galileo....except to further refine their respective calculations, using modern equipment and more precise observation techniques....

The Vatican tamped down on Galileo, itis true history....desperate to maintain their theological paradigm.....even in the face of science.

What a shame!



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 12:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon


No I am saying it excerpts the same force on all objects...




Nope.

The force is proportional to the product of their masses. The sun is pulling on the Earth harder than it pulls on the Moon. It was pulling on the LM much less than it pulls on either.

[edit on 12-9-2008 by Phage]



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 12:21 AM
link   
reply to post by zorgon
 


Zorgon, do you mean the "Theory of the ElectroMagnetic Universe"'?

If electromagnetism were the 'powerful force' that comprises gravity, then our compasses would not work.

Sorry if I jumped the gun...but mass=gravity. Einstein shows this. Our planet has a magnetic field (for now)....

Again, hope not to steal any thunder....so you can tailor you next post, as necessary, to 'flame' me....go ahead, I've got the suit on.



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 12:26 AM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


Wait a minute, Phage....gravity is a exerted as a product of distance.

It is an inverse relationship. Due to its proximity, the Earth has far more influence, gravitionally, on the Moon than the Sun does.

However, now it gets complicated....the Earth/Moon 'system' (almost could be considered a double planet) could be simultaneously influenced by the Sun's gravity....hence, the uncertainty of the Moon's orbit, in the next five Billion years.

But, for the next 500 years....I think the Moon is gonna tend to stay there, close enough.....



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 12:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by Grayarea
 


Not to mention, back in the early days....they mostly relied on slide rules (for the younger generation...."Yes, Beaver!" There actually was a time before digital computers!).



Oh sure you just had to use the "S" word


It still works and I have never changed the batteries lol



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 12:32 AM
link   
reply to post by Grayarea
 


I wasn't an engineer so this one worked for me.




posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 12:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by Phage
 


Wait a minute, Phage....gravity is a exerted as a product of distance.

It is an inverse relationship. Due to its proximity, the Earth has far more influence, gravitionally, on the Moon than the Sun does.

However, now it gets complicated....the Earth/Moon 'system' (almost could be considered a double planet) could be simultaneously influenced by the Sun's gravity....hence, the uncertainty of the Moon's orbit, in the next five Billion years.

But, for the next 500 years....I think the Moon is gonna tend to stay there, close enough.....


Nope.

Gravitational force is inversely proportionate to the square of the distance as well as directly proportional to the product of the masses. Yes the Earth has more of an influence on the Moon than the Sun does but that's not the issue.

It also acts on bodies independently, whether or not they are orbiting each other.

[edit on 12-9-2008 by Phage]



new topics

top topics



 
114
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join