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.

 

Gravity on the Moon...

page: 2
48
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 28 2009 @ 12:12 PM
link   
reply to post by eniac
 


I agree completely. Since gravity is a function/effect of Mass. Also I could swear hearing that the earth's own gravity is not uniform throughout the planet. The acceleration due to Earth's gravity 9.8m/s^2 is an average. All it would take is having very large relatively denser material in one region of the moon than another to have slightly different gravity. How much of a difference I don't know but surely no differences on a scale that would rival Earth's gravity.

[edit on 28-5-2009 by 2 cents]




posted on May, 28 2009 @ 12:13 PM
link   
reply to post by mckyle
 



So applying that rationale: if you can't see it, it must be there!!


I think a better way to word in more in his spirit would be, just because you can't see it doesn't mean it's not there.



posted on May, 28 2009 @ 12:14 PM
link   
Once again - The moon landing was pure BS.

Hey do you think the Indians might take some cool pictures of our BS moon buggy that we left, or the flag? What a crock of crap.



posted on May, 28 2009 @ 12:29 PM
link   
reply to post by esteay812
 


esteay812:

I don't John other than what I have read about him and his posts..But I could have done without knowing about his personal finacial business or speculation on his mining operation.... Not saying you were taking shots or any thing...But this place isn't the best place to post information like that ya know...might want to keep that stuff to yourself...never know who might be lurking around in here just looking for any information to use against anyone.



posted on May, 28 2009 @ 12:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Totalstranger
yeah but Lear thinks there is semi-earth like gravity,


.64 of Earth to be precise, based on Werner von Braun's and Apollo 8 reading of the neutral point





and there are bases there. did India see any of that?



No India did not 'see' that, but then they claim they have 40,000 high res images... have we 'seen' those yet? Kaguya/Selene also did not 'see' them, but we won't see those pictures for at least another year yet... why? And China's ChangE-1 showed us ONE picture that had 'flaws'. Where is that spacecraft now?



I guess it doesnt matter because there will soon be a new, dummy account by none other than Lear himself blowing this out of proportion.


John has never had, nor ever will have a dummy account here or anywhere else. So who is blowing what out of proportion?




so nice find. now find a base, vehicles, or anything....anything


Already have... your just not seeing it..



posted on May, 28 2009 @ 12:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by SaturnFX
I am a bit saddened that America will clearly not be leading this new age of information. looks like we will be falling behind and become a irrelevant nation if things are disclosed to the public, making our (shadow?) government about as trustworthy as the iraqi information minister at the beginning of the war.


So am I and since the other nations that are looking at the moon right now are also faltering on giving us the clear pictures, you have to ask WHY

WHY did China only show us one picture then almost disappear from the scene and that picture had a lot of controversy around it... like it was a copy of a Clementine photo, it had a 'new' crater that turned out to be an alignment error

WHY is JAXA with holding images for TWO YEARS? Plenty of time to remove anything 'incriminating...

WHY are India's high res (40,000 images) not available?

WHY is NASA saying this now?

NASA may abandon plans for moon base


NASA will probably not build an outpost on the moonM as originally planned, the agency's acting administrator, Chris Scolese, told lawmakers on Wednesday. His comments also hinted that the agency is open to putting more emphasis on human missions to destinations like Mars or a near-Earth asteroid.


www.newscientist.com...






[edit on 28-5-2009 by zorgon]



posted on May, 28 2009 @ 12:50 PM
link   
There are many possiblitys. I sure hope its aliens and they make a public apperance. All of this secrecy stuff is only making me angry. Theres nothing that could be said that would suprise me.



posted on May, 28 2009 @ 12:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by 2 cents
I agree completely. Since gravity is a function/effect of Mass. Also I could swear hearing that the earth's own gravity is not uniform throughout the planet. The acceleration due to Earth's gravity 9.8m/s^2 is an average. All it would take is having very large relatively denser material in one region of the moon than another to have slightly different gravity. How much of a difference I don't know but surely no differences on a scale that would rival Earth's gravity.


I would highly recommend that you read "Gravitational Force of the Sun" by Pari Spolter. She has some interesting theories about Gravity and is challenging Einstein and Newton...

www.thelivingmoon.com...

She also added a comment on an article on just what you say about Earth gravity anomalies

"Missing gravity near Canada's Hudson Bay"

www.earthsky.org...

"I have presented evidence in my book GRAVITATIONAL FORCE OF THE SUN and in a recent article “New Concepts in Gravitation” published in PHYSICS ESSAYS Volume 18, Number 1. pages 37-49 . that gravitational force is independent of the mass." - Pari Spolter

She and John have been discussing the gravity issues for some time and you can read the email exchanges here

www.thelivingmoon.com...
www.thelivingmoon.com...

Now I know chatting with John may get her bad reviews, but then, she is already making a name for herself anyway...



posted on May, 28 2009 @ 12:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by esteay812
I have heard people say that there is enough gravity and atmosphere on the moon to get out and walk around with little assistance or difference than being on Earth.


Dumb ass NASA engineers ...

Would not be way cheaper if they just used scuba gear ?



posted on May, 28 2009 @ 01:19 PM
link   
I think the difference in gravity is from large asteroid impacts on the young moon. It caused high density areas in some sections where the asteroid lodged into the softer lunar surface. That is the reason for the gravity anomaly IMHO.

The other possible features like underground cavities would also be caused by these impacts creating flutes where molten rock was ejected around the asteroid or perhaps several asteroids. The underground structures might have also been covered at the openings from collapsed materials from the ejecta.

I have often theorized that these natural underground structures could have been exploited by an earlier advanced civilization that has since become extinct. I know if we map these structures out we will likely want to visit them and explore them ourselves at some point in the future as possible colony sites. It would save a lot of excavation.

Of course if they already are occupied we might just be told to move along.



posted on May, 28 2009 @ 01:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by 5thElement
Dumb ass NASA engineers ...


Well its worse than just that though I do have a good picture of those NASA scientists that paints the picture

This is them wondering what went wrong on one of the Mars Rovers (Seems Spirit lost a wheel)





But here is my question...

WHY if NASA was so expert at landing on the moon do we need any MORE missions to study the gravity on the moon?

Japan's ship has sophisticated instruments that gave us the result of this OP...

India's ship...

NASA Seeks Berth On India's Moon Mission



"NASA is in talks with us for deploying some of its scientific
payload in our spacecraft to carry out specific tests in the lunar orbit. We are evaluating the proposal," Goel said in India's southern city of Bangalore.


And now they will send YET ANOTHER ship whose sole purpose is to study the gravity of the Moon 'for future missions'

GRAIL



The Gravity Recovery and Interior Laboratory, or GRAIL, mission is a part of NASA's Discovery Program. It will cost $375 million and is scheduled to launch in 2011. GRAIL will fly twin spacecraft in tandem orbits around the moon for several months to measure its gravity field in unprecedented detail. The mission also will answer longstanding questions about Earth's moon and provide scientists a better understanding of how Earth and other rocky planets in the solar system formed.


www.nasa.gov...

375 million to study lunar gravity? Not till 2011? And then talks of scrubbing the new Moon Base? What is going on here?

Why don't they just ask ATS skeptics who have all the answers already on what the gravity on the moon really is?

Why not just look up their Apollo landing notes?

Why do we still need to spend months studying the Gravity of the Moon...

Unless....

There is something not right



One of Mike Singh's related threads...

The Big NASA-Military Cover-up On Gravity And Atmosphere On The Moon!
www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on May, 28 2009 @ 01:34 PM
link   
the far side of the moon would have more gravity than the one we can see because of the Earth's gravity, correct?



posted on May, 28 2009 @ 01:34 PM
link   
Recent conversation overheard outside Mike Griffin's office...

"Hey Mikey, what are we going to do tomorrow?"

"Tomorrow? Why tomorrow we are going to take over the world's space programs, that's what!"

NASA And India Sign Agreement For Future Cooperation

NASA To Work With India on Moon Mission

U.S.- India Space Cooperation


NASA Administrator Visits China


ESA and NASA extend ties with major new cross-support agreement


NASA_Canadian_Space_Agency_Agreement


Hmmm No wonder we need to wait years to get those images




posted on May, 28 2009 @ 01:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by C0mmonen5e
the far side of the moon would have more gravity than the one we can see because of the Earth's gravity, correct?


I believe it is because the center of gravity on the moon is not the center of the moon. Not sure yet why that is though... maybe [HOLY] GRAIL will tell us


But this theory is not new...

Peter Andreas Hansen first proposed this.


In 1838 he published a revision of the lunar theory, entitled Fundamenta nova investigationis, &c., and the improved Tables of the Moon ("Hansen's Lunar Tables") based upon it were printed in 1857, at the expense of the British government, their merit being further recognized by a grant of £1000, and by their adoption in the Nautical Almanac as from the issue for the year 1862

en.wikipedia.org...

It wasn't until Simon Newcomb from the US NAVAL OBSERVATORY steeped in and kaboshed this. Until then it was accepted in main stream scince circles and even recieved awards.

Life on the moon? A short history of the Hansen hypothesis



Abstract
In 1856, Peter Andreas Hansen, one of the leading mathematical astronomers on the Continent, proposed a theory of the moon which included the possibility of an atmosphere and even of life on the far side. The theory was quickly endorsed by many in the scientific community, allowing in its brief life speculation about life on the far side to flourish. It attracted the attention of such notables as Sir John Herschel and was exciting enough to play a large role in Jules Verne's fiction about the moon. The hypothesis met its end around 1870 when assumptions behind it were questioned by Simon Newcomb and others.


Even John Hershel got involved...
"...astronomer, Sir John Herschel, whose famous father had advocated the plurality of worlds, and even life on the moon, adopted the Hansen hypothesis..."

www.informaworld.com...

So there you have it... the date that the US NAVY (who in my opinion run the REAL space program) got involved in matters of the Moon and that was the date the 'obfuscation' began

1870



posted on May, 28 2009 @ 02:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon
WHY if NASA was so expert at landing on the moon do we need any MORE missions to study the gravity on the moon?


Maybe because these gravitational anomalies of the Moon influence the orbit of spacecrafts around the Moon enough to include them in calculations for further long term missions and the previous data was more then enough for short and less important ones ?



posted on May, 28 2009 @ 02:14 PM
link   
Remember when we dropped something down on the Moon and it rung. So the bell tolls.



posted on May, 28 2009 @ 02:16 PM
link   
Hello, (not quite on topic but just a question),

Does anyone (other than NASA) have a picture, any picture, showing any of the equipment left behind on the Moon ? This would put an end to the speculation once and for all. A couple of months ago I came across some very good images taken by someone using his home telescope set-up. I wrote to him asking if he could zoom in on any of the landing areas but he replied that he needed a slightly stronger inch telescope to do this.

Surely this is possible, someone must be able to take a picture and confirm the landings.

Thanks for any info.



posted on May, 28 2009 @ 02:21 PM
link   
Wouldn't one assume the difference in gravity based on common sense? If the near side of the moon, being closer to earth, were effected by earths gravity, then the near side 'should' have a lower force of gravity since objects between the moon and earth would be tugged on by both. Where as on the back side of the moon, objects should be tugged toward the center of the moon and the center of the earth, which would be 'down' while standing on the moon. I wonder if being on the side of the moon would cause any sense of discomfort or loss of balance? Could it even be that noticeable?



posted on May, 28 2009 @ 02:23 PM
link   
I have always wondered if gravitational force varies on objects.

I always had this idea that gravity is a pull and push. Every object emits gravitation force as well as receives gravity. Wouldn't gravity add and cancel itself out at certain frequencies? Gravity must be a wave.

Earth is facing the light side of the moon, so the light side would have a different gravitational force.

I can picture the universe as a ocean of gravity constantly manipulating everything. Gravitational waves and colliding, reacting, displacing other gravitational waves.

Maybe the waves are created from movement of mass. Vibrating molecule creating gravitational wave like a moving object through water. more mass = more gravity.

Can you tell I find this subject intriging?



posted on May, 28 2009 @ 02:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Pimpish
reply to post by mckyle
 



So applying that rationale: if you can't see it, it must be there!!


I think a better way to word in more in his spirit would be, just because you can't see it doesn't mean it's not there.

Well said, thanks for putting a smile on my face today, I needed it.



new topics

top topics



 
48
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join