It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by star in a jar
This site concerns the availability of raw LRO images.
It's your money. These should be your images.
Another reputable source is the Encyclopaedia Britannica. This organization generally publishes information which is accepted by orthodox scientists. Therefore, their claim for the neutral point distance should be in close agreement with Wernher von Braun. In reference to Apollo 11, the Britannica stated the following in the 1973 printing within the topic "Space Exploration": Consideration of the actual dynamics of the Apollo trajectory will review the statements made above. The Apollo 11 spacecraft had been in Earth orbit at 118.5 mi. altitude, traveling at 17,427 mph. By firing the rocket motor at the exact moment when the spacecraft was precisely aligned along the proper trajectory, the velocity was increased to 24,200 mph. Because the Earth's gravitational pull continued to act upon the spacecraft during its two and three-quarters day (64 hr.) journey toward the Moon, the spacecraft velocity, with respect to the Earth, dwindled to 2,040 mph at a distance of 39,000 mi. from the Moon. At this point lunar gravitational attraction became greater than the Earth's and the spacecraft commenced accelerating as it swung toward and around the far side of the Moon, reaching a speed of 5,225 mph. By firing the spacecraft rocket propulsion system the velocity was reduced to 3,680 mph and the spacecraft entered an elliptical orbit about the Moon. Here the distance is 39,000 miles which is still close to the values given by Time and von Braun.
But the 1960 printing of the Encyclopaedia Britannica listed the neutral point distance as 19 Moon radii, or 20,520 miles, from the Moon. The distance discrepancy is between different printings of the same source. In We Reach the Moon, Wilford indicated that the spacecraft entered the lunar sphere of gravitational influence about 38,900 miles from the Moon.
In Footprints on the Moon written in 1969 by the Writers and Editors of the Associated Press, the neutral point is described as follows: Friday, Day Three of the mission, found Apollo 11 at the apex of that long gravitational hill between earth and the moon. At 1:12 p.m. EDT, the nose-to-nose spaceships passed the milestone where the moon's gravity becomes the more important influence. The astronauts were 214,000 miles from earth, only 38,000 miles from their rendezvous with the moon, leading their target like a hunter leads a duck.
There is no way to get around the discrepancy between the conventional, pre-Apollo distances of 20,000 to 25,000 miles, and the post-Apollo range of 38,000 to 43,495 miles. Even though the Earth to Moon distance varies between 221,463 and 252,710 miles, and spacecraft do not travel on a straight line between the Earth and Moon, this still does not explain the neutral point distance discrepancy. The logical conclusion is that the latest neutral point information reached the general public at about the time of the first Apollo lunar anding in 1969, even though it was determined as far back as 1959 from early lunar probes. Clearly, this discrepancy has not been pointed out to the public.
Originally posted by VitalOverdose
At this point in time i don't think there is much that could provide solid evidence that the moon landing wasn't faked.
Id love to see NASA try another moonshot using the same equipment as they did in the Apollo missions. With no radiation shielding for the suits or the ship and the computing power of a Commodore64.
Originally posted by strNick
....At least, run a game based on Source engine (Half-Life 2 or Counter-Strike Source, for example) and set sv_gravity 100 (default value is 600) so it will be like on the Moon, then jump. Do the same with sv_gravity 384 (64%). Compare the results (and don't forget to compare them with the Apollo film)....
The moon is a nearly spherical body, of a radius of about 1,081.5 miles, from which I calculate its volume to be approximately 5,300,216,300 cubic miles. Since its mean density is 3.27, one cubic foot of material composing it weighs close to 205 pounds. Accordingly, the total weight of the satelite is about 79,969,000,000, 000,000,000,000 and its mass 2,483,500,000,000,000,000 terrestrial short tons. Assuming that the moon does physically rotate upon its axis, it performs one revolution in 27 days 7 hours 43 minutes and 11 seconds, or 2,360,591 seconds. If, in conformity with mathematical principles, we imagine the entire mass concentrated at a distance from the centre equal to two-fifths of the radius, then the calculated rotational velocity is 3.04 feet per second, at which the globe would contain 11,474,000,000,000,000,000 short foot tons of energy, sufficient to run 1,000,000, 000 horsepower for a period of 1,323 years. Now, I say that there is not enough energy in the moon to run a delicate watch.
Originally posted by Phage
It's impossible to tell from either image what each is. Both could be rocks.