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.
Originally posted by TeslaandLyne
ED: Flag waving on the moon, was it air or ether, well both transmit
static...and the ether is always there.
Originally posted by Tomblvd
reply to post by weedwhacker
I understand what you are saying, but looking at it from a hoax believer's perspective, his placement of the objects in the 3D environment isn't spelled out precisely enough for most of them to understand (not that it would matter to any of them). So your point stands, but I don't think the video will make a dent on any HB.
Although there are very few things that will.....
The magnitude of the electrostatic force between two point electric charges is directly proportional to the product of the magnitudes of each of the charges and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between the two charges.
the electric field vector is described and the magnetic field is ignored
Chris - This is the solar wind? It's what a million mile an hour maelstrom of ionized material isn't it? It's a stream.
Giulio - Yes it goes streaming across and passing through the earth and throughout the whole solar system and creating all these wonderful displays of the auroras on the earth but also on all the planets. [Dr Giulio del Zanna, Mullard Space Science Laboratory]
Chris - So the northern lights and stuff is down to that?
Giulio - That's right, yes. The fast solar wind mostly. But then especially thanks to flares, when these big displays are happening, there's a link. For example when I was here I was able to predict a big explosion of the sun one day, and then it happened. And I was able to basically follow this huge energy release from the SoHo satellite. And we knew there were going to be huge Auroras, so it was very exciting one and a half days later.
Chris - Why do you actually get aurora borealis, the northern lights? What's actually happening to make them?
Giulio - Well what happens is there is this huge stream of particles that are coming together with huge masses of gas, about 10 thousand million tonnes or something like that, a huge amount of ionised gas that is streaming towards the earth. And then all these energetic particles they get trapped into the magnetosphere and then they follow basically the magnetic fields that we have on the earth. And so they stream down and they decelerate and interact with the upper atmosphere. They ionise our atmosphere, the oxygen and nitrogen atoms. And then they show the colours.
Helen - I've never seen the northern lights and I was wondering why we only see them at the north or south poles?
Giulio - It's because normally when the sun is quite normally active, that's where they are. You have these ovals which are very close to the North and South poles.
Chris - Just because that's where the magnetic field is dipping into the poles?
Giulio - Yes, that's right. When you have a flare, all that gets disrupted so you can get them to lower latitudes. You can see them even almost towards the equator in certain circumstances. I saw them even in Cambridge just because there was this flare that had this coronal mass ejection directed towards us. That was very nice. So they're easy to see actually, if you know when to see them and you have the right kind of combination.
Chris - I suppose one benefit of studying the behaviour of the sun is that it will enable you to know when communications on earth might be likely to be affected. Is that because satellites that we're using for our communications are also being bombarded by this radiation and this can cause problems?
Giulio - Yes, indeed. That has caused problems. To start with you have these energetic particles that come after just a few hours. You have first the light that comes in 8 minutes, and you have all these X-rays and you have all this very dangerous stuff, especially for humans in space who can get basically fried. But then you have after a few hours these very energetic particles, which can swamp all the detectors and cause damage. Plus you have after one day or something, you have these bubbles of gas passing at high speeds. And they've been known to cause trouble for even shut down satellites. The last one was in 1997, in the past there have been a lot of cases of this, they can shut down satellites and cause trouble. And of course the other problem is that all these X-rays they deform our ionosphere. They deregulate all of our upper atmosphere so when they happen basically they can affect all the transmissions, their upper frequencies, they can change a lot of things.
As the CME magnetic field connects with the Earth's, high energy particles are injected into the magnetosphere. Due to solar wind pressure, the Sun's magnetic field lines will fold around the Earth, sweeping behind our planet. The particles injected in the "dayside" will be funnelled into the polar regions of the Earth where they interact with our atmosphere, generating light as aurorae. During this time, the Van Allen belt will also become "super-charged", creating a region around the Earth that could cause problems to unprotected astronauts and any unshielded satellites.
Aurorae normally are visible only at high latitudes. However, during a geomagnetic storm aurorae can light up the sky at lower latitudes.
May 24, 1969 - Aurora borealis seen from N.Y to Louisiana [Los Angeles Times, May 24, 1969, p. A5].
Aurora Lights are Visible in Deep South
Originally posted by FoosM
Now I ask, who here wants to claim that no major solar flare(s) occurred during the Apollo missions to the moon?
In particular, Apollo 10. And give a rationale reason why.
Originally posted by FoosM
I call this post... "Bad Timing"
"Flares are the storms of solar space. They're tongues of plasma that occasionally shoot out from the sun,
with energies much higher than the normal wind. For example, the biggest flare yet recorded, in September, 1960, would have
delivered about 700 roentgens to an unprotected man in space, over two or three days. That's easily enough to kill a man."
"Then astronauts will have to be shielded against these flares?" I said.
"Yes, that's one possibility Butshielding costs weight, and we may not be able to afford it. The other possibility is to schedule flights at times
when it's unlikely that an astronaut would receive "too" much radiation from flares."
[Popular Science Apr 1963, page 209]
Hmph, you would think van Allen would know about the wonders of aluminum shielding. They were about to build the CM a year later AFAIR after all.
"We can't predict the weather very well here on earth", I said. How good are we at predicting it on the sun?"
"Well, we're learning", he said. "Bubbly, active regions on the surface of the sun seem to show up a few days before flares occur. So it's possible to make some general, prudential predictions. We can forecast for a period of one to two days. That's not good enough, but we hope to improve out accuracy, by the time we're ready to send astronauts to the moon."
"The recent Fox TV show, which I saw, is an ingenious and entertaining assemblage of nonsense. The claim that radiation exposure during the Apollo missions would have been fatal to the astronauts is only one example of such nonsense." -- Dr. James Van Allen
Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by CHRLZ
Electrostatic attraction occurs in a vacuum just as much as it does in air. The attraction is not due to the transfer of electrons it is due to the fact that the electrons are not transferred and there is a difference in charges between objects. Electrostatic attraction (and repulsion) is a force.
Coulomb's law:
The magnitude of the electrostatic force between two point electric charges is directly proportional to the product of the magnitudes of each of the charges and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between the two charges.
[edit on 8/21/2010 by Phage]
Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by FoosM
That LA Times article does not seem to be available but the Kp index for that period of time never reached 4 (it did reach 5, minor storm level on the 18th, briefly). The Kp index records the level of geomagnetic activity. If aurora had been visible in Louisiana the Kp index would have had to have been pretty high and there doesn't seem to be any reference to such an event other than that for which you did not provide a source. Maybe you can find a direct source for us. Are you sure you don't mean March 16th?
Aurora Lights are Visible in Deep South
Source
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/06d5715f3505.gif[/atsimg]
spidr.ngdc.noaa.gov...
Please provide evidence of a major solar flare occurring during any Apollo mission. How about a source for that "major flare" count as well.
[edit on 8/21/2010 by Phage]
SPEs were observed by MARIE that were not observed by sensors near Earth, confirming that SPEs are directional.
*eats the last of the popcorn*
wow, what an entertaining series of posts.
Im telling you, you guys, Apollogists & propogandists,
remind me of little fishes swimming around in their little
bowl waiting for some morsels of nourishment.
Its fun to feed you a little info and watch you all get frenzied.
Except some of you tend to just spit it right back out.
Dont worry, its good for you, trust me. LOL
But, yes, I have to be careful not to feed you guys too much.
Overfeeding tends to kill the fishes, and I have already noticed some
disturbing behavior from many of you... well, its time to feed the fishes.
And it wont disappoint, it will be chock full of quotes.
Open wide...
I call this post... "Bad Timing"
As we all know that on May 25, 1961 President John F. Kennedy announced the goal of landing Americans safely on the Moon before the end of the decade. Not the smartest time period to choose for a landing a man on the moon, seeing how that would place it smack dab in the middle of solar cycle 20 (1966 to 1976). One would ask "why the rush?" Did the US have any evidence that the USSR was planning to land men on the moon prior to that time?
A few months later, October 1, 1961 - Aurora borealis was seen over the New York sky.
An omen?
Hmph, you would think van Allen would know about the wonders of aluminum shielding. They were about to build the CM a year later AFAIR after all.
May 18, 1969 Apollo 10 was launched
May 24 Apollo 10 Transearth injection
May 26 Apollo 10 Splashdown
A10 astronaut's average skin dose rad: .48
Now I ask, who here wants to claim that no major solar flare(s) occurred during the Apollo missions to the moon?
In particular, Apollo 10. And give a rationale reason why.
This is a question for believers and non believers. And if you are going to hand wave and run in circles your reply
wont be taken seriously and at least I will ignore it.
Let me offer this piece of info as well.
367 major flares were recorded during Solar Cycle 20.
That would average out to about 1 major solar flare every 10 days.
Which is not adjusted for the peak period, the period that Apollo flew.
Days:
A8 - 8
A10 - 8
A11 - 8
A12 - 10
A13 - 5
A14 - 9
A15 - 12
A16 - 11
A17 - 12